A new airport.... South Yorkshire Airport City?

Doncaster Sheffield Airport Strategic Review Announcement​

Forums4airports discusses the latest press release from Doncaster Sheffield airport where the airport questions the future of the airport. The owners of the airport, the Peel Group have announced they are looking at their options as the group has decided the airport is no longer viable as an operational airport. Here's the press release:

"The Board of Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA) has begun a review of strategic options for the Airport. This review follows lengthy deliberations by the Board of DSA which has reluctantly concluded that aviation activity on the site may no longer be commercially viable.

DSA’s owner, the Peel Group, as the Airport’s principal funder, has reviewed the conclusions of the Board of DSA and commissioned external independent advice in order to evaluate and test the conclusions drawn, which concurs with the Board’s initial findings.

Since the Peel Group acquired the Airport site in 1999 and converted it into an international commercial airport, which opened in 2005, significant amounts have been invested in the terminal, the airfield and its operations, both in relation to the original conversion and subsequently to improve the facilities and infrastructure on offer to create an award winning airport.

However, despite growth in passenger numbers, DSA has never achieved the critical mass required to become profitable and this fundamental issue of a shortfall in passenger numbers is exacerbated by the announcement on 10 June 2022 of the unilateral withdrawal of the Wizz Air based aircraft, leaving the Airport with only one base carrier, namely TUI.

This challenge has been increased by other changes in the aviation market, the well-publicised impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and increasingly important environmental considerations. It has therefore been concluded that aviation activity may no longer be the use for the site which delivers the maximum economic and environmental benefit to the region. Against this backdrop, DSA and the Peel Group, will initiate a consultation and engagement programme with stakeholders on the future of the site and how best to maximise and capitalise on future economic growth opportunities for Doncaster and the wider Sheffield City Region.

The wider Peel Group is already delivering significant development and business opportunities on its adjoining GatewayEast development including the recent deal for over 400,000 sq ft logistics and advanced manufacturing development on site, creating hundreds of new jobs and delivering further economic investment in the region.

Robert Hough, Chairman of Peel Airports Group, which includes Doncaster Sheffield Airport, said: “It is a critical time for aviation globally. Despite pandemic related travel restrictions slowly drawing to a close, we are still facing ongoing obstacles and dynamic long-term threats to the future of the aviation industry. The actions by Wizz to sacrifice its base at Doncaster to shore up its business opportunities at other bases in the South of England are a significant blow for the Airport.

Now is the right time to review how DSA can best create future growth opportunities for Doncaster and for South Yorkshire. The Peel Group remains committed to delivering economic growth, job opportunities and prosperity for Doncaster and the wider region.”

DSA and the Peel Group pride themselves on being forward-thinking whilst prioritising the welfare of staff and customers alike. As such, no further public comments will be made whilst they undertake this engagement period with all stakeholders.
During the Strategic Review, the Airport will operate as normal. Therefore passengers who are due to travel to the airport, please arrive and check in as normal. If there are any disruptions with your flight, you will be contacted by your airline in good time.
For all press enquiries, please contact Charlotte Leach at [email protected]."

"Not great news for DSA or the region"

Should the government or local council foot the bill and provide a financial subsidy to keep the airport open, thoughts...?

 

Anyhow. Elsewhere SY business leaders are suggesting that ‘mood music coming from the mayors [Coppard] office indicate that the airport might not happen’. I don’t think we can call it, it’s very much 50/50 from where I’m standing but weve already seen a significant amount of compelling evidence, at least to my mind, that it’s not going to work. Unless there’s some serious secretive interest unlike before I dont see how it can receive a positive outcome in September, but Coppard has been involved in doing a lot of the talking up of the project previously and the people of Donny will never forget..

I think the most obvious telling thing Coppard has said publicly in his post last week. When he mentioned South Yorkshire Airport City & DSA in two separate formats.

With him putting them as two separate projects it kinda adds to the mood music.

Separating them means he can green light the wider SYAC development whilst dropping the airport segment.

 

I think the most obvious telling thing Coppard has said publicly in his post last week. When he mentioned South Yorkshire Airport City & DSA in two separate formats.

With him putting them as two separate projects it kinda adds to the mood music.

Separating them means he can green light the wider SYAC development whilst dropping the airport segment.

