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 would perhaps point out that if the losses were a result of mismanagement, why will it need a £138m public subsidy to operate it in the future.

 

A very interesting point. Maybe, they realise they do not have the management skills?

 

I would perhaps point out that if the losses were a result of mismanagement, why will it need a £138m public subsidy to operate it in the future.

It’s a fair question, I think the cost they are talking about is the cost of reinstatement I.e replacing equipment, staff and regulatory approval, and an operating subsidy offered to the winning operator for a period of up to 24 months. It’s not clear at this time how much of the £138m available to Doncaster will be used for the airport project. These costs are hiding behind commercial sensitivity. Not sure who will be expected to shoulder the operating losses, presumably the operator. Makes me think that if an agreement is reached, the operator will drop out soon as the freebies are over. It’s going to be a constant cost and by extension a constant millstone around the deck of CDC.

 

I would perhaps point out that if the losses were a result of mismanagement, why will it need a £138m public subsidy to operate it in the future.

£138m will only put the airport back to where it was….to make a profit and handle passenger numbers in excess of 2m it would need significant investment. This point also seems to have been missed. Car parking is extremely limited, public transport virtually non existent and the terminal facilities not sufficient to handle the number of passengers and flights needed to make a profit.
You only need to look at the size of investment going into EMA, LBA and MAN to see just what sort of money would be needed by whoever takes it on….

 

It’s a fair question, I think the cost they are talking about is the cost of reinstatement I.e replacing equipment, staff and regulatory approval, and an operating subsidy offered to the winning operator for a period of up to 24 months. It’s not clear at this time how much of the £138m available to Doncaster will be used for the airport project. These costs are hiding behind commercial sensitivity. Not sure who will be expected to shoulder the operating losses, presumably the operator. Makes me think that if an agreement is reached, the operator will drop out soon as the freebies are over. It’s going to be a constant cost and by extension a constant millstone around the deck of CDC.

But why would the operator (or supposedly 2 of them competing) shoulder the losses?? They will not own the site. If they did own the site then I suppose one might take a very highly speculative gamble if they were convinced of the potential. With the projected 2m pax in 10 years, logic would tell me that there is little profit if any at all in that. Really interesting to see what evolves.

 

But why would the operator (or supposedly 2 of them competing) shoulder the losses?? They will not own the site. If they did own the site then I suppose one might take a very highly speculative gamble if they were convinced of the potential. With the projected 2m pax in 10 years, logic would tell me that there is little profit if any at all in that. Really interesting to see what evolves.

The most detail we’ve seen yet regarding the plans are in the following link released in September:

https://doncaster.moderngov.co.uk/documents/g4600/Public%20reports%20pack%2020th-Sep-2023%2010.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=10

Of note is the feedback from market consultation which included offering an operator up to 2 years rent free, and allowing them to develop DSA as they see fit. So that to me would suggest either the private sector are to fund any development work necessary to increase revenue, or they should have overall control of the direction of the airport with minimal interference. Also noted is that the financial viability is based upon the projections made by the consultants they paid to write them. So basically it will be profitable if it’s successful like the council think it will (but actually don’t know because they don’t have experience in running airports), but they’ve only commissioned one airport consultancy firm who’s credentials aren’t quite up to scratch when compared to York Aviation etc.

Still interested to see what transpires in March, as I would assume this will be when the confidentiality will be lifted to an extent.

 

Seems to me the Council appointed a consultant who seems to have provided a report that told them what they wanted to hear. From my perspective, there are more holes in this business case than my cullendar.

Presumably it is this report that suggests 2m pax in 10 years, and that this will lead to profit, despite Peel stating DSA needs 3.5m to break even. Also that 2m pax at DSA will provide the local economy with significantly more money (via GVA) than LBA are claiming they will contribute to West Yorkshire GVA with 7m pax. It seems to me that the politicians of Doncaster and South Yorkshire are making things up as they go along, determined to re-open DSA come hell or high water.

All they are doing is risking huge amounts of local funding on a project which has a very high risk of failure and turning down the option of the site being developed for industry (so providing far more jobs than the airport will ever do) as intended by Peel.

I wonder what will happen if the airport re-opens, fails to attract sufficient traffic, and makes annual losses which the operator decides are not sustainable, so they quit at the first opportunity. Will yet another operator come forward who think they can succeed where Peel and whoever have failed? Or will the Council recognise they blew a fortune on a dead duck , accept the airports fate, close it again and leave Peel to pocket the significant penalty for early lease termination then carry out the development they always intended? Peel can't lose. The people of Doncaster and South Yorkshire may well do (and how!).

