Doncaster Sheffield Airport Strategic Review Announcement

1658481558330.png

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...?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AIUI, a successful application for interim relief would temporarily prevent Peel from doing something (in this case, presumably, that means knocking down the terminal, digging up the runway, and giving up the CAA aerodrome and ANSP licences and controlled airspace), before a judicial review into (again, presumably) the legality of the closure of the airport, which may take some time to come before the court.

So, this is not the judicial review itself, more an application to prevent the interests of the local authorities from being negatively affected before the judicial review can take place.
Which begs the question then, how will it qualify for a Judicial Review given that it is not a Public body.

Not sure if we will hear the results of todays court appearance for a while?
 
I just don't get it at all. Peel buy the Finningley airfield, build an airport terminal with their own money to create an airport that previously didn't exist. It's their business. That business fails, after 17 years so they close it down, yet the Council apply to the Courts to stop them
Since when can a Court stop a private enterprise from closing down if it's losing money for the owners?
Post automatically merged:

I'm not convinced that the Court could issue and injunction for the airport to remain open, could be the injunction to attempt to stop 'asset stripping' - very complicated.
But how can a company be prevented from getting rid of its own assets? They own them and would be perfectly entitled to transfer them to LPL or sell them. Many of the assets would not belong to Peel such as those owned by Swissport.
 
I just don't get it at all. Peel buy the Finningley airfield, build an airport terminal with their own money to create an airport that previously didn't exist. It's their business. That business fails, after 17 years so they close it down, yet the Council apply to the Courts to stop them
Since when can a Court stop a private enterprise from closing down if it's losing money for the owners?.

Claims its in the interest of the public to have another airport? Just a thought as how they could claim such things.
 
Claims its in the interest of the public to have another airport? Just a thought as how they could claim such things.
Yes - could be the route that they are going down. Just heard on BBC Look North that the Council had applied today for leave to apply for a Judicial Review - presumably the case before the Court in Leeds today. If successful, reported that a Review/Enquiry could cost £350,000.
 
Yes - could be the route that they are going down. Just heard on BBC Look North that the Council had applied today for leave to apply for a Judicial Review - presumably the case before the Court in Leeds today. If successful, reported that a Review/Enquiry could cost £350,000.
It’s becoming a farce. The Save DSA group posting things about Virgin operating from DSA just adds more nonsense to the whole thing. Problem is, there’s that much mistrust of Peel combined ironically with the solid bit of propaganda Peel perpetuated 20 years ago (long runway = long haul) that people are naturally in disbelief. Let’s not forget that most of them haven’t taken any interest in aviation until now.

The bloke who runs Save DSA is now appearing to control the narrative somewhat too (going as far as to tell everyone on his group not to believe the news!) which just muddy the water even more. They don’t care how much it costs just save the airport, meanwhile the possibility that Peel might actually deliver something that ultimately contributes far more to regional economy is getting overlooked. How much for instance does DSA contribute when compared to something like one of the large distribution centres employing a similar amount of people?
 
Last edited:
There's a saying 'Dont bite the hand that feeds you'. Doncaster Council would do well to remember that as they seriously p**s off Peel. You can't help thinking that Peel may not only close the airport but also lose interest in working in the area to generate more employment and just opt to sell the land off. The working relationship between Peel, the Council and the SY Mayor must be close to non existent now .
Post automatically merged:

Yes - could be the route that they are going down. Just heard on BBC Look North that the Council had applied today for leave to apply for a Judicial Review - presumably the case before the Court in Leeds today. If successful, reported that a Review/Enquiry could cost £350,000.
Interesting to see how such a review could be granted without Peels point of view and their evidence being considered.

To me this is no different to the closure of Steel Works, or any other major industry. If the Councils line is, as suggested, that it's in the people's interest, then the Council have the option to buy the airport at a similar cost to this consirtium, run it at a loss, and give the good people what they want. Peel are not a charity and if they don't want to run their own airport any more due to the endless losses, they should not be forced to do so. The solution is clear enough but Doncaster Council know that if they bought the airport it would be a money pit. Just like Teesside. They seem to want their cake and eat it. It's farcical.
 
Last edited:
Interesting that the Council didn't highlight the fact that they themselves were involved in the review of the airports viability and it was they that appointed the aviation consultants that considered there was no prospect of even breaking even. They paint a picture of being uninvolved but they knew exactly what was going on throughout, refusing the £20m requested by Peel and helping bring the airports time to an end by doing so. But the fact is that after 17 years, Peel shouldn't be needing £20m loans from the Council to keep going. The fact they did demonstrates the non viable nature of the airport. A painful truth for DSA supporters, but the truth nonetheless.
 
I'm sick to death of hearing "...but its got one of the longest runways in the UK, even Europe" roll eyes 🙄
The thing is, this is being spouted by the people from the local authorities who want to save it. With non fact-checked sound bites like that what hope of getting taken seriously considering what White Heather also posted above?

