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...?

 

Pug you were 100% right about the year, and it was resurfacing work carried out at DSA.
i was with the man who did the work last night, he says at a guess it should be ok for about another 7-8 years.

 

I’m pretty sure If they removed capacity at LBA and put it into DSA it would be grounds for legal action against FlyDoncaster owing to the public subsidy.

And I would expect another airline to fill any capacity left behind very swiftly.

 

Which makes you think that is absolutely the last thing any airline at LBA would do. Risk their pot of gold for DSA alright.. haha

 

Well summed up, but it does beg the question why they would be given another £20 million to continue work on it if there is a good chance the proposal doesn’t pass the scrutiny OC claims to be putting the plans through. If anything they’ve laid all their cards out on the table years ago, before they even had chance to actually have a good look at it. They said back in 2022 that they know it can be a success, Coppard even said he understood Peel could have done things differently resulting in a different outcome. Why has he left things until now to complete independent scrutiny? Surely your first thing to do would be to commission viability studies before entering into a procurement exercise. But we don’t really know who completed the initial viability studies because we’re not allowed to see them, they mentioned names that haven’t reappeared subsequently, perhaps this latest £20million is to put money in the meter of those companies?

There was another meeting about the airport yesterday which included the British Chamber of Commerce. They’ve said they hope to have freight operating by the end of this year and are confident there will be passenger flights Spring 26. This is from the project director who is a council employee NOT an MAI employee…

My best guess about the additional £20M is that this just to keep the embers alight until the final decision is made, i.e. after the local elections. Even though there is serious doubt with the SYMCA, they haven't got the political will to just pull the plug just yet. Nosing around some of the GE 2024 results in South Yorkshire, whilst Reform didn't put candidates in many constituencies, where they did they polled reasonably well and maybe well be on Labour's SY radar now. And they are exactly the kind of party that could make enough noise if DSA got canned before May to give them a rough ride. So bung an extra £10M each to keep the façade going, in the vain hope that something, or someone will come riding across the empty Lincolnshire fields to rescue the project before it finds itself on a dusty shelf.

 

The letter from the auditor is interesting

My best guess about the additional £20M is that this just to keep the embers alight until the final decision is made, i.e. after the local elections. Even though there is serious doubt with the SYMCA, they haven't got the political will to just pull the plug just yet. Nosing around some of the GE 2024 results in South Yorkshire, whilst Reform didn't put candidates in many constituencies, where they did they polled reasonably well and maybe well be on Labour's SY radar now. And they are exactly the kind of party that could make enough noise if DSA got canned before May to give them a rough ride. So bung an extra £10M each to keep the façade going, in the vain hope that something, or someone will come riding across the empty Lincolnshire fields to rescue the project before it finds itself on a dusty shelf.

Have you seen the warning from CDC auditor?

 

The letter from the auditor is interesting

Have you seen the warning from CDC auditor?

As it’s from November 24 I suspect they’re doubling over to work to allay any concerns. It’s probably informed their most recent request for funds as that document was quite clear in the inherent risks involved and didn’t seem to play that down.

That’s what most of the £20 million will be spent on, trying to make a solution fit the problem. They know it’s not going to work as planned, they know it’s going to cost a lot more than what is being proposed. They’re trying to get it reopened so that people are up in arms when it’s threatened with closure again and it therefore receives a further huge injection of public cash, or as Bantamzen suspects, some private investor suddenly realises it’s not a risk any more.

Christian Foster and Damien Allen, time to let someone else take it on. Airports are not places for those on the gravy train to be!

Hope is not a strategy.

 

There is an airspace meeting tomorrow, and a friend of Burke on social media say Mitchinson posting a bombshell story in YP tomorrow

No bombshell?

 

No bombshell?

It has landed

 

It has landed

Wouldn’t be this would it?

Doncaster Sheffield Airport: Auditors reveal "major concern" about £105m reopening plans

A council’s auditors have expressed “a major concern” about its plan to spend over £100m on reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport, it has been revealed.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Minimum lease costs increased 4 fold from £14million to £56million too?

Interesting that the article states that it’s rare that an external auditor would issue a letter of concern, presumably outside of its usual remit. Costs already increased 38% in a matter of weeks and now this?

I can only see the first couple of paragraphs, perhaps someone could paste the rest?

 

It has landed

YP Grant Thornton

Thank you Egyptian King, a very interesting read.

My favourite bit is the reassurance from the major stating “It should be seen as a gamechanger not only for Doncaster but our county, the North and UK PLC.
“It is the business case that demonstrates the viability of this. With my financial background, I’d always want to see a business case that supports it and that’s what we have been presented with.”

