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...?

 

Oliver will probably get a promotion in return for approving it, that is what happens in public life.
It will be whoever the Mayor is having to manage this with no Gainshare left, and in all likelihood, it will be Reform or Nick Fletcher.

Oliver will probably get a promotion in return for approving it, that is what happens in public life.
It will be whoever the Mayor is having to manage this with no Gainshare left, and in all likelihood, it will be Reform or Nick Fletcher.

He may be in the firing line if there is sufficient kick back from the auditors and consultants. Although in all likelihood any elected official involved now will have long climbed the greasy pole or retired before the true cost of this disaster will be realised by the public,

MAI won’t be putting a penny in, and from the small snippets of information we have from them, they aren’t on the same page as the FlyDoncaster execs. If Fletcher or Reform get in you can kiss the idea of the airport reopening goodbye. Any political good will would be lost in an instant and Fletcher is even more of a liability that Ros Jones.

Watched the clip on YouTube seemed a waste of time ,only a handful of people in the house listing to the MP seem a bit like he was pleading the point about jobs prosperity growth and even history about finningley, nothing detailed mentioned about any financial figures any why it failed previously only seems to thank all the efforts from the council, I said in many previous posts I can’t believe that some senior mp or government officials have stepped in to seriously question why this has got this far

They can’t question it because to question it would mean they are against investment and job creation in Doncaster. Doesn’t matter what the experts have said, cos people are sick of experts aren’t they.

Interesting they PM today has alluded to cut backs in domestic spending is to follow after todays announcement that we’re cutting foreign aid.. Get the auditors in and make sure every single penny of public money is going on projects that have a real and tangible ROI and not some scheme based on hope for which there is overwhelming evidence it will be a flop.

 

Sally Jameson asks Keir to support Ros.
Is the Mayor the only one getting support.
Plenty of Mayors and councils in trouble fron Reform

 

Doncaster Sheffield Airport: Keir Starmer backs council's £145m reopening plan

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has reiterated the Government’s support for the reopening of Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Think this warranted another post. So the PM has been asked by an MP whose constituency is local to DSA whether he would support the reopening of DSA. Of course he said yes, it’s a policy of the government to support their and their party affiliates ‘growth’ plans. Let’s face it, be a bit weird if he said no. But he won’t know much about DSA, nor will he have time to scrutinise the plans. Pitcher, Milliband etc realise the popularity of it and hence are playing on it even though there is a clear conflict of interest as far as Milliband is concerned.

SAF is a flawed principle at the moment, there is lots of academic and scientific research to conclude it’s not actually sustainable or viable at the moment so to base your plans (presumably, they’ve only mentioned it and not released these plans) on something that doesn’t really exist (least not yet, and there’s no guarantee it will exist) is just as problematic as refusing to comment on the very real questions of viability of the airport as a passenger and freight facility. These are challenges that hit a brick wall when raised and these question the fundamental viability of the airport.

So OC has his work cut out, but the buck does indeed stop with him.

 

Doncaster Sheffield Airport: Keir Starmer backs council's £145m reopening plan

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has reiterated the Government’s support for the reopening of Doncaster Sheffield Airport.

www.yorkshirepost.co.uk

Think this warranted another post. So the PM has been asked by an MP whose constituency is local to DSA whether he would support the reopening of DSA. Of course he said yes, it’s a policy of the government to support their and their party affiliates ‘growth’ plans. Let’s face it, be a bit weird if he said no. But he won’t know much about DSA, nor will he have time to scrutinise the plans. Pitcher, Milliband etc realise the popularity of it and hence are playing on it even though there is a clear conflict of interest as far as Milliband is concerned.

SAF is a flawed principle at the moment, there is lots of academic and scientific research to conclude it’s not actually sustainable or viable at the moment so to base your plans (presumably, they’ve only mentioned it and not released these plans) on something that doesn’t really exist (least not yet, and there’s no guarantee it will exist) is just as problematic as refusing to comment on the very real questions of viability of the airport as a passenger and freight facility. These are challenges that hit a brick wall when raised and these question the fundamental viability of the airport.

So OC has his work cut out, but thi e buck does indeed stop with him.

