ANALYSIS OF PASSENGER TRAFFIC IN POLISH AIRPORTS IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR 2014

Review: Statistics and Analysis Division

Warsaw, 24th September 2014 1 • Slide 3- 4 Summary • Slide 5 Total number of passengers • Slide 6 Total number of flight operations • Slide 7 Seasonality of traffic • Slide 8 Airports results- comparison with ACI • Slide 9 Airports- individual results • Slide 10 Domestic and international traffic - comparison with ACI • Slide 11 Scheduled traffic • Slide 12 Charter traffic • Slide 13 RPKMs, ASKMs, LF YTD - comparison with IATA data • Slide 14 RPKMs, ASKMs, LF quarterly • Slide 15 Air carriers- business models • Slide 16 Low-cost carriers- comparison with European data • Slide 17 Network carriers- comparison with AEA carriers

2 Summary

• The results of Polish airports in the H1* should be considered as good. The positive trend in travel volumes and seat factor has followed the developments in the first three months of the year. Although , the hitherto growth leader, has downsized its network, this has been offset by the increases of Wizzair, Germanwings and, subsequently, Norwegian and EasyJet. The gap left after the withdrawal of LOT Polish ’ international operations from regional airports has been filled by Lufthansa group, although as shown by the example of German market, it took place at the cost of the number of operations available, especially to . You can also notice the positive effects of the restructuring of the LOT Polish Airlines network. • Passenger traffic at Polish airports in the Q2* by approx. 6.7%, year-on-year. In the entire H1 this value was moderately lower and equalled to 6.6%. Air travel market rose in spite of no change of the number of operations in the Q2 and moderate decrease in the H1 respectively. Notably, as in the Q1*, also in the Q2 and consequently in the H1, airlines increased average aircraft capacity. As a result, the capacity rose by 2% in the Q2 and the H1. In the Q2, seat factor reached the level of 79,5%, which is 3% increase, year -on -year . For the entire H1 this value was 75 ,9%, which was also 3% higher compared to a year ago . • Polish airports recorded higher increases in comparison to European airports associated in ACI Europe. Chopin airport itself achieved also higher growth in comparison to its benchmark airports. However, regional airports with the exemption of Warsaw/Modlin airport, saw a lower traffic increase in comparison to airports welcoming less than 5 million passengers per year. Expansion in domestic and international air traffic volumes also outperformed the results achieved by airports associated in ACI Europe. • Likewise in the Q1, in the H1, Polish market reported higher growth of RPKMs in comparison to passenger volumes, mainly due to a lengthening of the flight stage by approx. 24 km. The expansion in RPKMs was also higher compared to European and Worldwide results presented by IATA. The growth of ASKMs was however noticeably lower in comparison to IATA benchmarks. As a result, the load factor recorded a result of +3,1%, close to the growth of the seat factor. The growth of LF was also higher compared to European and Worldwide results.

H1- the half of the year, Q2-the second quarter, Q1- the first quarter 3 Summary

• If we exclude from analysis Ryanair’s operations moved to Warsaw/Modlin airport, Polish market in terms of quantitative growth was led by in the Q1 and the entire H1. In the Q2 among the regional airports the highest growth was observed at the airport in Gdańsk. It was also another consecutive quarter of robust growth at airport in Kraków. As a result this airport reported the highest traffic expansion in the entire H1. Both in the Q2 and the H1 the largest drops in traffic were recorded in Łódź. • The airports’ results were driven by multiple factors. Firstly, it was another quarter of notable increase of charter market, which saw a robust result of +19%. In the H1 the growth reached the level of 16%. Unlike in the Q1 the market expansion was mainly driven by the destinations in the Mediterranean region. In case of scheduled traffic it is worth noting that there was a strong decline in passenger volumes to United Kingdom. • Domestic traffic reported a robust growth in the H1. It was mainly driven by an impressive growth by 22% in the Q2. It is worth noting that the results of the Q2 were influenced by two dominant factors. Firstly, mainly due to Ryanair’s activity, there was a significant increase in domestic flights bypassing Warsaw Chopin airport . Secondly, one can see the positive results of network restructuring by LOT Polish Airlines, resulting in the higher seat factors on domestic flights. As a consequence the seat factor on the whole domestic market grew by 0,5%, despite the modest ratio recorded on the routes bypassing Warsaw Chopin airport. What is more, the growth of seat factor was possible besides the robust growth of average aircraft capacity. • In the H1 there was a soft change in the structure of the market shares between airlines representing different business models. Network carriers increased their share at the expense of low-cost airlines due to the difference of growth ratio which amounted to 5.1% and 9.1% respectively. In the Q2 the stoppage of the expansion of LCCs was even more evident in comparison to the first three months of the year. While the LCCs, the main drivers of growth in recent two years, reported a soft growth of 3,6%, network carriers increased traffic by 11%. The results of low cost carriers were mainly affected by the Ryanair’s decision to downsize the capacity. Importantly, it was offset by the accelerating growth of Wizzair and subsequently Germanwings, Norwegian and EasyJet. The network carriers, which reported the highest increases in passenger traffic are as follows: , Lufthansa, LOT Polish Airlines, SAS and Austrian Airlines. It is worth noting that expansion of LOT Polish Airlines and Eurolot was mainly driven by the charter operations.