Well I feel so much better now, her financial background obviously serves her well

 

Wouldn’t be this would it?

Doncaster Sheffield Airport: Auditors reveal "major concern" about £105m reopening plans

A council’s auditors have expressed “a major concern” about its plan to spend over £100m on reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport, it has been revealed.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Minimum lease costs increased 4 fold from £14million to £56million too?

Interesting that the article states that it’s rare that an external auditor would issue a letter of concern, presumably outside of its usual remit. Costs already increased 38% in a matter of weeks and now this?

I can only see the first couple of paragraphs, perhaps someone could paste the rest?

It is that

 

It is that

What period do those minimum lease costs cover? 10 years?

YP Grant Thornton

Thank you Egyptian King, a very interesting read.

My favourite bit is the reassurance from the major stating “It should be seen as a gamechanger not only for Doncaster but our county, the North and UK PLC.
“It is the business case that demonstrates the viability of this. With my financial background, I’d always want to see a business case that supports it and that’s what we have been presented with.”

Well I feel so much better now, her financial background obviously serves her well

I’ve managed to read it all. She also states that the council have employed an entrepreneurial approach to the project.

I could take an entrepreneurial approach if I had access to £100’s of millions of other people’s money.

It still doesn’t acknowledge the very real prospect of not many airlines showing interest due to failed attempts at establishing a route network from there previously. This is a fundamental problem and is such a high risk that the private sector won’t touch it. How are they going to mitigate this?

In order to generate those 5000 jobs I would bet my house that the airport isn’t needed and could even hinder the redevelopment of the hinterland. I need to see how they are projecting that the 5000 jobs they claim will be created are predicated on an airport being there.

I also note that the CDC quote the positive audit report of 23/24 which is irrelevant to the purpose of the letter in November 24. Grant Thornton spokesperson presumably being diplomatic when he says that the world has moved on since then. Referring to MAI who have no financial risk from the project, have no U.K. operating experience and will have an unclear role in the airports OPCO.

 

So RJ states that the reopening will signal that the North is open for business! In a sentence she has demonstrated her delusional view about Doncaster, the airport, and its importance to the North.

As for the CDC auditors, I'm sure their views will be dismissed by the Mayor who seems fixated on the possible benefits and determined to be a hero by opening the airport no matter what the cost. Meanwhile, no doubt the mechanic and his merry men will presumably claim that the auditors are the latest experts to be nobbled by LBA management because they are so worried about the threat DSA poses.

 

So RJ states that the reopening will signal that the North is open for business! In a sentence she has demonstrated her delusional view about Doncaster, the airport, and its importance to the North.

As for the CDC auditors, I'm sure their views will be dismissed by the Mayor who seems fixated on the possible benefits and determined to be a hero by opening the airport no matter what the cost. Meanwhile, no doubt the mechanic and his merry men will presumably claim that the auditors are the latest experts to be nobbled by LBA management because they are so worried about the threat DSA poses.

They are stuck aren’t they. The auditor talks of ‘escalation of commitment’ which is a concern that they’ll get too far in they can’t back out, but I think they’re in that position now! We had Damien Allen just a few months ago stating that those public sector gatekeepers should ignore the public at their peril! If they shelve it now it’ll be political suicide in Doncaster and would be remembered for many years to come.

I hope the external auditors pick this apart, there is no evidence available to show that the success of Gateway Easy is in any way predicated on having an airport on site, only that this is what the CDC want to happen and have tried influencing through their own planning controls.

 

They are stuck aren’t they. The auditor talks of ‘escalation of commitment’ which is a concern that they’ll get too far in they can’t back out, but I think they’re in that position now! We had Damien Allen just a few months ago stating that those public sector gatekeepers should ignore the public at their peril! If they shelve it now it’ll be political suicide in Doncaster and would be remembered for many years to come.

I hope the external auditors pick this apart, there is no evidence available to show that the success of Gateway Easy is in any way predicated on having an airport on site, only that this is what the CDC want to happen and have tried influencing through their own planning controls.

They have dug themselves one almighty big hole and look intent on jumping in .

Their only get out is Oliver Coppard and his 'independent advice,' with him deciding to pull the plug on the gainshare funding, after which he could forever be known locally as Oliver Coppout. He would need to be brave to do it, and it would be interesting to see what his so called independent advisor says , bearing in mind the York Aviation report, and the warnings from the CDC Auditors, not to mention the recent comments from Michael O'Leary .

It makes you wonder who the original advisors were as appointed by CDC and how they reached apparently opposite conclusions to everyone else.