I see what you’re saying but that might be careful changing of words following the SAU report which took issue with where DSA (Airport) ended and Gateway East began. It’s evident that Gateway East could provide economic benefits at a fraction of the cost of reopening the airport yet expansion of Gateway East is clearly not predicate on an operational airport because otherwise Peel would have kept it open. So far no advanced aviation manufacturing of R&D has been attracted to the site (that we know of) and therefore arguments for DSA to unlock the potential of Gateway East are flimsy at best. Bit like the old debate about the inland rail port which was inherently for sea based cargo and had no synergies with the airport. It’s still part of the narrative in spite of the SAU findings.

I think Coppards more telling choice of language is in his recent response to Dan Fell via the YP and the unmentioned things discovered.

Not helping matters is the recent stand capacity increases at EMA which has doubled wide body capacity and will provide 4 extra passenger aircraft stands;

Extra aircraft stands help East Midlands Airport’s growth plans - Air Cargo Week

East Midlands Airport is rethinking the layout of its aircraft stand spaces to increase capacity for both the cargo and passenger sides of its business as

aircargoweek.com

This is a significant increase and may mean more to come. Rumours of easyJet returning to EMA seem to have gone quiet, but….

 

An article released today regarding a talk Coppard gave at a recent ‘South Yorkshire Property Awards Dinner’ which shows why I don’t think we can take his negative or positive talk as true gauge of which way it’s going to go.

“I know the delay on Doncaster Sheffield Airport has been frustrating. But here’s the thing: we get one chance at getting this right,” mayor Oliver Coppard tells Insider dinner attendees. - Insider Media

South Yorkshire has just one chance to make the right decision on Doncaster Sheffield Airport, the region’s mayor has told an Insider awards dinner.

www.insidermedia.com

I don’t think he’s giving anything away, but he is making a bigger deal of the jobs on Gateway East which are not aviation related.

And now we have Ros Jones accusing people of lying.

Doncaster Sheffield Airport Update

Below is the update I have just provided to Full Council in relation to the latest update in relation to Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

The Gainshare decision is due to go to South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority Board in early September. Of course I cannot predetermine the decision, but it certainly does look positive and I am pleased that Oliver Coppard has signalled that through the ongoing assurance works that this builds confidence to provide a credible update to the MCA board.

We continue to see misinformation spread by some, especially on social media, so let me be perfectly clear in relation to airspace.

The Civil Aviation Authority have announced the full removal of the airspace surrounding DSA. This will enable the redesign of the airspace and where appropriate reinstatement of any of the previous airspace to suit our requirements. We are already progressing with the Aerodrome Certification and Airspace Change Process with Trax and Cyrrus mobilised and working at pace.

Our airport will be for both freight and passenger aircraft, as previously stated. Anyone who suggests otherwise is lying.

Current works on the Fire Station and Heyford House are nearing conclusion and the preparations on the Air Traffic Control have begun. Procurement for the Air Ground Landing Lights and Radar and Fire Apparatus have commenced.

Alongside @Munich Airport International we are talking with airlines and freight providers and these are at an advanced stage. As you would expect we are in discussions with a number of airlines, of course I cannot name them until everything is signed.

The plan remains to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport in Spring 2026, there of course remain a number of interdependencies. Once we have the Gainshare decision signed off in early September we can finalise our plans, including progressing with the Airspace requirements, signing-up airlines and freight providers and to employ and train staff required to operate an airport. I look forward to providing you all with the next update in September, by which point our Gainshare funding should have been signed off. Thank you.

#DoncasterIsGreat #Delivering4Doncaster #SaveDSA

 

An article released today regarding a talk Coppard gave at a recent ‘South Yorkshire Property Awards Dinner’ which shows why I don’t think we can take his negative or positive talk as true gauge of which way it’s going to go.

“I know the delay on Doncaster Sheffield Airport has been frustrating. But here’s the thing: we get one chance at getting this right,” mayor Oliver Coppard tells Insider dinner attendees. - Insider Media

South Yorkshire has just one chance to make the right decision on Doncaster Sheffield Airport, the region’s mayor has told an Insider awards dinner.

www.insidermedia.com

I don’t think he’s giving anything away, but he is making a bigger deal of the jobs on Gateway East which are not aviation related.

And now we have Ros Jones accusing people of lying.

I wonder who that's aimed at?

So she's still insisting the airport will be open in 9 months from now despite the fact, as she says, they are only just starting the procurement process for some pretty vital stuff, and also as she says, there's all those staff to recruit and train. I wonder if she's aware of the timescale for obtaining security approval?

I'm sorry but the more she says, the more I don't believe her.

 

I wonder who that's aimed at?

So she's still insisting the airport will be open in 9 months from now despite the fact, as she says, they are only just starting the procurement process for some pretty vital stuff, and also as she says, there's all those staff to recruit and train. I wonder if she's aware of the timescale for obtaining security approval?