Failed airport, doomed from the start but Peel took a punt where nobody else would and it’s come back to bite then. An airport that has never been able to tap into the business market so the only tangible public service the council claim DSA provides is that of NPAS (now at LBA), 2Excel (HUY, MME) and military who just go elsewhere anyway! Quite why this wasn’t thrown out today is anyone’s guess. Even worse now with the talk by Peel of risking insolvency and thus lack of redundancy pay!
 
I quote what the legal representative of Peel had to say in Court as reported by BBC: "At the heart of this case is whether a private company should be held accountable to a public authority for the process through which it decided to close its business"
Sums it up precisely. I can't see that there could be 'a case to answer' but who knows - as they say, the law is an ass!
 
I quote what the legal representative of Peel had to say in Court as reported by BBC: "At the heart of this case is whether a private company should be held accountable to a public authority for the process through which it decided to close its business"
Sums it up precisely. I can't see that there could be 'a case to answer' but who knows - as they say, the law is an ass!
Needless to say that Save DSA have put a positive spin on it. Like I say, controlling the narrative.
 
I quote what the legal representative of Peel had to say in Court as reported by BBC: "At the heart of this case is whether a private company should be held accountable to a public authority for the process through which it decided to close its business"
Sums it up precisely. I can't see that there could be 'a case to answer' but who knows - as they say, the law is an ass!
Pretty much the same argument I made above. If logic has any part to play in this, the Judge will throw out both applications and hand the costs to Doncaster Council to pay.

It will all come down to what's written in law and, crucially, any precedents previously set.
 
Last edited:
Needless to say that Save DSA have put a positive spin on it.
If Save DSA were to approach banks/investors to raise funds to purchase the airport, I very much doubt that they would find any willing to risk investment, given the airports financial history.

If logic has any part to play in this, the Judge will throw out both applications and hand the costs to Doncaster Council to pay.
Except it wont really be Doncaster Council, but rather the tax payers of Doncaster who pay.

Kevin
 
If Save DSA were to approach banks/investors to raise funds to purchase the airport, I very much doubt that they would find any willing to risk investment, given the airports financial history.


Except it wont really be Doncaster Council, but rather the tax payers of Doncaster who pay.

Kevin

In the long run, yes. Hence why Doncaster Council is being somewhat reckless in going to court and risking a large amount of ratepayers money. At least losing now will reduce the financial waste. Going through the Judicial Review and losing that will, by the Councils own admission, cost £350k ( a very conservative estimate IMHO) and even if they win, it will not necessarily result in the resurrection if DSA from the dead. Nor will their much vaunted Compulsory Purchase Order which again by their own admission, will take 2 years to complete and apply only to the airport land, not the airport facilities.

It's all starting to look like the Council are somehow pursuing some sort of vanity project and unable to see reality - or how much rate payers money they could end up wasting on it .

It's strange how Sheffield Council is staying very quiet despite it being their airport too, if only in name.
 
With the judge reserving judgement, it may be a week or two now before his decision is known but it should be published giving the reasoning behind it.

As a Judicial Review is only to test the legality of a decision made by a public body (or a commercial operator delivering a service on behalf of a public body) that they are required to provide, that is, was it made correctly in law and if not to clarify the law and ask for the decision process to be done again. It is hard to see how this would be eligible for Judicial Review (and an interim injunction preventing anything being done by Peel). It sounds like the injunction was not granted so that is maybe an interesting pointer.

Does anyone know the email address to send FOI requests to Doncaster Council, be interesting to ask the cost of all this at some point.
 
I’m afraid the local authorities are in an unenviable position. Unless they can say that they tried everything in their arsenal, then their political opponents will make hay with it. They have to make a lot of noise in the press. They have to go to court. They have to promise a CPO, even if it means promising to buy an empty field where there used to be an airport.

There is local pride at stake here - it doesn’t look good for a newly-minted city to lose highly visible infrastructure that a city usually has.
 
Last edited:
There's a saying 'Dont bite the hand that feeds you'. Doncaster Council would do well to remember that as they seriously p**s off Peel. You can't help thinking that Peel may not only close the airport but also lose interest in working in the area to generate more employment and just opt to sell the land off. The working relationship between Peel, the Council and the SY Mayor must be close to non existent now .
Post automatically merged:


Interesting to see how such a review could be granted without Peels point of view and their evidence being considered.

To me this is no different to the closure of Steel Works, or any other major industry. If the Councils line is, as suggested, that it's in the people's interest, then the Council have the option to buy the airport at a similar cost to this consirtium, run it at a loss, and give the good people what they want. Peel are not a charity and if they don't want to run their own airport any more due to the endless losses, they should not be forced to do so. The solution is clear enough but Doncaster Council know that if they bought the airport it would be a money pit. Just like Teesside. They seem to want their cake and eat it. It's farcical.
Exactly how much interest do you think Peel have in the local area?

