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...?

 

i dont think they will be to worried about a legal challenge.

The UK subsidy control regime enables UK public authorities, including devolved administrations and local authorities, to give subsidies that are tailored to their local needs, and that drive economic growth, while minimising distortion to UK competition and protecting our international obligations.

the locals need an airport (even though the people of west yorkshire would like to deny them one)

an airport will drive economic growth.

and as everyone one here says , no airlines is going switch to DSA from LBA.
so nothing to worry about.

Oh I think they will - they need to be very careful how they spend the public's money to avoid that. In spite of the 'spin' from CDC the SAU report contained several banana skins if not heeded. I do not think generally the people of West Yorkshire are that bothered one way or another and most certainly would not like to deny an airport to the folk of South Yorkshire. With the best will in the world that's a bit of a daft allegation. This focus on LBA as the bogeyman is also a bit silly - I agree with you that LBA will lose little to a re-opened DSA as they gained little when DSA shut other than a few Wizz flights - it's EMA/MAN where the
real issues for DSA could arise and I guess it might come as a shock to some.

 

you need glasses pug,
2nd line, , while minimising distortion to UK competition
so i have not skipped it. and as i said nobody on here thinks any airline will leave|LBA for DSA
and it is not a google search , it from the governments website.
and any legal challenge will fail, just like your failed idea that |DSA was going open again

presume you must know more the the legal team putting together the board pack for Tuesdays meeting if you’re staying a fact that any legal challenge would simply fail….Maybe you should look for a career change from to competition lawyer…. The facts are since the SAU report was published there is actually even greater grounds for any legal challenge to be successful….The economic benefits stated by DMBC in their presentation to the Subsidy Advice Unit have been found to be significantly over estimated - given the extent of the over established it could be argued that they were actually misleading….The extent of any subsidy also looks to be only going in one direction! Added to that the Bristol challenge has arisen since the SAU report was published….
I would be extremely surprised if no challenge is made on competition grounds by at least one competitor airport. Any challenge will have the potential to significantly delay the opening of the airport whilst the case is heard by the Competition Appeal Tribunal- further given it will raise significant question marks over DSA again it will have a significant impact on any commercial negotiations with prospective airlines who are already highly sceptical about the airport given its previous history..

 

It’s obvious it’s the as he has always a fixation (slight obsession maybe?) with LBA and West Yorkshire. Absolutely no mention of this from other neighbouring airports. Not another mention of Regional and City Airport that also raised concerns. Because of course that doesn’t fit the poor me Doncaster narrative and South Yorkshire narrative.

You think MAG will take lightly to a recently private investment in EMA and their cargo facility if DSA use public fund to try and gain? Nope likewise with passenger flights from both MAN & EMA. Let’s not forget the big earners from DSA demise was MAN and EMA but obviously the fixation of LBA is to hard to resist so it must be mentioned at any given opportunity for the DSA followers to be interested in the “arm chair aviation expert opinions”

I’m sure the CDC opened a new car garage down the road and subsidised the public to use it with cheaper rates he would quickly have something to say and object..? Penny finally dropping?

No private investment would touch DSA, says it all. Boring now, move on, let’s get this air strip open and watch it flourish eh

 

It’s obvious it’s the as he has always a fixation (slight obsession maybe?) with LBA and West Yorkshire. Absolutely no mention of this from other neighbouring airports. Not another mention of Regional and City Airport that also raised concerns. Because of course that doesn’t fit the poor me Doncaster narrative and South Yorkshire narrative.

You think MAG will take lightly to a recently private investment in EMA and their cargo facility if DSA use public fund to try and gain? Nope likewise with passenger flights from both MAN & EMA. Let’s not forget the big earners from DSA demise was MAN and EMA but obviously the fixation of LBA is to hard to resist so it must be mentioned at any given opportunity for the DSA followers to be interested in the “arm chair aviation expert opinions”

I’m sure the CDC opened a new car garage down the road and subsidised the public to use it with cheaper rates he would quickly have something to say and object..? Penny finally dropping?

No private investment would touch DSA, says it all. Boring now, move on, let’s get this air strip open and watch it flourish eh

Interestingly Cardiff’s defence against the Bristol airport action is based around their subsidy being used to diversify their operation and increase their cargo ops which will not impact Bristol as they have no or a very limited cargo ops. Of course this defence would not hold water in DSAs case should both LBA and MAG decide to take their case to the CAT.