4 TOTAL NUMBER OF AIR PASSENGERS

• In the H1 Polish airports served over 12 million passengers which constitutes an 6.6% increase compared to a year ago and almost equal result compared to 2012. In the Q2 passenger traffic reported a growth of 6,7% which was slightly better compared to the Q1. • In the Q1 operations decreased slightly by 1%, as a consequence of decrease and no change of this figure in the Q1 and Q2 respectively. • In the Q1 and the Q2, and consequently in the entire H1 the capacity rose by 2%. In both quarters air carriers increased the average aircraft capacity, but the scope of this increase was different among quarters. The average capacity grew by 3% and 4% in the Q2 and the H1 respectively. • In the Q2, the trend in seat factor, calculated as the ratio between the number of passengers and available seats, has followed developments in the Q1 of the year. Seat factor amounted to 79.5%, 3 percentage points more compared to the year ago. In the entire H1 seat factor reached the level of 75,9%, also +3%, year-to-year.

Number of passengers (millions) - YOY* Number of passengers (millions) YTD*

7 7,143 12 12,066 12 6,939 7 12 12 11,324 11,324 7 6,696 11 7 11 11 6 11 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 5 Source: CAA of * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts TOTAL NUMBER OF FLIGHT OPERATIONS

• As a result of the above changes, the average number of passengers per operation increased in the Q1 and the Q2 and as a consequence in the entire H1. In the Q2 and the H1 this value amounted to 103 and 96 respectively (+6 and +7 passengers more compared to year ago). • In the Q1 and the Q2 and as a consequence in the H1, the network carriers reported a greater increase in the average number of passengers per operation. While low-cost carriers carried on average 3 and 4 passengers more in the Q2 and the H1 respectively, in case of network carriers the growth amounted to 7. It was driven by the fact that in the Q2 as in the Q1 legacy airlines were operating aircrafts on average with 7 seats more, year-to-year. At the same time the number of seats on boardof LCC’s aircrafts felt by 5 and 4 in the Q2 and the H1 respectively.

Number of flight operations (thousands) YOY* Number of flight operations (thousands) - YTD*

78 77,367 136 135,193 76 134 74 132 72 130 69,392 69,201 128 126,738 70 125,503 126 68 124 66 122 64 120 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 6 Source: CAA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts SEASONAL CHANGES

• By contrast to the first quarter, the growth of the traffic was unevenly distributed in the subsequent months of the Q2. The increase amounted to 2,1%, 6,6% i 10,4% respectively. • It was mainly driven by the performance of charter market. The dynamics of the charter traffic was 0,7%, 12,7% i 28% respectively. It is worth noting that in June Polish airports recorded growth of 110 thousand passengers compared to year ago. The impressive growth in June, but also in May, was driven also by Wizzair as well as Lufthansa and Germanwings group.

