Mr. Stephen Kavanagh:

On the issue of the Shannon Dublin hub, based on its demand, I believe Shannon is appropriately served. I do not believe the same level of opportunity exists there because Shannon is not connected to Europe in the way Dublin is, nor will it be. It is simply a fact that the demand for travel to and from Dublin is exponentially greater than the demand for travel to and from Shannon. A hub needs connectivity. The ability to flow passengers through Dublin, and the natural demand through Dublin, is on a different scale.

I do not believe that, as it builds out, Dublin will necessarily compete with or cannibalise Shannon. There is resilient demand in Shannon. The challenge always has been to profitably serve that demand. The Dublin to New York route at peak has seven services a day, while Shannon to New York maintains two services a day in competition. That is demonstrative of the resilience of routes at Shannon where there is demand. The issue is the opportunity for growth and I see access to Oneworld selling access to other parties. Actively selling Aer Lingus capacity neutrally can be only beneficial, but I do not see significant growth opportunities in terms of additional routes and frequencies. It consolidates the opportunity that exists currently.

Regarding the basis of the valuation, I believe both the company and its advisers reviewed all of the assets - that was one of the criteria for valuation - as well as the more traditional valuation metrics, future earnings, past earnings, capital employed, etc. All of the same criteria were used that would be used by the Government advisers in confirming the attractiveness or otherwise of the €2.55 a share valuation. Certainly assets under management was one of the criteria that was evaluated in arriving at the €2.55 a share.