 

Ros Jones has directly quoted the PR guy who had an opinion piece in the Yorkshire Post over the weekend, some may have seen this being spread as gospel even though the guy doesn’t seem to have much actual credibility when it comes to airports.

In it he suggests that DSA has the potential to link up Doncaster with the globe due to its long runway (where have we heard that before?) but also to capture some of the freight that currently routes through Heathrow because 70% of the U.K. air freight transits through LHR. This is a bit silly, 90-95% of the air freight coming through LHR does so as belly freight on passenger aircraft. The reason? Well it helps sustain such a wide and varied network, but also because of this air freight is more viable being sent through that means than on pure freight aircraft that do not offer the flexibility or just in time capabilities. Evidently they failed to mention that bit, but that’s what jobbing PR people do I suppose.

I’m concerned that this is driving the project, because if it is it will fail.

Interestingly Cardiff’s defence against the Bristol airport action is based around their subsidy being used to diversify their operation and increase their cargo ops which will not impact Bristol as they have no or a very limited cargo ops. Of course this defence would not hold water in DSAs case should both LBA and MAG decide to take their case to the CAT.

Also the SAU report into CWL was critical of 4 out of the 7 principles as opposed to DSA where it was critical of 5 out of the 7. Though SYMCA appear to have addressed some of them, they’ve actually doubled down on others and are clearly playing by the Governments growth agenda.

The November budget has a lot of people worried, not least the airlines who rely on people having a high disposable income to travel. Places like Doncaster, where there isn’t a lot of money, are certainly not going to be attractive places to put expensive aircraft to work. They’re justifying this as a long term investment, presumably to keep it going until the economy of South Yorkshire is prosperous to actually support an airport. So they’ll say these short term pains don’t account for the longer term vision. It’ll be hard to make the airport ‘stand on its own two feet/brush its own teeth’ in the meantime though won’t it.

 

Ros Jones has directly quoted the PR guy who had an opinion piece in the Yorkshire Post over the weekend, some may have seen this being spread as gospel even though the guy doesn’t seem to have much actual credibility when it comes to airports.

In it he suggests that DSA has the potential to link up Doncaster with the globe due to its long runway (where have we heard that before?) but also to capture some of the freight that currently routes through Heathrow because 70% of the U.K. air freight transits through LHR. This is a bit silly, 90-95% of the air freight coming through LHR does so as belly freight on passenger aircraft. The reason? Well it helps sustain such a wide and varied network, but also because of this air freight is more viable being sent through that means than on pure freight aircraft that do not offer the flexibility or just in time capabilities. Evidently they failed to mention that bit, but that’s what jobbing PR people do I suppose.

I’m concerned that this is driving the project, because if it is it will fail.


Also the SAU report into CWL was critical of 4 out of the 7 principles as opposed to DSA where it was critical of 5 out of the 7. Though SYMCA appear to have addressed some of them, they’ve actually doubled down on others and are clearly playing by the Governments growth agenda.

The November budget has a lot of people worried, not least the airlines who rely on people having a high disposable income to travel. Places like Doncaster, where there isn’t a lot of money, are certainly not going to be attractive places to put expensive aircraft to work. They’re justifying this as a long term investment, presumably to keep it going until the economy of South Yorkshire is prosperous to actually support an airport. So they’ll say these short term pains don’t account for the longer term vision. It’ll be hard to make the airport ‘stand on its own two feet/brush its own teeth’ in the meantime though won’t it.

Interesting that a PR guy would have an opinion piece in the YP. Independent or released to them by CDC before the meeting Tuesday??? For those on here who took an interest in the original opening/Public Enquiry will remember that Peel's vision was extremely adjacent to what he said. I think there was a little more substance - but not much more - in Peel's vision at that point in time than this guy is saying now - times are harder in the industry!
As for @rabitfoot suggesting that most folk were wrong to think it would not open - I agree - that thinking was based on logic, common sense and knowledge of the industry. The decision will be taken on political grounds and all that will be out of the window. However - lets see!

