Privatization process in Sweden the role of the state and Swedavia, Olle Fält, IC Aviation.

1. Deregulation Process in Sweden:
The role of the State and Swedavia
Case Studies
Lappeenranta
23rd April, 2014

3. Role of the Swedish State and Swedavia
“Aviation has a unique position when it comes to creating effective
travel options for longer trips, both within the country and abroad, and
that has been an important starting point for my suggestions. By
dividing the airports in different categories, the state resources, on a
number of airports, will help to strengthen national and international
accessibility”.
Governmental one‐man investigator Christina Rogestam.

4. Role of the Swedish State and Swedavia

5. Role of the Swedish State and Swedavia
"In order to develop a smaller airport it requires a strong commitment
from the region, politicians and industry and that they are working
closely together……,”
Luftfartsverkets General Director Lars Rekke.
"When the municipality has full control it also increases the possibilities
for developing the airport. It has a large interest in the airport and will
be able to make adaptations to local and regional development in a
completely different way than the Luftfartsverket. During our
negotiations, the municipality has proven to be a tough counterparty
that pushed us properly, while discussions proceeded in a very good
spirit. “
Luftfartsverkets, Chief of Negotiations, Olle Sundin

6.  Break up of LFV aviation monopoly in
2009
 LFV to keep on technical aspects only
 New company (Swedavia) established
to manage / run the airports
 Also a political decision to sell some of
the LFV / Swedavia airports
 Recognition of uncompetitive and
highly expensive model
Swedish Timeline

7. The Sale Process – Regional Perspective
 Regions nervous about
taking on airports
 Long term implications
of “owning” airport not
clear
 Feeling that it’s a
govnt. obligation
 Opportunistic regions
could see the benefits
 Very fast negotiations
resulted in quick sales
 Already in 2006 KLR,
NRK, HAD were sold
SLOW FAST

8. 1. EX‐SWEDAVIA
 Norrkoping (2006)
 Halmstad (2006)
 Kalmar (2006)
 Karlstad (2010)
 Jönköping (2010)
 Skellefteå (2010)
 Ängelholm (2011)
 Örnsköldsvik (2011)
 Sundsvall (2013)
2. SWEDAVIA
Stockholm (ARN)
Stockholm (BMA)
Gothenburg
Malmö
Luleå
Umeå
Östersund
Visby
Ronneby
Kiruna
Sweden Status Quo

9. Ownership Models ‐ Sweden
Ängelholm
 100% private
Real estate makes it profitable
PEAB; construction company with development plans
Jönköping
Airport municipality owned
Airport real estate controlled by separate municip. company
Karlstad, Halmstad
Municipality owned
Considered a public “utility”
Växjö
 Infrastructure owned by the region and 2 municipalities
Airport tower services in separate company

10.  Old philosophy – did same things, in the same way
 Since 2006 – no development whatsoever
 Dependent on 2 carriers (BRA & NextJet – both flying to
Stockholm)
 No development strategy and no future vision
 2015 – employed well known consultants!
Staying Still………

11.  Took time to adapt to new ownership
 Slow pace of development, but it was quite planned and
deliberate
 Recent years has seen change – in particular the
uncertainty around SAS’s future
 New strategy and now new routes: scheduled service to
Berlin and increased charters
Cautious………

12.  Took a different approach immediately
 Revolutionised aero & non‐aero development
 Several new carriers: low cost and scheduled
 Charter biz +35%
Revolution………