Traffic dynamics* Air passengers monthly 2014 vs 2013 3 500

3 000 I - quarter 6,3%

Thousands 2 500

2 000 Cumulatively 6,3% 1 500 2014 vs 2012 1 000

500 I - quarter 14,0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 Cumulatively 14,0% 2014 2013 2012 7 Source: CCA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts AIRPORTS RESULTS ––COMPARISONCOMPARISON WITH ACI EUROPE

• Regional airports in Poland reached the traffic dynamics distinctly higher than the benchmark of ACI airports, despite the airports associated in this organisation recorded the acceleration of expansion in the H1. However the results of the regional airports are still to be seen through the lens of the Ryanair’s decision to move operations from Warsaw Chopin to Warsaw/Modlin airport. If one excluded Warsaw/Modlin airport from the analysis, this growth rate would be 3,3 %, which is about 3 percentage points lower than that for comparable ACI airports. Only in the Q2 this value was 2,8%. • In the H1 domestic traffic in regional airports recorded higher growth (+11%) in comparison to international traffic (+2.5%). Over the same period network carriers reported robust growth of +12.6%, while in case of LCCs traffic volume remained almost unchanged (+0,4%). • By contrast to the Q1, in the Q2 in regional airports (excluding Warsaw/Modlin) the expansion of domestic traffic (+19%) was stronger compared to international traffic (+1,2%). This record breaking growth on domestic market was mainly driven by Ryanair’s new routes, although it also worth noting that the traffic increases were also reported by LOT Polish Airlines and Eurolot. It should also be noted that, as in the Q1, the growth to a greater extent was driven by network carriers which increased the traffic by a staggering 17.4%. It was another quarter when the decrease of LOT‘s traffic was evident, but at the same time it was offset by the increase brought primarily by Lufthansa and secondly by Eurolot, SAS and Austrian Airlines. • In the Q2, for the first time in more than two years in regional airports LCC’s traffic recorded decline (-2.1%), mainly due to the Ryanair’s traffic drop. This was partially compensated by Wizzair’s growth. The result of regional airports was also significantly driven by charter traffic, which reported growth of +24%. The dynamics of the entire market* The dynamics of regional airports* Dynamics of WAW*

8,00% 20,00% 6,39% 16,33% 10,00% 6,00% 5,57% 4,60% 15,00% 5,00% 4,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% 2,00% 5,00% -5,00% 0,00% 0,00% -5,51% Poland ACI airports Poland ACI airports -10,00% Poland ACI airports 8 Źródło: ULC i ACI EUROPE * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts AIRPORTS RESULTS --INDIVIDUALLYINDIVIDUALLY

• In the Q2, the airport in Gdańsk was the leader of the passenger growth among regional airports with the exemption of Warsaw/Modlin. It recorded the highest LCC’s passenger growth and second best results in terms of charter traffic. It was also another consecutive quarter of robust growth in airport in Kraków, driven mainly by expansion of EasyJet and subsequently Norwegian. As in the Q1, the airport in Łódź recorded the biggest drop of passengers which was driven by significant reduction of Ryanair’s capacity. As far as the entire H1 is concerned airport in Kraków and subsequently in Gdańsk were the leaders of passenger traffic expansion. • To the greatest extent the outcome of the Chopin airport was influenced by the transfer of Ryanair’s operations to the airport in Modlin. If you exclude Ryanair’s traffic the airport recorded the increase in traffic of +11% (+ 475 K passengers) which was the best result in the country and higher growth in comparison to benchmark ACI airports. In the Q2 the airport recorded the growth of +12%. If you take into account the outcome of both airports serving Warsaw city, they reported traffic increase of +12 % and +11 % in the Q2 and the H1 respectively . To the greatest extent the result of Warsaw Chopin airport was driven by reorganization of LOT Polish Airlines’ network and the growth associated with the development of the Warsaw hub. With the exception of Ryanair’s operations LCC’s reported the staggering growth of +42.5%. Wizzair, the leader of the passenger growth, increased frequency on part of the directions, but also operated on new routes. The growth was also driven significantly by Germanwings and Norwegian. In the entire H1 charter traffic recorded also a significant growth of +16%. Change in the passenger market -YOY* Change in the passenger market - YTD* 400000 30% 400 000 30% 23% 24% 300000 20% 23% 24% 300 000 20% 11% 10% 11% 10% 200000 6% 200 000 3% 3% 6% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% -3% -3% 0% 100000 -6% -10% 100 000 -6% -10% -9% -8% -10% -9% -8% -10% 0 0 -20% -20% LCJ IEG SZZ RZE LUZ KRK BZG -100 000 POZ GDN KTW WMI -100000 WRO -30% -30% WAW -37% -37% -200 000 -40% -200000 -40% Per value Per percentage Per value Per Perrcentage 9 Source: CAA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL TRAFFICTRAFFIC-- COMPARISON WITH ACI