 

on want grounds can they make a legal challenge on spending there gainshare money on reopening an airport for economic reasons?

have they paid subsidies to airlines ?

no.

i do not have to be a leagl expert to know that.

and snackbar dont go into the prediction game, for all you spouted , DSA is opening.

 

on want grounds can they make a legal challenge on spending there gainshare money on reopening an airport for economic reasons?

have they paid subsidies to airlines ?

no.

i do not have to be a leagl expert to know that.

and snackbar dont go into the prediction game, for all you spouted , DSA is opening.

Even the local village idiot understands that decisions to subsidise a company or organisation (in this case DSA) operating in the market place and providing non public services to the potential detriment of other nearby non subsidised companies or organisations is open to legal challenge since you are putting state funding to one party which may distort the market. You can provide subsidies, but only under certain circumstances such as market failure. If I were EMA/MAN/LBA I would definitely be looking to challenge this.

And yes you are correct, you are not a legal expert - but then I doubt anyone has thought otherwise.

 

If I were EMA/MAN/LBA I would definitely be looking to challenge this.

trouble for you Karfa your not,

and there will be no legal challenge.

and we should we know soon enough , as they only have a month to make a legal challenge.

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,

and it was published in jan 2025

 

I suspect with such a large amount of public funds being pumped into one project rather than the normal principal of gain share cash where it is spread out locally, that it will be challenged. Not only does it distort the market, but it sets a precedent in the method of doing so. Therefore, I suspect that it will be challenged, but I’m not Nostradamus, although I do have a law degree (albeit qualified in Norway)

 

Even the local village idiot understands that decisions to subsidise a company or organisation (in this case DSA) operating in the market place and providing non public services to the potential detriment of other nearby non subsidised companies or organisations is open to legal challenge since you are putting state funding to one party which may distort the market. You can provide subsidies, but only under certain circumstances such as market failure. If I were EMA/MAN/LBA I would definitely be looking to challenge this.

And yes you are correct, you are not a legal expert - but then I doubt anyone has thought otherwise.

In fairness Rabbitfoot is only trotting out the same stuff that SYMCA/CDC are using to justify the investment. It’s growth innit. Only nobody thought to explain to them the interdependencies between the requirement for high value services like air travel and people having the necessary means to pay for that service at a volume which makes it viable for the airlines. So the economic slant is a questionable one to take at best.

This is why the challenge could hold water on a public subsidy front. It didn’t struggle before because the market failed. It struggled because the market was already well served. In order to bring the ‘market’ back to DSA it has to take passengers from other airports, SYMCA themselves admit this in their documents and is why they’re saying that the environmental aspect will be minimal. They know they’re going to have to offer financial incentives because that’s how it works. It’s blatant market distortion but of course the locals don’t see it that way, they think it’s an injustice that they have to travel an hour or so for their one holiday a year when they had the opportunity to use DSA previously but even then felt they were priced out and don’t seem to grasp why this is problematic.

One would assume that LBA, MAN, EMA and whoever else might see fit to make a legal challenge would be in the receipt of quantitive ticket tracing data that shows that South Yorkshire and the Humber generate far less air passenger journeys than their West Yorkshire, East Midlands and Greater Manchester counterparts.

I suspect with such a large amount of public funds being pumped into one project rather than the normal principal of gain share cash where it is spread out locally, that it will be challenged. Not only does it distort the market, but it sets a precedent in the method of doing so. Therefore, I suspect that it will be challenged, but I’m not Nostradamus, although I do have a law degree (albeit qualified in Norway)

Not only that but the Gainshare allocation is being borrowed against at below commercial rates because it’s not all available in one go, rather it’s available in tranches. This is why it constitutes a public grant I believe.

 

i dont think they will be to worried about a legal challenge.

The UK subsidy control regime enables UK public authorities, including devolved administrations and local authorities, to give subsidies that are tailored to their local needs, and that drive economic growth, while minimising distortion to UK competition and protecting our international obligations.

the locals need an airport (even though the people of west yorkshire would like to deny them one)

an airport will drive economic growth.

and as everyone one here says , no airlines is going switch to DSA from LBA.
so nothing to worry about.

I'm sure there are lots of cities and towns that would like their own airport, but that doesn't mean they need one. And especially one where it's going to cost into 9 figures of purely public spending with no real prospect of any returns, which is the case at Doncaster. You don't just throw up a new airport and watch the investment roll in & drive economic growth. It's been tried before at, oh yeah Doncaster where the best part of a quarter of a million was thrown at trying to make the place work.