I'm sorry but the more she says, the more I don't believe her.

It’s a dig at Nick Fletcher. To be fair I’m all for having a dig at him but anyway…

She’s only posting what she’s been told to post. I haven’t seen the full council meeting today which she apparently provided an update at but let’s face it she’s hardly going to say ‘nothings going to plan and we’re all thinking it’s not going to happen’ is she. I can only imagine, given the videos of previous council meetings, that this latest one was an uninspiring attempt to read through pre-planned statement and refusing to field questions.

How many times were Peel in ‘advanced negotiations’ with airlines? If they truly are in negotiations at an advanced stage then they better hope they can pull a few rabbits out the hat because it looks like Coppard isn’t going to entertain it to the fullest extent if those ‘advanced negotiations’ are going to lead to 0 again.

 

An article released today regarding a talk Coppard gave at a recent ‘South Yorkshire Property Awards Dinner’ which shows why I don’t think we can take his negative or positive talk as true gauge of which way it’s going to go.

“I know the delay on Doncaster Sheffield Airport has been frustrating. But here’s the thing: we get one chance at getting this right,” mayor Oliver Coppard tells Insider dinner attendees. - Insider Media

South Yorkshire has just one chance to make the right decision on Doncaster Sheffield Airport, the region’s mayor has told an Insider awards dinner.

www.insidermedia.com

I don’t think he’s giving anything away, but he is making a bigger deal of the jobs on Gateway East which are not aviation related.

And now we have Ros Jones accusing people of lying.

A bit rich her accusing others of lying This is the same Mayor who said there were several private investors were lined up last Autumn only then to not issue any update that they had walked away until it was disclosed in the SAU report….. She also previously alluded to the fact that the Council had agreed with Peel for the landing lights to be placed in secure storage, now we find that isn’t the case as they now need to be procured….
She states they are in advanced discussions with several airlines……presumably given the recent statements from colleague the local Labour MP these weren’t with Ryanair as he clearly stated they had only agreed to meet the DSA team last week!
It’s all just gaslighting from the Mayor…..

 

A bit rich her accusing others of lying This is the same Mayor who said there were several private investors were lined up last Autumn only then to not issue any update that they had walked away until it was disclosed in the SAU report….. She also previously alluded to the fact that the Council had agreed with Peel for the landing lights to be placed in secure storage, now we find that isn’t the case as they now need to be procured….
She states they are in advanced discussions with several airlines……presumably given the recent statements from colleague the local Labour MP these weren’t with Ryanair as he clearly stated they had only agreed to meet the DSA team last week!
It’s all just gaslighting from the Mayor…..

She also stated that the SAU report was ‘largely positive’ yet recent opinion pieces in a couple of commercial law publications would suggest otherwise - in fact they state that there were numerous concerns raised. Focus is on airport subsidies at the moment as BRS are launching legal action against the Welsh Government over the subsidy to CWL.

On 6 December 2024, the CMA accepted a referral from the City of Doncaster Council in respect of a proposed subsidy of up to £89.7m to Fly Doncaster Limited (a 100% owned Council subsidiary), in order to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport, which closed in 2022 after its owners declared it was no longer viable.

The CMA's report was published on 22nd January 2025. The report was criticial, raising concerns around the approach taken to Principles A, B, D, F and G, while third parties questioned the proportionality of the Subsidy. Eight third party submissions were reported to have been received, including from Leeds Bradford Airport which said that "achieving passenger volumes at or above previous levels seen by the Airport would be difficult, and that the level of the proposed Subsidy was unlikely to lead to a viable airport over the longer term" whilst Regional & City Airports said "additional subsidy is likely to be required given the Airport’s historical financial performance".

Public funding package to be challenged under the Subsidy Control Act | DWF Group

Our experts consider the Cardiff Airport Subsidy Control case and if we will see more legal challenges emerge within the airport and aviation sector.

dwfgroup.com

Hardly ‘on the whole positive’ is it. But the people have been told it is. I do wonder whether, as part of their new plan, the SAU findings have been addressed because it looks like legal challenges will be fired off if Coppard lights the blue touch paper in September. It’s ok though cos they have an ‘international airport operator’ on the payroll.

 

An article released today regarding a talk Coppard gave at a recent ‘South Yorkshire Property Awards Dinner’ which shows why I don’t think we can take his negative or positive talk as true gauge of which way it’s going to go.