 

Noticed one of the politically motivated DSA reopening supporters has started sharing things by GALBA and York Aviation. Does this person not realise that actually, York Aviation have publicly stated that DSA is not viable and has no future as an airport? I think this is in response to posts on the dried plumb forum by people who are being accused of being ‘LBA supporters’ challenging the posts of someone championing the Councils plan for reopening. They are not LBA supporters of course, but that doesn’t stop him.

I’ve been told a rumour recently that Jet2 are interested. From what I can gather, they are not. However, if they were they’d make a great job of it I’m sure and it would be great for those of us who don’t live in Leeds or Bradford. Airlines do not run airports though, so I’m not sure how that rumour started.

 

Why would Jet2 move nearer to their base at EMA?. They will want the people who can't get to LBA to go to either EMA or MAN

 

Makes no sense really for Jet2 to operate at DSA given they have bases within 40 miles or so North, South and West of Doncaster . They dont go in for W patterns either. It would do nothing for their sales figures but significantly increase their costs.

Being a bunch of selfish NIMBYs, they who shall not be named will be DSAs biggest fan. They'll have been gutted when it closed as they'd been extolling DSAs virtues for long enough . Their chief aim is a quiet life and as few as aircraft as possible at LBA .So the reopening of DSA, may be to them, be seen as a way of achieving their aims. Pure desperation. Pure NIMBYism.

 

Why would Jet2 move nearer to their base at EMA?. They will want the people who can't get to LBA to go to either EMA or MAN

There is a very tenuous link between Jet2 and DSA, that being the CEO. I believe he was at mytravel after the merger with Airtours (and I forget the other one) and I seem to recall that Airtours were a big proponent of DSA - one of the reasons it never got off the ground, cos the market changed and the low cost airlines had no interest in DSA due to its relative remoteness to lots of people. So, maybe now that Philip has sadly stepped aside, there could be a change in focus. Look at LPL as case in point!

That said, LPL could be a coincidence. It had been on the cards for at least ten years but various other things put a stop to it actually happening. Plus, airlines do not run airports for a reason! Jet2 would do well out of DSA just because of their name and values, but actually, given that they shunned it so many times before due to threat of diluting demand aligned with increasing costs, I don’t see them having a big presence at a reopened DSA if they had a presence at all!

 

There is a very tenuous link between Jet2 and DSA, that being the CEO. I believe he was at mytravel after the merger with Airtours (and I forget the other one) and I seem to recall that Airtours were a big proponent of DSA - one of the reasons it never got off the ground, cos the market changed and the low cost airlines had no interest in DSA due to its relative remoteness to lots of people. So, maybe now that Philip has sadly stepped aside, there could be a change in focus. Look at LPL as case in point!

That said, LPL could be a coincidence. It had been on the cards for at least ten years but various other things put a stop to it actually happening. Plus, airlines do not run airports for a reason! Jet2 would do well out of DSA just because of their name and values, but actually, given that they shunned it so many times before due to threat of diluting demand aligned with increasing costs, I don’t see them having a big presence at a reopened DSA if they had a presence at all!

To the best of my knowledge that was a management decision not just a Philip Meeson decision for all the reasons already discussed.

 

To the best of my knowledge that was a management decision not just a Philip Meeson decision for all the reasons already discussed.

Yes I’ve seen a fair bit of correspondence from a long time ago.. There is a lot of wishful thinking in South Yorkshire, not just from people wanting the airport to reopen.. But we have to accept that nothing is impossible. It is true though that LBA is embarking on a huge redevelopment that will see capacity increase by a huge margin and with it will come the ability to negotiate new contracts and with their bargaining power they could effectively keep DSA dead in the water. I believe they will be going for the jugular.

 

Yes I’ve seen a fair bit of correspondence from a long time ago.. There is a lot of wishful thinking in South Yorkshire, not just from people wanting the airport to reopen.. But we have to accept that nothing is impossible. It is true though that LBA is embarking on a huge redevelopment that will see capacity increase by a huge margin and with it will come the ability to negotiate new contracts and with their bargaining power they could effectively keep DSA dead in the water. I believe they will be going for the jugular.

