Tony Gollin, senior vice-president for business development with Alterra Partners, which forms part of the Alterra Consortium, the government`s erstwhile preferred bidder for Malta International Airport, speaks to The Sunday Times about the events of the past few days.

The Alterra Consortium was named the Maltese government`s preferred bidder for Malta International Airport four months ago. What does `preferred bidder` status mean?

The status of the preferred bidder is there to make both parties comfortable enough to move to the next step of the negotiations, which is expensive and complicated. That, normally, is a goodwill situation that hinges on reciprocal confidence and trust.

Were you informed that your preferred bidder status had changed?

We were never informed that our preferred bidder status had changed. Some time in late January, we were verbally informed that two other parties had been approached to restart negotiations. We were then handed a copy of the letter that had been sent to them. But there was no implication that our preferred bidder status had changed.

Is it normal practice to bring a third party into the equation when there is still a preferred bidder at the negotiating table?

The short answer is `No`. Given the significant status of a preferred bidder, and the significant milestones that had been passed to achieve that status, at least procedurally, one would expect that the preferred bidder would be formally placed on notice that their status had changed, or would be likely to change if agreement on key issues could not be reached.

If there are issues which are deal-breakers from the point of view of the government, the preferred bidder should be given every opportunity to confirm or otherwise satisfactorily negotiate a position on these deal-breakers with the government.

That procedure was not followed, and it is by no means clear what the so-called deal-breaking issues were, even now, and whether they remained unresolved.

Were you, at any point, given to understand that negotiations had broken down?

No. In fact, negotiations, including detailed review and consultation on transaction documents have continued, at least from our point of view, in good faith and on the understanding that we were still moving towards a successful conclusion as preferred bidder with the government.

This accounts for our incredulity on finding out, through one newspaper report on Thursday, that a deal was about to be signed with a third party.

What, in your opinion, caused the Ministry of Finance and the Privatisation Unit to intensify negotiations with the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium, while you were still at the table as preferred bidder?

I`d prefer not to speculate. Any comments that we have made over recent days have been based on what we believe to have occurred.

The Alterra Consortium claims, in its judicial protest, that confidential information related to its offer was disclosed, abusively and illegally, to the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium. What do you mean by this?

There was an extremely striking similarity between what we offered, and what the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium offered, as described in the Ministry of Finance press release last Friday.

That, however, is not why we mentioned it in the judicial protest, which was filed before we read the press release. There were other indications. However, commenting in this fashion is not helpful. The correct way forward is to examine our conclusions in a more objective forum.

Is it correct that you found out about the imminent closure of the deal with the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium from the front page news story in The Times last Thursday?

Yes. We called the Privatisation Unit and were told that the story was "inaccurate". However, I thought it best to come to Malta immediately to assist my colleagues in their attempts at trying to find out exactly what was happening.

Why did you attempt to be present at the press conference given by the Minister of Finance, when he announced the privatisation deal?

In the absence of any official information, we sought permission to attend the press conference as observers, to at least hear whether there was a development in the bid transaction. We certainly did not intend to create disruption, as was suggested or implied, which is why we sought prior clearance. It was a last resort to find out what was happening.

Do you feel that Alterra has been used as a stooge in the process?

Please - that`s an unfair question, and you must understand that it would be most inappropriate for me to make any sort of comment in that regard.

The Minister of Finance signed the agreement with the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium at midnight on Thursday, a few hours after he received your offer of US$41 million. Did you know this would happen, and what do you make of it?

No, we didn`t know it would happen. Of course not, we had just offered, as you yourself said, $41 million.

Why didn`t you offer the $41 million by the Friday deadline?

We couldn`t get comfortable with more than $39.5 million based on the balance sheet information, and we needed the extra time to obtain clearance to put up our offer by a further $1.5 million. We were not given that time.

Do you believe that the other consortium had indications that your offer was of $39.5 million, which is why they bid $40 million?

I really can`t confirm that. That would be unfair speculation. I don`t have any basis for comment.

Were you, at any point, told what the Malta Mediterranean Link Consortium had put forward as an offer, or asked whether you were willing to better it?

No. We only know what we read in The Times last Thursday.

The Minister of Finance claims that you repeatedly refused to step down from certain positions you took.

What are they, and why weren`t they presented to us as deal-breakers during negotiations? What is the point of being a preferred bidder if there isn`t that kind of mutual respect?

He said that your bid for Cyprus airport was also an issue.

When we were appointed preferred bidder, we were asked about other Mediterranean investments, and we presented a thorough report on the matter. We would have ring-fenced Cyprus, and in any event, Cyprus appears not to be going ahead with its airport project.

The Vienna consortium also has an interest in Cyprus. I don`t think the Cypriots have been told that they have pulled out - their partners in the Cyprus bid certainly haven`t been told.

Why was no attempt made to introduce Alterra to the Maltese public through the media, as the potential operator of Malta`s only airport, when you were appointed as preferred bidder?

If we had the choice, we would have been very happy to publicise the nature of the consortium, particularly as we were named preferred bidder. But we didn`t have the choice.

As a general principle, the less confusion there is about a prospective strategic investor, the less likelihood there is for misunderstanding about the relative merits.

What are the substantial costs incurred by Alterra during the negotiation process, as mentioned in your judicial protest?

It is not our practice to say what our costs are, though obviously those costs are substantial. It`s been suggested in the media that the figure is around Lm2 million.

The Alterra Consortium is composed of Alterra Partners (UK), Grupo Dragados (Spain), Bechtel Enterprises (USA), Singapore Changi Airport (Singapore) and Manchester Airport (UK). The consortium compromises more than 25 airports around the world, including important hubs in Europe, Asia and the Americas.