“I know the delay on Doncaster Sheffield Airport has been frustrating. But here’s the thing: we get one chance at getting this right,” mayor Oliver Coppard tells Insider dinner attendees. - Insider Media

South Yorkshire has just one chance to make the right decision on Doncaster Sheffield Airport, the region’s mayor has told an Insider awards dinner.

www.insidermedia.com

I don’t think he’s giving anything away, but he is making a bigger deal of the jobs on Gateway East which are not aviation related.

And now we have Ros Jones accusing people of lying.

Personally I'm fascinated as to which businesses are really frustrated at the delay in Doncaster's "Global Connectivity"? I'm mean really frustrated that they can't grow their business without half a dozen package holiday flights a day from the south east of Doncaster? Is this really the thing that sits on their minds, I'm finding that hard to believe, because if we are all being honest a handful of bucket and spade flights are as big as the project is likely to get for the foreseeable.

Reading that article is like playing DSA Statement Bingo. "Significant opportunity", "Transforming Gateway East", "Sustainable aviation", "Global connectivity".... Blah, blah, blah....

Coppard's statement sounds more like he's reading CDC's Christmas wish list than anything he actually believes in. I'm still (fairly) certain that he is just posturing to keep from any dissention from CDC until the decision is made. If he's done any due diligence, and listened to a broad spectrum of views within the aviation industry and without, he cannot surely be unaware that DSA is a massive risk, and that pretty much all of the risk falls to CDC & SYMCA. Even the government has kept oddly silent on any kind of investment commitment, in fact I'm pretty sure given the current financial situation & growing concern after a series of step-downs on fiscal decisions centrally, Westminster & Whitehall would at the very least be giving quiet hand signals indicating that he should walk slowly away from the project.

There are after all other areas of South Yorkshire that could have better use for the money, which in a quiet kind of way I think he alludes to (as a Civil Servant of nearly 40 years, I've long got used to this kind of political speak, and reading between the lines). After all Barnsley or Rotherham (for example) really won't benefit all that much from DSA, given that they have no hat in the ring. Maybe mentioning these places clears the path to giving the thumbs down to DSA, allowing the Gainshare funds to be more equally, and fairly spread across the county.

 

Personally I'm fascinated as to which businesses are really frustrated at the delay in Doncaster's "Global Connectivity"? I'm mean really frustrated that they can't grow their business without half a dozen package holiday flights a day from the south east of Doncaster? Is this really the thing that sits on their minds, I'm finding that hard to believe, because if we are all being honest a handful of bucket and spade flights are as big as the project is likely to get for the foreseeable.

Reading that article is like playing DSA Statement Bingo. "Significant opportunity", "Transforming Gateway East", "Sustainable aviation", "Global connectivity".... Blah, blah, blah....

Coppard's statement sounds more like he's reading CDC's Christmas wish list than anything he actually believes in. I'm still (fairly) certain that he is just posturing to keep from any dissention from CDC until the decision is made. If he's done any due diligence, and listened to a broad spectrum of views within the aviation industry and without, he cannot surely be unaware that DSA is a massive risk, and that pretty much all of the risk falls to CDC & SYMCA. Even the government has kept oddly silent on any kind of investment commitment, in fact I'm pretty sure given the current financial situation & growing concern after a series of step-downs on fiscal decisions centrally, Westminster & Whitehall would at the very least be giving quiet hand signals indicating that he should walk slowly away from the project.

There are after all other areas of South Yorkshire that could have better use for the money, which in a quiet kind of way I think he alludes to (as a Civil Servant of nearly 40 years, I've long got used to this kind of political speak, and reading between the lines). After all Barnsley or Rotherham (for example) really won't benefit all that much from DSA, given that they have no hat in the ring. Maybe mentioning these places clears the path to giving the thumbs down to DSA, allowing the Gainshare funds to be more equally, and fairly spread across the county.

The Gainshare is Doncaster’s allocation which will effectively be borrowed against (it’s available in tranches over something like 30 years) and the loan will be at below market rates. So in effect the money that will be allocated to the project will be Doncaster’s to spend and Doncaster alone. In fact there is reluctance from within CDC to share the burden with other authorities in SY, perhaps this is a control thing or maybe it’s lack of confidence in buy in from other areas.

I was having an interesting chat with someone from a commercial/legal background yesterday hence my previous post. Their take on things is that Coppard wants to say yes and let CDC worry about it, however his concerns are with suitably answering the findings in the SAU report which, to put it into context, there were more of than in the case of CWL!

Coppards language about seeking assurances and ‘getting it right’ are not about wasting £millions in tax payers money, because let’s face it the tax payers in Doncaster have voted Ros Jones in a slim majority to see the airport reopen, but it’s all about making sure the case is water tight to prevent (as much as is possible) legal action as a result of unfair public subsidy.