I would be highly sceptical of Jet2 taking on an airport, especially one with a commercial history like DSA. Whoever takes it on is picking up a huge commercial risk- why would jet2 want that especially as it would be a huge distraction and change to their commercial operating model. On the other side of the equation why would the Council award the contract to a third party who potentially may want to limit competition at the airport??
Add to that to make it successful jet2 would have to close a base at EMA or LBA - that would not be cheap given the staff redeployment costs etc. and would have little commercial upside given their operational success at both these airports.
Lastly if jet2 did depart either of these bases jet2 know Ryanair of EasyJet would be straight in to pick up their previous ops…
Far too much risk for very little if any reward!!

 

With Jet 2 being based at LBA and offices in Leeds City Centre, I can't see how they would want to move from their HQ base.

 

I would be highly sceptical of Jet2 taking on an airport, especially one with a commercial history like DSA. Whoever takes it on is picking up a huge commercial risk- why would jet2 want that especially as it would be a huge distraction and change to their commercial operating model. On the other side of the equation why would the Council award the contract to a third party who potentially may want to limit competition at the airport??
Add to that to make it successful jet2 would have to close a base at EMA or LBA - that would not be cheap given the staff redeployment costs etc. and would have little commercial upside given their operational success at both these airports.
Lastly if jet2 did depart either of these bases jet2 know Ryanair of EasyJet would be straight in to pick up their previous ops…
Far too much risk for very little if any reward!!

I don’t buy in to the rumours, but you have to be open to anything. It’s quite clear that the reopening of DSA will have a focus on passenger flights. They mention freight but don’t seem to appreciate that there really isn’t the demand for another freight airport in the area. There may be an argument for passenger flights, because SY is a population of around 1.2m people, of course we know it’s not as easy as that, but ok paper it’s quite a lot of people. To capitalise on passenger market then they would need at least two major players to enter into long term agreements to grow the market and establish the airport as a key departure point. Would TUI return? Probably if they thought they weren’t going to get turfed out again in a couple of years. Who else? Wizz? Jet2? Easyjet? Ryanair?

I’ve had the opinion for many years that to really get its claws in the airport would need to attract easyjet and hold on to them, sadly they never shared that view despite twice attempting to serve the airport. I fully believe they will be in the LBA crosshairs with the capacity increases we will see in the next couple of years. Ryanair didn’t really seem too fussed with DSA only adding token services and withdrawing them after a season or two. Wizz did alright but not as a base operator. Jet2 never took interest, but given their strength in the market now could make it work, but it could come at a cost that they are cautious to avoid. It’s all a case of overlap.

I understand one of the interested private sector operators is that Middle Eastern consortium. I’m not sure whether they have any credibility in actuality, they’d probably try to plug it into the Middle Eastern network but, like Qatar at CWL, would probably find it would struggle. Problem with overseas operators is that they tend to lack an understanding of just how cut throat the U.K. airport industry can be, it’s why Vantage rapidly relinquished their ownership of MME and DSA.

I’m sure LBA management will be keeping a close eye on proceedings. Work is still ongoing to claw at some of the DSA airspace and I expect an update on that soon.

 

I don’t buy in to the rumours, but you have to be open to anything. It’s quite clear that the reopening of DSA will have a focus on passenger flights. They mention freight but don’t seem to appreciate that there really isn’t the demand for another freight airport in the area. There may be an argument for passenger flights, because SY is a population of around 1.2m people, of course we know it’s not as easy as that, but ok paper it’s quite a lot of people. To capitalise on passenger market then they would need at least two major players to enter into long term agreements to grow the market and establish the airport as a key departure point. Would TUI return? Probably if they thought they weren’t going to get turfed out again in a couple of years. Who else? Wizz? Jet2? Easyjet? Ryanair?

I’ve had the opinion for many years that to really get its claws in the airport would need to attract easyjet and hold on to them, sadly they never shared that view despite twice attempting to serve the airport. I fully believe they will be in the LBA crosshairs with the capacity increases we will see in the next couple of years. Ryanair didn’t really seem too fussed with DSA only adding token services and withdrawing them after a season or two. Wizz did alright but not as a base operator. Jet2 never took interest, but given their strength in the market now could make it work, but it could come at a cost that they are cautious to avoid. It’s all a case of overlap.

I understand one of the interested private sector operators is that Middle Eastern consortium. I’m not sure whether they have any credibility in actuality, they’d probably try to plug it into the Middle Eastern network but, like Qatar at CWL, would probably find it would struggle. Problem with overseas operators is that they tend to lack an understanding of just how cut throat the U.K. airport industry can be, it’s why Vantage rapidly relinquished their ownership of MME and DSA.

I’m sure LBA management will be keeping a close eye on proceedings. Work is still ongoing to claw at some of the DSA airspace and I expect an update on that soon.