• In the H1 international traffic reported a higher growth (+5.8%) compared to ACI airports. Over the same period operations recorded the decline of 0.6%. In the Q2 the growths amounted to 5.1% in case of passenger traffic and 0.4% in case of operations. • In the H1 domestic traffic reported a robust growth of 13.5% despite the fall in the number of operations by over 2%. It was possible thanks to the record breaking increase in the average aircraft capacity up to 10 seats and parallel rise of S/F by around 0.5%. The good outcome of the H1 was mainly driven by an impressive growth by 22.5% in the Q2. Over this time the capacity increased by 21.5%. While the average aircraft capacity rose by around 15 seats the S/F was up to 0.5%. The outcome of domestic market was mainly driven by the growth of Ryanair’s and to lesser extent Eurolot’s flights bypassing Warsaw Chopin airport. Approx. 60% of new domestic passengers were travelling on the new routes. It is evident however that new routes are being operated with a low S/F. LOT Polish Airlines reported also significant traffic rise. What is important the LOT’s sharp growth of S/F contributed to the whole market in this regard.

International traffic* Domestic traffic* 8,00% 8,00% 6,67% 5,80% 6,00% 6,00% 4,30% 4,00% 4,00% 3,47%

2,00% 2,00%

0,00% 0,00% Poland ACI airports Poland ACI airports 10 Source: CAA i ACI EUROPE * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts SCHEDULED TRAFFIC

• In the Q2 the scheduled destinations which reported the highest increases in passenger traffic were as follows: the , Norway, Israel and Greece. In case of first three mentioned markets the growth was driven by the low cost airlines. However in case of Greece the offer of these carriers was complemented by Aegean Airlines. The largest declines were reported to United Kingdom, Ireland, Hungary and Ukraine. • In the H1 the scheduled destinations which reported the highest increases in passenger traffic were as follows: Norway and, subsequently, , the Netherlands and Israel. As in the Q1, the growth was driven by low cost carriers, with the exception of Italy, where the growth was influenced by both Ryanair and Alitalia. It is also worth noting that the network to significantly changed its composition. The largest declines were recorded to UK, Ireland, and Hungary. With the exception of Finland the market drop was driven by the reduction of low cost operations.

Number of passengers (millions) - YOY* Traffic dynamics YOY* 6 6,235 6,0% 5,0% 6 6 6,048 4,0% 3,1% 6 5,936 6 2,0% 6 6 0,0% 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs 2013 2014 vs 2012

Number of passengers (millions) YTD* Traffic dynamics - YTD* 10,850 11 8,0% 7,5% 5,6% 11 10,276 6,0% 10,095 4,0% 10 2,0% 10 0,0% 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs 2013 2014 vs 2012 11 Source: CAA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts CHARTER TRAFFIC

• In the H1, the Polish charter market recorded a significant growth in traffic of 16.1%. This was mainly driven by the outcome of the Q2 when traffic increased by 19.4%, year-on-year. The result of the first three months of the summer season was influenced by several concurrent factors. Firstly, the market again recorded a significant decline in traffic to Egypt. However, differently from the Q1, the growth was driven mainly by the destinations in the Mediterranean region. The destinations which reported the highest increases in passenger traffic are as follow: Greece (+53%) and subsequently Turkey and Tunisia. The largest increase in charter traffic was recorded by Warsaw Chopin Airport. Among regional airports the largest growth was reported by Poznań and Gdańsk. The strongest declines were recorded by the airports in and . Once again, the market proved to be resistant to the turbulence of the supply side. The exit from the market by as well as significant drop in traffic of the Travel Service group was offset compensated primarily by a robust increase of Small Planet Airlines and subsequently by and LOT Polish Airlines.

Number of passengers (million) - YOY* Traffic dynamics - YOY* 1 30,0% 0,908 0,891 19,4% 1 20,0% 1 0,761 10,0% 1 2,0% 1 0,0% 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs 2013 2014 vs 2012

Number of passengers (millions) YTD* Traffic dynamics - YTD* 1 1,217 1,229 20,0% 16,1% 1 15,0% 1,048 1 10,0% 1 5,0% 1 0,0% 2014 2013 2012 -5,0% -1,0% 12 2014 vs 2013 2014 vs 2012 Source: CAA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts RPKM, ASKM, LF CUMULATIVELY --COMPARISONCOMPARISON WITH IATA DATA

• Likewise in the Q1, in the H1, Polish market reported higher growth of RPKs in comparison to passenger volumes, mainly due to a lengthening of the flight stage by approx. 24 km. The expansion in RPKMs was also almost 2 percentage points higher compared to European and Worldwide results presented by IATA. The growth of ASKMs was however noticeably lower in comparison to IATA benchmarks.

RPKM(mln)-YTD* ASKM -YTD* LF -YTD*

16500 16 275 21000 80,0% 79,2% 20 542 79,0% 16000 20500 78,0% 15500 15 086 20000 19 816 77,0% 76,1% 15000 76,0% 19500 14500 75,0% 14000 19000 74,0% 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013

RPKM -YTD* ASKM –YTD* LF –YTD* 15,0% 6,0% 5,9% 5,8% 4,0% 3,4% 9,8% 5,5% 3,0% 10,0% 4,9% 5,0% 5,2% 5,6% 2,0% 5,0% 4,5% 1,0% 0,2% 0,0% 4,0% 0,0% Poland Europe World Poland Europe World -1,0% -0,5% Poland Europe World13 Source: CAA of Poland i IATA * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts RPKM, ASKM, LF QUARTERLY

• What it is important, in the H1, as in the Q2, the dynamics of passenger traffic far exceeded capacity growth. As a result, load factor increased by more than 3 percentage points, thereby significantly more compared to the world and the Europe, as presented by IATA. • In the Q2 the RPKs increased by 6.6% and far exceeded the growth rate of ASKs (+ 2.7%). As a result, LF increased by 3 percentage points, which was similar to the result achieved in the Q1 and the H1. The average flight stage rose by approx. 19 km.

RPKM (mln) – YOY* ASKM (mln) – YOY* LF – YOY*

10000 12000 11 920 83,0% 9 760 81,9% 9800 11900 82,0% 9600 11800 81,0% 9400 11700 80,0% 9 153 11 604 78,9% 9200 11600 79,0% 9000 11500 78,0% 8800 11400 77,0% 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 14 Source: CAA of Poland * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts CARRIRES ––BUSINESSBUSINESS MODELS

• In the H1 there was a soft change in the structure of the market shares between airlines representing different business models. Network carriers increased their share at the expense of low-cost airlines due to the difference of growth ratio which amounted to 5.1% and 9.1% respectively. Among air carriers that recorded the highest growth on the market in the H1 are representing all airline business models. The largest growth of traffic was recorded by Lufthansa and subsequently by Small Planet Airlines and Wizzair. All mentioned airlines managed to raise traffic by over 100 K passengers. The largest drop in traffic was recorded by Ryanair and Travel Service group. In the Q2 the airlines, which reported the highest increase in passenger traffic are as follows: Wizzair, Eurolot, Lufthansa, Small Planet Airlines and LOT Polish Airlines. The largest drop in traffic cover this period was recorded by Ryanair.

Market share by volume of air traffic- (YTD) Market share by business model (YTD)

100% Ryanair 5,2% 5,8% 7,0% 90% 1,6% LOT Polish Airlines + Eurolot SA 17,9% 80% 2,0% 25,9% 70% 49,7% 49,3% 43,6% 2,4% 60% 7,6% Lufthansa Charter 50% EasyJet LCC 17,6% 25,1% 40% Norwegian Air Shuttle Legacy 30% 49,4% SAS 20% 45,1% 44,9%

Other 10% 0% 15 2014 2013 2012 Source: CAA of Poland LOW--COSTCOST CARRIERS ––COMPARISONCOMPARISON WITH EUROPEAN DATA