They have exactly non like any other area they operate in they are pretty much hated everywhere they operate because of how they operate they are good at what they do yes but hated for the way they treat people be it airport staff or Liverpool dockers.

They really are ruthless in how they go about their business.

Yes it's up to Peel to do what they want however they haven't half screwed some very loyal hard working staff in the last few months who've served them for many years whilst a few walked off into the sunset with a nice payoff whilst screwing all around them.

Sorry but how much can you trust Peel from where I sit you can't they've played a complete lie going back to 2018 or whenever it was when they released that video on about the airport being key to the area's success and an aerotropolis as they put it.

Obviously it depends on which side of Yorkshire you sit with this debate some in South Yorkshire have little idea or like it's been mentioned had little interest till now on the matter whilst other folk will until it's proven otherwise, those who have actually had an interest over the years in DSA continue to and in my opinion rightly claim severe mismanagement of the place in recent times whilst those in West Yorkshire continue to have a different opinion entirely. Maybe the truth sits somewhere in the middle.

Peel have now got what they have wanted over the last few years (my view won't change) with very little fuss up to the last few weeks the airport's gone it will take five years but they'll sit on the land till that day and then they'll be allowed to build what they want or in other people's minds quarry the place unless there is something in this lease thing mentioned that they believe can get them what they want immediately?. I can't remember that point being mentioned before by anyone.

Peel want this done and dusted they don't want it dragging on however it's going to play out for a little while longer I'm not sure to who's advantage that is ultimately at this stage will Peel's near silence favour them and things go in there favour pretty quickly or are Peel worried the longer this drag's on the more messy thing's get for them and a continued fight arise over time before Peel ultimately win the day.
 
Exactly how much interest do you think Peel have in the local area?

They have exactly non like any other area they operate in they are pretty much hated everywhere they operate because of how they operate they are good at what they do yes but hated for the way they treat people be it airport staff or Liverpool dockers.

They really are ruthless in how they go about their business.

Yes it's up to Peel to do what they want however they haven't half screwed some very loyal hard working staff in the last few months who've served them for many years whilst a few walked off into the sunset with a nice payoff whilst screwing all around them.

Sorry but how much can you trust Peel from where I sit you can't they've played a complete lie going back to 2018 or whenever it was when they released that video on about the airport being key to the area's success and an aerotropolis as they put it.

Obviously it depends on which side of Yorkshire you sit with this debate some in South Yorkshire have little idea or like it's been mentioned had little interest till now on the matter whilst other folk will until it's proven otherwise, those who have actually had an interest over the years in DSA continue to and in my opinion rightly claim severe mismanagement of the place in recent times whilst those in West Yorkshire continue to have a different opinion entirely. Maybe the truth sits somewhere in the middle.

Peel have now got what they have wanted over the last few years (my view won't change) with very little fuss up to the last few weeks the airport's gone it will take five years but they'll sit on the land till that day and then they'll be allowed to build what they want or in other people's minds quarry the place unless there is something in this lease thing mentioned that they believe can get them what they want immediately?. I can't remember that point being mentioned before by anyone.

Peel want this done and dusted they don't want it dragging on however it's going to play out for a little while longer I'm not sure to who's advantage that is ultimately at this stage will Peel's near silence favour them and things go in there favour pretty quickly or are Peel worried the longer this drag's on the more messy thing's get for them and a continued fight arise over time before Peel ultimately win the day.
I have read a number of social media posts from the outgoing staff and I have been impressed with the dignity and lack of vindictiveness of the posts. Clearly a proud and closely knit bunch and hope they all have found/will find alternative employment. Airport staff with airside clearance are like gold! The mismanagement claim is widespread in some circles - is there any evidence of what form that has taken? It would be helpful if some of this stuff could be fact checked. The whole situation is a complete mess.
 

Upload Media

Upgrade Your Account

Subscribe to help support your favourite forum and in return we'll remove all our advertisements. Your contribution will help to pay for things like site maintenance, domain name renewals and annual server charges.



Forums4aiports
Subscribe

NEW - Profile Posts

9 trips in 9 days done 70 miles walked and over 23-00 photos taken with a large number taken at 20mph or above. Heavy rain on 1 day only
5 trips done and 45 miles walked,. Also the RAF has had 4 F35B Lightning follow me yesterday and today....
My plans got altered slightly as one of the minibus companies had to cancel 3 trips and refunded me but will be getting nice discount when I rebook them.
wondering why on my "holidays" I choose to get up 2 hours earlier than when going to work. 6 trips in 6 days soon coming up with 3 more days to sort out

Trending Hashtags

Advertisement

Back
Top Bottom
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock