The saga of our airport sale should be made a compulsory lesson for all first year economics students.
First, it was sold at a ridiculously low price, for the reason given in the government report, that it was unprofitable due to its high land area. This was actually written into the report as the reason for the sale and the low price. i.e. that it was unprofitable when measured by its land value.
Then, once in private hands, it became high in value for the very same reason. It had lots of attractive unused land.
Meaning, that the land deemed to be spare, was first an overhead cost when publicly owned, then as if by magic became the major sales attraction when privatised.
Who needs smoke or mirrors?