• In the H1 low cost carriers in Poland recorded a lower passenger traffic growth rate compared to the European benchmarks, but they were more efficient in terms of S/F increase. This result was mostly driven by Ryanair’s moves, mainly in the Q2. Over this period, LCC carriers increased the traffic by 3.6% raised the LF by over 4 percentage points. • In the Q2, for the first time since 2010 Ryanair decreased the traffic. Therefore the robust expansion of this carrier, which managed to raise the traffic between 2010-2014, by over 80% was ceased. The data for the first three months of the summer season shows a signs of Ryanair’s network restructuring. It increased the traffic only in case of Warsaw city and airport in Gdańsk. However airport in Gdańsk was the only one that reported the significant raise of capacity. The largest drop of capacity was reported by , what may be associated with the proximity of Krakow airport and possible cannibalization of traffic. Moreover, it is clear that Ryanair decided to perform more deep cuts at airports welcoming less than 1 million passengers. The cuts were the most evident in case of UK market. Around 50% of cuts affected this destination. What is more, in the Q2 Wizzair started to accelerate the growth . It was also another subsequent quarter of the dynamic growth of Germanwings, Norwegian and EasyJet. It should be noted however that operations of these carriers are still limited to a the selected airports in Poland.

Comparison of dynamics(YTD)* Comparison of changes in the percentage points of LF (YTD)*

8,00% 7,29% 5,00% 4,31% 4,00% 6,00% 5,54% 3,00% 4,00% 2,00% 2,00% 1,00% 0,37% 0,00% 0,00% Poland Europe Poland Europe

16 Source: CAA of Poland , Ryanair, EasyJet and Norwegian * Please note the difference in scale on the vertical axis between charts NETWORK CARRIERSCARRIERS--COMPARISONCOMPARISON WITH AEA CARRIERS

• In the H1, network carriers in Poland recorded a higher dynamics in comparison to AEA carriers. This result was primarily driven by operations in the Q2. Over this period network airlines reported capacity growth of 7%, due to the higher average aircraft capacity and with almost unchanged number of operations. However, by contrast to the Q1 they were not able to increase the LF. This value rose by 1.7 percentage points (S / F by 2.7 pp). As a consequence, in the H1 the LF increased by 2.3 percentage points (S / F: 2.5 pp). • Likewise in the Q1, in the Q2 Lufthansa reported the largest traffic increase and also as in the Q1 it was mainly driven by the new seats allocated to the routes between regional airports and Germany due to LOT’s withdrawal from this market. As a consequence, in the Q2, the number of passenger seats offered on the market remained almost unchanged, year-on-year. However, passengers’ choice shrank since the number of operation fell by nearly 18%. As in the Q1 Lufthansa focused its operations on feeding hub in . The capacity remained unchanged due to the operations of aircraft with the larger average capacity. In the Q2, as it was already mentioned, there are clear effects of LOT’s network restructuring around hub in Warsaw . Among others, it raised the number of routes to Eastern , Central Europe and North America, as well as made changes in the network to Western Europe. Despite the decline in the number of scheduled operations it managed to increase the traffic thanks to the higher S/F. It is worth noting that the traffic growth was also recorded by Eurolot, SAS and Austrian Airlines. The biggest traffic volume drop was reported by Emirates.

Comparison of dynamics(YTD) Comparison of changes in the percentage points of LF YTD