Seems to me the Council appointed a consultant to provide a report that told them what they wanted to hear, and they duly obliged. There are more holes in this business case than my cullandar.

Presumably it is the report that suggests 2m pax in 10 years, and that this will lead to profit, despite Peel stating DSA needs 3.5m to break even. Also that 2m pax at DSA will provide the local economy with significantly more money (via GVA) than LBA are claiming they will contribute to West Yorkshire GVA with 7m pax. It seems to me that the politicians of Doncaster and South Yorkshire are making things up as they go along, determined to re-open DSA come hell or high water.

All they are doing is risking huge amounts of local funding on a project which has a very high risk of failure and turning down the option of the site being developed for industry (so providing far more jobs than the airport will ever do) as intended by Peel.

I wonder what will happen if the airport re-opens, fails to attract sufficient traffic, and makes annual losses which the operator decides are not sustainable, so they quit at the first opportunity. Will yet another operator come forward who think they can succeed where Peel and whoever have failed? Or will the Council recognise they blew a fortune on a dead duck , accept the airports fate, close it again and leave Peel to pocket the significant penalty for early lease termination then carry out the development they always intended? Peel can't lose. The people of Doncaster and South Yorkshire may well do (and how!).

I don’t buy in to the rumours, but you have to be open to anything. It’s quite clear that the reopening of DSA will have a focus on passenger flights. They mention freight but don’t seem to appreciate that there really isn’t the demand for another freight airport in the area. There may be an argument for passenger flights, because SY is a population of around 1.2m people, of course we know it’s not as easy as that, but ok paper it’s quite a lot of people. To capitalise on passenger market then they would need at least two major players to enter into long term agreements to grow the market and establish the airport as a key departure point. Would TUI return? Probably if they thought they weren’t going to get turfed out again in a couple of years. Who else? Wizz? Jet2? Easyjet? Ryanair?

I’ve had the opinion for many years that to really get its claws in the airport would need to attract easyjet and hold on to them, sadly they never shared that view despite twice attempting to serve the airport. I fully believe they will be in the LBA crosshairs with the capacity increases we will see in the next couple of years. Ryanair didn’t really seem too fussed with DSA only adding token services and withdrawing them after a season or two. Wizz did alright but not as a base operator. Jet2 never took interest, but given their strength in the market now could make it work, but it could come at a cost that they are cautious to avoid. It’s all a case of overlap.

I understand one of the interested private sector operators is that Middle Eastern consortium. I’m not sure whether they have any credibility in actuality, they’d probably try to plug it into the Middle Eastern network but, like Qatar at CWL, would probably find it would struggle. Problem with overseas operators is that they tend to lack an understanding of just how cut throat the U.K. airport industry can be, it’s why Vantage rapidly relinquished their ownership of MME and DSA.

I’m sure LBA management will be keeping a close eye on proceedings. Work is still ongoing to claw at some of the DSA airspace and I expect an update on that soon.

Thought the Middle East consortium had been binned through failure to provide legitimate source of funds?? If the Operator/Airport can offer something that is not available at other nearby airports maybe there is some chance, but to try and replicate what's going on in nearby airports has been demonstrated to struggle. Just at the moment however to exacerbate the difficulties, I read that airlines are currently struggling to fill seats (note recent low cost 'Sales') after the post Covid 'boom'. Cautious outlook if you are sensible??

 

Like Jet2 would look into / operate the airport...? don't make laugh. its the desperate supporters clutching at straws. why on earth would an airline want to take the responsibility and risk or operating an airport? and one that's in the middle of nowhere without a strong catchment area... competition is good.. last time the DSA supporters was adamant monarch yes monarch would and should start from there.. literally at them at this point.

 

Thought the Middle East consortium had been binned through failure to provide legitimate source of funds?? If the Operator/Airport can offer something that is not available at other nearby airports maybe there is some chance, but to try and replicate what's going on in nearby airports has been demonstrated to struggle. Just at the moment however to exacerbate the difficulties, I read that airlines are currently struggling to fill seats (note recent low cost 'Sales') after the post Covid 'boom'. Cautious outlook if you are sensible??

I don’t believe they were binned by CDC, it was Peel who rebuffed their offer and later suggested that their financial backing was questionable.