How much more money is DSA going to needed to make it work, half a billion, a billion, more? If this were a purely private venture then many people would just say sure, give it a go. But this is money that could, nay should be used elsewhere. In the coming years many councils, Doncaster included are going to face severe financial challenges which could well result in deep cuts to services. Putting all this Gainshare in one basket, along with all the risks highlighted by reports, is potentially wasteful if not borderline negligent. The rate at which their ambitions for DSA have been scaled back demonstrate that even hardcore supporters of the project are getting nervous, which is telling. At this point it's pretty much only egos & pride keeping the project going, the numbers just don't work.

 

If I were EMA/MAN/LBA I would definitely be looking to challenge this.

trouble for you Karfa your not,

and there will be no legal challenge.

You seem extremely confident that there will be no legal challenge but you’ve yet to provide any answers as to why or questions posed by @pug.

There’s either an incredible amount of naivety here or you are purposely being argumentative rather than willing to debate these issues.

Ok @rabbitfoot…Which airlines do you believe will go into DSA? And what do you believe CDC will do differently to Peel to attract them and make services from DSA profitable for airlines?

 

You seem extremely confident that there will be no legal challenge but you’ve yet to provide any answers as to why or questions posed by @pug.

There’s either an incredible amount of naivety here or you are purposely being argumentative rather than willing to debate these issues.

Ok @rabbitfoot…Which airlines do you believe will go into DSA? And what do you believe CDC will do differently to Peel to attract them and make services from DSA profitable for airlines?

The ones that Sour Grape LBA stole! (Handful of Wizz Routes). Nothing gets mentioned of x4 TUi based aircraft that MAN/EMA "Stole". Because the West Yorkshire and LBA think the people of Doncaster doesn't deserve and airport.

Maybe Global airlines? the college project of Monarch airlines revival? or as mentioned on the DSA page, exclusive use from Virgin? or is it the shambles that is Eastern Airways? gosh so much to chose from.

In all fairness, there are far too many airports in the UK that wouldn't make much off a difference to aviation if they wasn't operating, could easily get rid of 3 of the top of my head.

Tomorrow's the big day for the council and the mechanic to shout victory over a positive outcome then I'm sure it will be crickets for 3 years until the first pax flight it seems.. wonder how much money will be p*ssed away?

Wonder which aviation professional would want to risk their career on becoming the CEO? unless it is of course these aviation professionals oops sorry mean councillors taking it on... Ha.. MIA have gone. Now what? lets visit LGW to compare apples and pears? alright then.

 

with regards airlines ,TUI and Wizz ( or another eastern europe ) and unlike Peel they do not have to make a profit, a small lose would be ok.

why would MAG mount a legal challenge , when they got freeport status awarded at EMA , ( without that there would be no £1 billion investment from prologis)

west yorkshire allocated £419 million of their gainshare to transport infrastruture . ( no much different to SYC, just a liitle more money )

 

with regards airlines ,TUI and Wizz ( or another eastern europe ) and unlike Peel they do not have to make a profit, a small lose would be ok.

why would MAG mount a legal challenge , when they got freeport status awarded at EMA , ( without that there would be no £1 billion investment from prologis)

west yorkshire allocated £419 million of their gainshare to transport infrastruture . ( no much different to SYC, just a liitle more money )

And here is more confirmation of a lack of understanding.

So not only is the airport to be in receipt of a public grant but it’s also able to run at a ‘small loss’. Can you not see that this could be contentious to the surrounding private sector airports that have to be profitable? No? ‘Another Eastern Europe’ like who?

Why would MAG mount a legal challenge, well they possibly won’t. However what’s Freeport status got to do with anything? Didn’t they apply for this at DSA? You can ask why this wasn’t granted there along with SYMCA taking the AMRC for Sheffield Uni to Runway Park instead then can’t you?

They’ve allocated it to surface transport infrastructure. Different kettle of fish I’m afraid due to it being a public service that people use every day.