Basically there is no case to be made for a market failure, DSA failed because airlines just wanted to fly from other airports and that’s a sign of a fully functioning commercial market. They’ve taken issue with Gateway East requiring an airport on site yet what good is using the money on an airport when the money could be better spent on other infrastructure to ensure Gateway East thrives as best it can? What industries have been attracted to Gateway East that moved there because there was an airport nearby and which ones are interested more because of its proximity to the motorway network? They mention advanced manufacturing and sustainable aviation, but isn’t this exactly what was delivered on the former SZD site without the cost of keeping that open at relative pennies compared to the overheads DSA had and is likely to have in future?

They’ve raised concerns about the growth models. The forecasts submitted to the SAU exceed those that the airport witnessed in its 17 year history, but what if Peel were right and there wasn’t a market to support it? Taking away what we know about incentives etc, but they have to prove that they’ve really considered the implications of Peel being correct and the market not existing. Have they done this? Because if they haven’t satisfied this criteria then it opens them up to more legal challenges where LBA and others can quite rightly state that the subsidy will be used to underwrite airline losses which would provide an unfair advantage. My suspicions are that they’re struggling with this bit, if the airlines aren’t all that bothered then it suggests a fundamental lack of viability. It is however tricky to correctly gauge appetite due to the secretive nature of discussions and strategic planning*. They might say one thing and do the complete opposite.

So Coppard wants to push ahead, but if it means legal action can be taken it risks the courts putting a block on subsidies and even potentially spending £millions more in legal fees.

In their words ‘The Subsidy Control Act provides a clear pathway for interested parties to contest public funding decisions if they believe the rules haven't been followed. Given the history of DSA's commercial viability and the SAU's previous criticisms, any approval of significant public funding without an ironclad, demonstrably compliant business case will carry a high risk of legal action that could severely delay, or even ultimately derail, the project’

At the moment I think Coppard is poised to green light the development but with caveats. He just best hope he’s got the best legal brains on it.

*we could be wrong, maybe there was (and still is) some serious interest from airlines and freight operators alike. But there’s absolutely no evidence for this and airport proponents have had to make up rumours of misdeeds or incompetence suit their agenda.

 

The Gainshare is Doncaster’s allocation which will effectively be borrowed against (it’s available in tranches over something like 30 years) and the loan will be at below market rates. So in effect the money that will be allocated to the project will be Doncaster’s to spend and Doncaster alone. In fact there is reluctance from within CDC to share the burden with other authorities in SY, perhaps this is a control thing or maybe it’s lack of confidence in buy in from other areas.

I was having an interesting chat with someone from a commercial/legal background yesterday hence my previous post. Their take on things is that Coppard wants to say yes and let CDC worry about it, however his concerns are with suitably answering the findings in the SAU report which, to put it into context, there were more of than in the case of CWL!

Coppards language about seeking assurances and ‘getting it right’ are not about wasting £millions in tax payers money, because let’s face it the tax payers in Doncaster have voted Ros Jones in a slim majority to see the airport reopen, but it’s all about making sure the case is water tight to prevent (as much as is possible) legal action as a result of unfair public subsidy.

Basically there is no case to be made for a market failure, DSA failed because airlines just wanted to fly from other airports and that’s a sign of a fully functioning commercial market. They’ve taken issue with Gateway East requiring an airport on site yet what good is using the money on an airport when the money could be better spent on other infrastructure to ensure Gateway East thrives as best it can? What industries have been attracted to Gateway East that moved there because there was an airport nearby and which ones are interested more because of its proximity to the motorway network?

They’ve raised concerns about the growth models. The forecasts submitted to the SAU exceed those that the airport witnessed in its 17 year history, but what if Peel were right and there wasn’t a market to support it? Taking away what we know about incentives etc, but they have to prove that they’ve really considered the implications of Peel being correct and the market not existing. Have they done this? Because if they haven’t satisfied this criteria then it opens them up to more legal challenges where LBA and others can quite rightly state that the subsidy will be used to underwrite airline losses which would provide an unfair advantage. My suspicions are that they’re struggling with this bit, if the airlines aren’t all that bothered then it suggests a fundamental lack of viability. It is however tricky to correctly gauge appetite due to the secretive nature of discussions and strategic planning*. They might say one thing and do the complete opposite.

So Coppard wants to push ahead, but if it means legal action can be taken it risks the courts putting a block on subsidies and even potentially spending £millions more in legal fees.