 

They have dug themselves one almighty big hole and look intent on jumping in .

Their only get out is Oliver Coppard and his 'independent advice,' with him deciding to pull the plug on the gainshare funding, after which he could forever be known locally as Oliver Coppout. He would need to be brave to do it, and it would be interesting to see what his so called independent advisor says , bearing in mind the York Aviation report, and the warnings from the CDC Auditors, not to mention the recent comments from Michael O'Leary .

It makes you wonder who the original advisors were as appointed by CDC and how they reached apparently opposite conclusions to everyone else.

People elsewhere have been using various AI platforms to inform their opinions. Whilst it isn’t scientific (AI works on the resources it is able to review) I got the following summary on Google Gemini;

• No Private Investment: The absence of private investment is a major red flag. Private investors, who are typically driven by profit motives, are voting with their wallets. Their reluctance to invest suggests a lack of confidence in the airport's financial viability. Relying solely on public funds significantly increases the risk for taxpayers.
• Operator Fees: Paying an operator (like MAI) to run the airport, rather than having them invest their own capital, further underscores the lack of private sector confidence. It also adds to the airport's operating costs, making profitability even more challenging.
• Escalating Costs: Cost overruns are common in large infrastructure projects. The fact that costs are alreadyescalating is a worrying sign and suggests that the initial budget may have been unrealistic. This increases the financial risk for the council and taxpayers.
• Low Propensity to Fly/Over-Served Market: The combination of a low propensity to fly in the region and the presence of numerous well-established airports nearby creates a highly competitive environment. Attracting enough passengers to make Doncaster viable will be extremely difficult. Airlines are unlikely to be interested if they don't see sufficient demand.
• Exaggerated/Negative ROI: Doncaster's projected ROI compared to Gatwick is misleading and raises serious concerns about the accuracy of the financial projections. The real ROI could very well be negative, meaning that the airport would be a financial drain on the public purse.
• Freight Competition: East Midlands Airport's established dominance in the freight market makes it highly unlikely that Doncaster could attract significant cargo traffic. This further limits the airport's potential revenue streams.

The Bigger Picture:

All of these factors combined paint a picture of a project that is facing significant headwinds and has a very low probability of success. Continuing to pursue the reopening plans in the face of these challenges would be a considerable risk to public funds and could lead to significant financial losses for the council and taxpayers.

What Needs to Happen:

• Independent Review: A truly independent and objective review of the project's financial viability, taking into account all of the concerns raised, is absolutely essential. This review should be conducted by experts with no vested interest in the project's outcome.
• Reconsideration of Alternatives: The council must seriously reconsider alternative uses for the land. Are there other development options that could generate more jobs and economic growth without the high financial risks associated with the airport?
• Transparency and Accountability: The entire process needs to be far more transparent. The public has a right to know how their money is being spent and what the true risks are. Those responsible for promoting this project should be held accountable for their decisions.

In short, the evidence strongly suggests that reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport is not a viable proposition. Continuing to pursue this project would be a gamble with public money that is unlikely to pay off. It's time for a realistic assessment of the situation and a serious consideration of alternative options.

 

People elsewhere have been using various AI platforms to inform their opinions. Whilst it isn’t scientific (AI works on the resources it is able to review) I got the following summary on Google Gemini;

All the same points we have made in here over and over again.

 

They have dug themselves one almighty big hole and look intent on jumping in .

And to ensure they have dug themselves in even deeper, Lee Pitcher has confirmed he has set up a parliamentary debate to highlight its contribution to the region!!!

 

And to ensure they have dug themselves in even deeper, Lee Pitcher has confirmed he has set up a parliamentary debate to highlight its contribution to the region!!!

That’s another pit of meaningless twaddle. What the hell is a parliamentary debate if it doesn’t involve money?

All these people saying it should relieve LHR should really be going out to the airlines of the world and promoting Doncaster as a viable alternative. If this got some backing I would support it unreservedly. However I suspect it would be met with ambivalence, I also suspect our elected officials know this and hence they rather have a ‘parliamentary debate’ cos it shows they’re doing something and nothing all at the same time.

 

That’s another pit of meaningless twaddle. What the hell is a parliamentary debate if it doesn’t involve money?

All these people saying it should relieve LHR should really be going out to the airlines of the world and promoting Doncaster as a viable alternative. If this got some backing I would support it unreservedly. However I suspect it would be met with ambivalence, I also suspect our elected officials know this and hence they rather have a ‘parliamentary debate’ cos it shows they’re doing something and nothing all at the same time.

Not sure about ambivalence. I suspect the very idea would be met with hilarity.