Slightly different take in the I today:

Inside Labour's £190m gamble to re-open a Red Wall airport

Doncaster Sheffield Airport closed in 2022 after owners Peel Group said it wasn’t commercially viable – has anything changed?

inews.co.uk

 

I cant add much more to what has already being posted by in my view are excellent and informal posts but from when this all started back in 2022 but we now seem to have local politicians who now seen to be aviation experts who have mislead people at every point from saying we have operator willing to take it on & creditable offers waiting to step in on the running of this AIRPORT– none of this has materialised at any level and now this has gone all the way to a full taxpayers money funded project. Is it right MAI are longer involved ! if its 3 years before passengers services start this is a long time in aviation current state of the economy which in my view is in a precarious position and to be using this amount of tax payers money to attempt to re-open a failed airport is beyond ridiculous in fact I still not 100% is will actually start in time. & using words like sustainable aviation hub ?? & can run at a loss !IF ANY ROUTES / AIRLINES ARE ATTEMPTED & INCENTIFIED TO RELOCATED TO DSA FROM ANY OTHER AIRPORT (INC FREIGHT) I EXPECT A LEGAL CHALLENGE



In my view they are making a grave mistake using tax payer money to re-open an failed airport as the money will not stop there will further funding will be required time after time, in my view they all seen to have short memories as to why it closed in 2022, if this is signed of tomorrow some of the politicians who have constantly mislead people have started the beginning to the end of their political careers.

 

@northsouth still a question mark over MAIs continued involvement. It’s strange that they don’t seem to get much of a mention at the minute but that may be due to the decision pending.. I found it odd that Coppard decided to visit Gatwick as part of his promotional campaign, and has recently been quoted as saying that they need to bring in experts who have experienced of operating airports within the U.K.

It could be that he’s simply trying to widen the scope, but when MAI have been absent for quite some time and they have apparently removed mentions of DSA from some of their websites/playtforms it seems odd. They’ve clearly been used to add credibility to the project but what if they really have pulled out (or asked to leave when they couldn’t deliver)? Wouldn’t people feel a little misled?

 

with regards airlines ,TUI and Wizz ( or another eastern europe ) and unlike Peel they do not have to make a profit, a small lose would be ok.

why would MAG mount a legal challenge , when they got freeport status awarded at EMA , ( without that there would be no £1 billion investment from prologis)

west yorkshire allocated £419 million of their gainshare to transport infrastruture . ( no much different to SYC, just a liitle more money )

Ok so where are TUi going to get the aircraft from? Taken from other bases will be market distortion. The airline is currently shrinking not expanding with no new AC on order. Wizz, rumoured to be happy at LBA. so now what?

Making a small loss is ok? is it? and I highly highly doubt it will be small, losses are no doubt going to be huge and no doubt will be sugar coated like the do at MME.

 

with regards airlines ,TUI and Wizz ( or another eastern europe ) and unlike Peel they do not have to make a profit, a small lose would be ok.

why would MAG mount a legal challenge , when they got freeport status awarded at EMA , ( without that there would be no £1 billion investment from prologis)

west yorkshire allocated £419 million of their gainshare to transport infrastruture . ( no much different to SYC, just a liitle more money )

Yes - I think everyone would put TUI at the top of the possibilities but at this moment in time with the state of play in the industry, not perhaps as was before, with a base. However it will need much, much more than that. Not sure that I would have your confidence in Wizz returning, they have issues as well as the quieter market and I note that they have just cut two more routes from LPL which evidences this.
Not sure that freeport status is linked in any way to a challenge if DSA attempt to lure aircraft away from EMA with highly subsidised contracts. There were offers of 'Peel deals' in the past but that was private money and like it or not (and whether it was equitable or not) there's a difference and it was acceptable in law.
The West Yorkshire Gainshare allocation is for transport infrastructure that is not competing with rival private ownership so it is not quite the same.
Of course Doncaster can spend their Gainshare via SYMCA as they wish and if they choose to spend it all on opening the airport that is entirely up to them but what they will struggle to do with impunity is use chunks of that public money to subsidise (to a significant degree) competition with 'private' rivals.
There is still so much hidden from public view that it's difficult for anyone to know exactly how SYMCA are
are going to dot the i and cross the t and the lack of transparency is the cause of many of the discussions we are having on this page. I doubt much will be revealed after the vote tomorrow as my own opinion is that they will want to keep as much away from public scrutiny as possible.