In its letter of withdrawal, PSI stated, "if you may recall, the undersigned has expressed to MASO that PSI is not seriously affected with the operation of Terminal 3 and our only concern is to continue providing cargo handling services to our foreign airline clients in Terminal 3… Last week, MIAA called all the NAIA cargo warehouse operators… In that meeting, MIAA made it clear that all existing warehouse operators will continue servicing its clients."
This withdrawal of two of its key members closely follows MASO’s getting criticized by international airlines for false statements it issued in recent advertisements, wherein it mentioned that Singapore Airlines, Swissair, Malaysia Airlines and Emirates have united to demand a review of the PIATCO-DOTC Concession Agreement.
This was denied by these airlines in a letter to MASO stating that they "have not united or confederated with the other airline companies to demand a review of the contract and to allegedly correct the onerous and lopsided provisions therein." To date, MASO has not fulfilled the demand of these airlines for a retraction of this statement in newspapers of general circulation.
MASO has used extensive advertising and publicity that cast doubts on the legality of the Philippine Government’s Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) agreement with the Philippine International Air Terminals Co. (PIATCO) operators of NAIA International Passenger Terminal 3. AS the concession agreement, however, stands the test of time and heavily-funded opposition by MASO, MASO finds itself slowly losing claimed and real supporters.
Meanwhile, the BOT law of the Philippines has become a model for other countries seeking to attract private investment in their governments’ infrastructure project.