8,00% 6,90% 4,00% 3,31% 6,00% 3,00% 4,00% 2,00%

2,00% 0,78% 1,00% 0,68%

0,00% 0,00% Poland Europe Poland Europe 17 Source: CAA of Poland and AEA Slide 5 • Number of passengers (millions) - quarter - chart shows the total number of passengers in the quarter, including two previous years (YOY) • Number of passengers (millions) YTD - chart shows the total number of passengers in past quarters including the corresponding periods of the previous 2 years Slide 6 • Number of flight operations (thousands) - quarter - chart shows the total number of operations in the given quarter, including two previous years (YOY) • Number of flight operations (thousands) - chart shows the total number of operations in the past quarters, including the corresponding periods of the previous 2 years (YTD) Slide 7 • Air passengers monthly - chart compares the monthly distribution of air passenger traffic in given years at Polish airports • Traffic dynamics - chart shows the dynamics for current quarter and YTD compared to with the corresponding period year ago, and compared to the results two years ago Slide 8 • The dynamics of the entire market - chart compares the total dynamics of air traffic in all polish airports with European airports associated in ACI • The dynamics of regional airports - chart compares the total dynamics of traffic at regional airports in Poland and regional airports associated in ACI (serving less than 5 million passengers) • Dynamics of WAW - chart compares the dynamics of traffic in Warsaw and European airports associated in ACI (airports selected as benchmarks for the Warsaw Chopin Airport, Athens, Belgrade, Bratislava, Bucharest, , Lisbon, Podgorica, Prague, , Sarajevo, Skopje, Sofia, , Tirana, Toulouse, , ) Slide 9 • Changes on the passenger market - (YOY) - chart shows the traffic difference in absolute terms and the traffic dynamics at Polish airports of domestic and international traffic. • Changes on the passenger market - (YTD) - chart shows the traffic difference in absolute terms and the traffic dynamics at Polish airports of domestic and international traffic 18 Slide 10 • International traffic- chart compares the dynamics of international traffic in Poland and the airports associated in the ACI (YTD) • Domestic traffic- chart compares the dynamics of domestic traffic in Poland and the airports associated in the ACI (YTD) Slide 11 • Number of passengers (millions) - (YOY) - the chart shows the number of passengers on scheduled flights in the current year and two previous years • Number of passengers (millions) - (YTD) - the chart shows the number of passengers on scheduled flights in the current year and two previous years • Traffic dynamics - (YOY) - chart shows the changes in the scheduled traffic dynamics in comparison to two previous years • Traffic dynamics - (YTD) - chart shows the changes in the scheduled traffic dynamics in comparison to two previous years Slide 12 • Number of passengers (millions) - (YOY) - chart shows the number of passengers in non-scheduled traffic in comparison to two previous two years • Number of passengers (millions) - (YTD) - chart shows the number of passengers in non-scheduled traffic in comparison to two previous two years • Traffic dynamics - (YOY) - chart shows the changes in the non-scheduled traffic dynamics • Traffic dynamics - (YTD) - chart shows the changes in the non-scheduled traffic dynamics Slide 13 • RPKM (mln)- (YTD) - chart shows RPKs in current and previous year • ASKM (mln)- (YTD) - chart shows the ASKs in current and previous year

19 • LF - (YTD) chart shows the LF in current and previous year • RPKM - (YTD) - chart shows a comparison of the RPKs’ dynamics in Poland, Europe and Worldwide on the basis of Polish CAA and IATA data • ASKM - (YTD) - chart shows a comparison of the ASKs’ dynamics in Poland, Europe and Worldwide on the basis of Polish CAA and IATA data • LF - (YTD) - chart shows a comparison of changes in percentage points of LF in Poland, Europe and Worldwide, on the basis of Polish CAA and IATA data Slide 14 • RPKM - (YOY) - chart shows the RPKs in current and previous year • ASKM - (YOY) – chart shows the RPKs in current and previous year • LF - (YOY) - the chart shows the LF the current and previous year Slide 15 • Market share by volume of air traffic - (YTD) - chart shows the market share of carriers which served the largest number of passengers in Poland in a given year • Market share by business model - (YTD) - chart shows the market share, broken down by business models i.e. network carriers, low-cost and charter in past quarters in given years Slide 16 • Comparison of dynamics - (YTD) - the chart shows a comparison of the dynamics of LCC carriers in Poland and Europe, on the basis of Polish CAA data and statistics from Ryanair, EasyJet and Norwegian, which are responsible for nearly 80% of European LCC’s traffic. CAA decided to use the data of these carriers because these entities are continuously updating their data on monthly basis • Comparison of changes in the percentage points of LF - (YTD) - chart shows a comparison of changes in percentage points of LF of LCC carriers in Poland and in Europe on the basis on the basis of Polish CAA data and statistics from Ryanair, EasyJet and Norwegia Slide 17 • Comparison of dynamics - (YTD) - chart shows a comparison of the dynamics of network carriers’ traffic in Poland and Europe (Europe and Middle East), on the basis of Polish CAA and AEA data • Comparison of changes in the percentage points of LF - (YTD) - chart shows the change in percentage points of LF of network carriers in Poland and in Europe on the basis of CAA and AEA data 20