Seems the BBC have once again spoken with Louise Congden of York Aviation:

Doncaster-Sheffield Airport vote set to free £138m towards reopening

Local leaders are to vote on freeing the cash to fund Doncaster-Sheffield Airport's reopening.

www.bbc.co.uk

Louise Congdon, an expert on airport economics at the York Aviation consultancy, warned that while re-opening Doncaster-Sheffield Airport might create good employment opportunities, Doncaster Council should "not expect any money back".
"The market is focusing on bigger airports where airlines can make more money," she said.
"To get airlines to use marginal airports like Doncaster, you have to pay them large sums to get them to operate.
"In those circumstances, it's unlikely a smaller airport like Doncaster would be able to cover its operating costs."

Meanwhile Peel apparently confirm that talks are continuing with regards to a possible lease agreement with Doncaster Council. I think they’re safe in the knowledge that actually, it’s not possible to continue operating an airport that is unlikely to cover its costs. They do appear to be justifying the investment in the GVA/GDP aspect, but if it doesn’t make money, and they are expected to subsidise airlines to fly from it, then it’s inevitably going to come back to ongoing cost to the tax payer. I cannot believe for a moment that a private sector operator would be comfortable with covering lease repayments, shouldering the inevitable losses that will ensue, and covering the costs of ongoing investment into the site, when they don’t own it.

There must be more to this than what we’re being told, up to and including the possibility that the council and OC are just going through the motions to show that they are doing something.

I’ve noticed the accountant is now spreading misinformation with regards the contract agreement with Peel and (someone, presumably Wizz) that Peel were apparently supposed to build a second terminal to honour the commitment by Wizzair UK. What utter drivel, they committed to and built an extra two boarding gates in line with their own commitment to foreseen increase in passenger numbers that never materialised because Wizz weren’t getting to forward sales!

It’s a shame that this plays into peoples confirmation bias, when in fact it’s complete nonsense spouted by someone who hasn’t a clue what they’re talking about.

 

I don’t believe they were binned by CDC, it was Peel who rebuffed their offer and later suggested that their financial backing was questionable.

Seems the BBC have once again spoken with Louise Congden of York Aviation:

Doncaster-Sheffield Airport vote set to free £138m towards reopening

Local leaders are to vote on freeing the cash to fund Doncaster-Sheffield Airport's reopening.

www.bbc.co.uk

Louise Congdon, an expert on airport economics at the York Aviation consultancy, warned that while re-opening Doncaster-Sheffield Airport might create good employment opportunities, Doncaster Council should "not expect any money back".
"The market is focusing on bigger airports where airlines can make more money," she said.
"To get airlines to use marginal airports like Doncaster, you have to pay them large sums to get them to operate.
"In those circumstances, it's unlikely a smaller airport like Doncaster would be able to cover its operating costs."

Meanwhile Peel apparently confirm that talks are continuing with regards to a possible lease agreement with Doncaster Council. I think they’re safe in the knowledge that actually, it’s not possible to continue operating an airport that is unlikely to cover its costs. They do appear to be justifying the investment in the GVA/GDP aspect, but if it doesn’t make money, and they are expected to subsidise airlines to fly from it, then it’s inevitably going to come back to ongoing cost to the tax payer. I cannot believe for a moment that a private sector operator would be comfortable with covering lease repayments, shouldering the inevitable losses that will ensue, and covering the costs of ongoing investment into the site, when they don’t own it.

There must be more to this than what we’re being told, up to and including the possibility that the council and OC are just going through the motions to show that they are doing something.

I’ve noticed the accountant is now spreading misinformation with regards the contract agreement with Peel and (someone, presumably Wizz) that Peel were apparently supposed to build a second terminal to honour the commitment by Wizzair UK. What utter drivel, they committed to and built an extra two boarding gates in line with their own commitment to foreseen increase in passenger numbers that never materialised because Wizz weren’t getting to forward sales!

It’s a shame that this plays into peoples confirmation bias, when in fact it’s complete nonsense spouted by someone who hasn’t a clue what they’re talking about.

It seems to be a common theme relating to DSA that many of the people making the most noise publicly, dont seem to have a clue what they're talking about and those that do are ignored and/or ostracised.

Meanwhile, an expert who wasn't appointed by CDC is repeating the warning given 20 years ago that DSA won't make money. Translate that into 'continue to operate at a significant loss'. It seems though that the politicians don't really care about that and seem hell bent on throwing every penny plus the kitchen sink at reopening, plus, ongoing lease payments for however many years .

It beggars belief that any airport operator worth it's salt would take this risk especially with the industry struggling at present. Airlines tend to consolidate when bookings decline not take risks on an airport they've tried before and given up on - and that's not even taking into account the problems airlines currently face due to manufacturing defects which will impact on growth for some time to come.