In their words ‘The Subsidy Control Act provides a clear pathway for interested parties to contest public funding decisions if they believe the rules haven't been followed. Given the history of DSA's commercial viability and the SAU's previous criticisms, any approval of significant public funding without an ironclad, demonstrably compliant business case will carry a high risk of legal action that could severely delay, or even ultimately derail, the project’

At the moment I think Coppard is poised to green light the development but with caveats. He just best hope he’s got the best legal brains on it.

*we could be wrong, maybe there was (and still is) some serious interest from airlines and freight operators alike. But there’s absolutely no evidence for this and airport proponents have had to make up rumours of misdeeds or incompetence suit their agenda.

Thanks for the detailed response. If your suspicions are right, and it's more about legal "arse covering" if it all goes pointy bits up than it is about delivering value for local Council Tax payers, then honestly he'd better start considering a change in career in a few years. Because if he does green light it, and when it almost inevitably becomes a money pit and fails, he'll be remembered as the one that handed over the cash (put in simple voter terms). And with a new, growing, and very noisy political party breathing down the two main party's necks, hundreds of millions chucked down a black hole would be political gold for them as well as the Tories. The more I think about it, the more politically suicidal it would seem to be.

It's an open secret that there are likely to be more cuts made in the public sector & services, both centrally and at local council level to come, which will increasingly likely be accompanied with tax rises and/or tax thresholds frozen. This is going to impact a lot of the voting public moving forward, and the good folk of Doncaster and the wider country aren't going to be too pleased to up their contributions and receive worse services simply so that CDC politicians get their vanity project for a bit, before having to chuck in it in bin. I have honestly hoped that Coppard might be the one pragmatic layer in all the levels of DSA fluff, and would ultimately weigh it up as too much of a risk. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet if I am, the fallout will reshape the political landscape of the region for a long time, and Coppard, Ross et al will not have a part of it!

 

The Gainshare is Doncaster’s allocation which will effectively be borrowed against (it’s available in tranches over something like 30 years) and the loan will be at below market rates. So in effect the money that will be allocated to the project will be Doncaster’s to spend and Doncaster alone. In fact there is reluctance from within CDC to share the burden with other authorities in SY, perhaps this is a control thing or maybe it’s lack of confidence in buy in from other areas.

I was having an interesting chat with someone from a commercial/legal background yesterday hence my previous post. Their take on things is that Coppard wants to say yes and let CDC worry about it, however his concerns are with suitably answering the findings in the SAU report which, to put it into context, there were more of than in the case of CWL!

Coppards language about seeking assurances and ‘getting it right’ are not about wasting £millions in tax payers money, because let’s face it the tax payers in Doncaster have voted Ros Jones in a slim majority to see the airport reopen, but it’s all about making sure the case is water tight to prevent (as much as is possible) legal action as a result of unfair public subsidy.

Basically there is no case to be made for a market failure, DSA failed because airlines just wanted to fly from other airports and that’s a sign of a fully functioning commercial market. They’ve taken issue with Gateway East requiring an airport on site yet what good is using the money on an airport when the money could be better spent on other infrastructure to ensure Gateway East thrives as best it can? What industries have been attracted to Gateway East that moved there because there was an airport nearby and which ones are interested more because of its proximity to the motorway network? They mention advanced manufacturing and sustainable aviation, but isn’t this exactly what was delivered on the former SZD site without the cost of keeping that open at relative pennies compared to the overheads DSA had and is likely to have in future?

They’ve raised concerns about the growth models. The forecasts submitted to the SAU exceed those that the airport witnessed in its 17 year history, but what if Peel were right and there wasn’t a market to support it? Taking away what we know about incentives etc, but they have to prove that they’ve really considered the implications of Peel being correct and the market not existing. Have they done this? Because if they haven’t satisfied this criteria then it opens them up to more legal challenges where LBA and others can quite rightly state that the subsidy will be used to underwrite airline losses which would provide an unfair advantage. My suspicions are that they’re struggling with this bit, if the airlines aren’t all that bothered then it suggests a fundamental lack of viability. It is however tricky to correctly gauge appetite due to the secretive nature of discussions and strategic planning*. They might say one thing and do the complete opposite.

So Coppard wants to push ahead, but if it means legal action can be taken it risks the courts putting a block on subsidies and even potentially spending £millions more in legal fees.

In their words ‘The Subsidy Control Act provides a clear pathway for interested parties to contest public funding decisions if they believe the rules haven't been followed. Given the history of DSA's commercial viability and the SAU's previous criticisms, any approval of significant public funding without an ironclad, demonstrably compliant business case will carry a high risk of legal action that could severely delay, or even ultimately derail, the project’

At the moment I think Coppard is poised to green light the development but with caveats. He just best hope he’s got the best legal brains on it.

*we could be wrong, maybe there was (and still is) some serious interest from airlines and freight operators alike. But there’s absolutely no evidence for this and airport proponents have had to make up rumours of misdeeds or incompetence suit their agenda.

Presumably if LBA and any other airports lodge legal action with the CMA as per Bristol - once Coppard approves SYMC will be unable to drawdawn on funding?

 

Thanks for the detailed response. If your suspicions are right, and it's more about legal "arse covering" if it all goes pointy bits up than it is about delivering value for local Council Tax payers, then honestly he'd better start considering a change in career in a few years. Because if he does green light it, and when it almost inevitably becomes a money pit and fails, he'll be remembered as the one that handed over the cash (put in simple voter terms). And with a new, growing, and very noisy political party breathing down the two main party's necks, hundreds of millions chucked down a black hole would be political gold for them as well as the Tories. The more I think about it, the more politically suicidal it would seem to be.

It's an open secret that there are likely to be more cuts made in the public sector & services, both centrally and at local council level to come, which will increasingly likely be accompanied with tax rises and/or tax thresholds frozen. This is going to impact a lot of the voting public moving forward, and the good folk of Doncaster and the wider country aren't going to be too pleased to up their contributions and receive worse services simply so that CDC politicians get their vanity project for a bit, before having to chuck in it in bin. I have honestly hoped that Coppard might be the one pragmatic layer in all the levels of DSA fluff, and would ultimately weigh it up as too much of a risk. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm willing to bet if I am, the fallout will reshape the political landscape of the region for a long time, and Coppard, Ross et al will not have a part of it!

Thanks for your informed input on it from a public sector perspective.

The person I spoke to was speculating, of course Coppard may be looking out purely in the interests of investing the money wisely, but their reading between the lines was due to the language being used about seeking assurances. Fail to satisfy the criticisms raised in the SAU report and there will be legal implications unless none of the third party objectors decided to pursue it. I find this an unlikely scenario given the ultra-competitive nature of the sector.

Coppard, Jones, Foster, Allen, Fell, none of these people are in a position to pick up on the nuances of the business. It’s quite evident that they think all that needs to happen is to make the place ‘competitive’ and routes including to long haul destinations will open up. If they have been following this principle and the outsourced independent analysis of it has returned with a negative there is no way Coppard can green light it in the knowledge that the airport is unlikely to have the ROI based on assumptions that are null and void. But I don’t have confidence that he’s been told that, or he knows the political ramifications of rejecting the proposals so he may be forced to sign off the funding with caveats. What those caveats may be remains to be seen.

As I’ve tried to say continuously over the years, if by some miracle the FlyDoncaster/MAI team have managed to get some tangible airline and freight interest that didn’t exist before then I would support the reopening. But I don’t believe they have, so I wait patiently to be proved wrong.

Presumably if LBA and any other airports lodge legal action with the CMA as per Bristol - once Coppard approves SYMC will be unable to drawdawn on funding?

Yes I think this is the case. They would have one month from the date of sign off to initiate legal proceedings. So if LBA or other decided to formally object then the project would be put on hold whilst the process runs its course. Thats my understanding, I’m sure there would be nothing to stop them going ahead but if the courts found in favour of the objector then it would put FlyDoncaster and ultimately SYMCA in a very perilous position of potentially losing the right to subsidy and re compensating, least that’s my understanding. This is why Coppard needs to seek assurances which will have to include ‘iron clad’ business case.

 

The DSA supports are shouting now that the LBA supporters are the ones saying the removal of airspace is a bad, when they are saying it is indeed actually a good thing..

Notice how the petition to SAVE the airspace is not being pushed and they fail to mention it literally takes years to get the CAA to approve new air space. The realistic people on that page / the ones actually asking the correct questions are getting labelled as LBA supporters.. just because they are questioning the BS and contractions over the months.

Very interesting to see how this will be played out but Christ, I have zero confidence and airline will 100% commit with or without subsidy. Cant even see regular cargo airlines committing. Odd flights here and there I'm sure, but not enough to justify millions spent on this.

 

If they do get the airport up and running, would the CDC be able to sell it?

 

If they do get the airport up and running, would the CDC be able to sell it?

Good question of which I don't know the answer but a working airport is obviously a more viable airport from a buyers perspective.

 

If they do get the airport up and running, would the CDC be able to sell it?

It’s been suggested that FP Airport's have walked away from the partnership because they wanted equity in the business and CDC refused. They intend on keeping the airport under the control of FlyDoncaster so it looks at the minute that an eventual sale of the business isn’t on the agenda. Aviador points out that an open airport is a more viable proposition from a buyers perspective but the lease deal with Peel is worth £600 million. If a buyer was ever interested then they’d probably want to negotiate purchasing the freehold for which they’d probably not get much change from £300 million as an operational airport. We have been told that the private sector have walked away in part due to the terms of the lease, so I don’t see how an operational airport under the same terms would change that.

Either way the airport would need to be financially successful and sustainable before any private sector investor would want to take on the risk. If this venture fails to get off the ground, or does indeed reopen but fails to satisfy the terms of the lease by year x, then the land will revert to Peel to use as they see fit.

 

According to Google a working regional airport with a modest number of flights is worth in the region of between £100m and £150m. This would potentially be much lower for the reasons mentioned in the previous post by @pug

 

The DSA supports are shouting now that the LBA supporters are the ones saying the removal of airspace is a bad, when they are saying it is indeed actually a good thing..

Notice how the petition to SAVE the airspace is not being pushed and they fail to mention it literally takes years to get the CAA to approve new air space. The realistic people on that page / the ones actually asking the correct questions are getting labelled as LBA supporters.. just because they are questioning the BS and contractions over the months.

Very interesting to see how this will be played out but Christ, I have zero confidence and airline will 100% commit with or without subsidy. Cant even see regular cargo airlines committing. Odd flights here and there I'm sure, but not enough to justify millions spent on this.

I commented myself, and so on this occasion, they're right. I am am LBA supporter. But that's not why I think that the CDC politicians are talking absolute bulls**t.

Those DSA fans who actually understand the aviation industry are the ones questioning the facts being pedalled by politicians. Those who accused them of being LBA supporters for doing so are clueless.

 

According to Google a working regional airport with a modest number of flights is worth in the region of between £100m and £150m. This would potentially be much lower for the reasons mentioned in the previous post by @pug

Judging by precedent set in Teesside, Peel would sell for the amount they invested. So anywhere from £280 million and they’d sell. Clearly they had no interested buyers despite this apparent untapped goldmine.

Had today off so I’ve had more chance to review what Ros Jones has said in her latest statement.

She accuses people of lying yet claims;

Approach lights bring purchased - I thought these were ‘in storage’ according to her?

The CAA have announced full removal of airspace which will let them redesign - well why were you encouraging a petition to call it in?

DSA will open in spring 2026 and it’s heavily implied this will include passenger flights. They’re in ‘advanced discussions’ with airlines and freight operators - she then goes on to state that they can’t ’sign up’ airlines until the Gainshare has been signed off in September. Well there’s a couple of issues with that, the airlines would be the ones deciding, not FlyDoncaster and a bunch of career public sector middle managers. However not only that how are they going to get airlines in with such a short lead in time?

Also note that recruitment will not start until after Gainshare sign off. That gives them at best 8 months.

Any idea what she (or her minder) means when she says ‘I am pleased that Oliver Coppard has signalled that through ongoing assurance works that this builds confidence to provide a credible update to the MCA board’? Seems a lot of words that don’t really mean much?

Is it lying or purposefully misleading?

 

Judging by precedent set in Teesside, Peel would sell for the amount they invested. So anywhere from £280 million and they’d sell. Clearly they had no interested buyers despite this apparent untapped goldmine.

Had today off so I’ve had more chance to review what Ros Jones has said in her latest statement.

She accuses people of lying yet claims;

Approach lights bring purchased - I thought these were ‘in storage’ according to her?

The CAA have announced full removal of airspace which will let them redesign - well why were you encouraging a petition to call it in?

DSA will open in spring 2026 and it’s heavily implied this will include passenger flights. They’re in ‘advanced discussions’ with airlines and freight operators - she then goes on to state that they can’t ’sign up’ airlines until the Gainshare has been signed off in September. Well there’s a couple of issues with that, the airlines would be the ones deciding, not FlyDoncaster and a bunch of career public sector middle managers. However not only that how are they going to get airlines in with such a short lead in time?

Also note that recruitment will not start until after Gainshare sign off. That gives them at best 8 months.

Any idea what she (or her minder) means when she says ‘I am pleased that Oliver Coppard has signalled that through ongoing assurance works that this builds confidence to provide a credible update to the MCA board’? Seems a lot of words that don’t really mean much?

Is it lying or purposefully misleading?

Well she's reading the signals from OC completely contrary to how I would interpret the things he's said.