I noticed that the Welsh Government who have been bailing out CWL with megabucks for ages, are also claiming they can be a hub for sustainable aviation industries, so DSA already has a competitor in that field, at an airport that's open and which already has aviation related industries on site.

Is there an on line book of nonsense that they're all quoting from? Anyone who has an unsustainable airport and who wants to chuck money down the drain can just look up a list of pie in the sky excuses to justify what they're doing?

Seems that way.

 

I noticed that the Welsh Government who have been bailing out CWL with megabucks for ages, are also claiming they can be a hub for sustainable aviation industries, so DSA already has a competitor in that field, at an airport that's open and which already has aviation related industries on site.

Is there an on line book of nonsense that they're all quoting from? Anyone who has an unsustainable airport and who wants to chuck money down the drain can just look up a list of pie in the sky excuses to justify what they're doing?

Seems that way.

Yes we must question what part airports play in SAF or sustainable aviation. Are they going to build a refinery as part of gateway east? As I understand it the refineries on the south Humber bank are making strides in alternative jet fuel so it’s not going to have any impact on DSA. Most R&D in the field is completed overseas or even on a former airport runway in Sheffield. So it’s just a way of placating the green lobby.

All they want is the airport back as it was, serving the holiday maker because they know it’s a tick against their name at the ballot box. The cost is immaterial to them, they can blame stuff later because their pledges are simply to reopen the airport not make it successful,

 

He’s just become the next Prime Minister of the UK – but did you know Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has Doncaster family connections?
The politician, who now has the keys to 10 Downing Street, has strong family connections with our city and has been a regular visitor here over the years, not only for family occasions but also trips to Racecourse.
Sir Keir’s wife Victoria comes from Doncaster and his late mother in law Barbara lived in the town before her death in February 2020.

i always thought his wife was from london?

 

He’s just become the next Prime Minister of the UK – but did you know Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has Doncaster family connections?
The politician, who now has the keys to 10 Downing Street, has strong family connections with our city and has been a regular visitor here over the years, not only for family occasions but also trips to Racecourse.
Sir Keir’s wife Victoria comes from Doncaster and his late mother in law Barbara lived in the town before her death in February 2020.

i always thought his wife was from london?

He also spent time living in Leeds whilst at Leeds Uni, though he's never shown much interest in openly supporting the city or its airport. Neither did Robert Jenryk, another with a Leeds further educational past. Whilst our beloved Chancellor and MP for Leeds West has openly objected to airport development until recently, when publicly identified as a hypocrite then she suddenly turned into an avid LBA supporter! Yeah, right Rachel.

Frankly, I would trust or believe a single politician . They'll will say whatever they think they need to say to gather support and not even flinch at telling a pack of porkies .

As far as DSA is concerned, if in the end it all goes down the can, before or after reopening, both the CDC Mayor and PM have a ready made fall guy to point the finger at in O.C.

 

He also spent time living in Leeds whilst at Leeds Uni, though he's never shown much interest in openly supporting the city or its airport. Neither did Robert Jenryk, another with a Leeds further educational past. Whilst our beloved Chancellor and MP for Leeds West has openly objected to airport development until recently, when publicly identified as a hypocrite then she suddenly turned into an avid LBA supporter! Yeah, right Rachel.

Frankly, I would trust or believe a single politician . They'll will say whatever they think they need to say to gather support and not even flinch at telling a pack of porkies .

As far as DSA is concerned, if in the end it all goes down the can, before or after reopening, both the CDC Mayor and PM have a ready made fall guy to point the finger at in O.C.

Well it all comes down to money, and they haven’t got all that much to spend on things. Cutting foreign aid is one sign of them being in trouble, the relinquishing of significant soft power of times past and aiming to increase defence spending is basically waving the white flag in Trumps direction. They want growth so they can invest in public services, but poor investment decisions on a local level are not going to create growth. Gainshare is the pot they have ring fenced, they won’t get anything else. Just be interesting to see where the rest comes from In summer and beyond.

 

Yorkshire Post repeat TUI story https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/bus...iscussion-on-return-to-fantastic-site-5008765

 

Yorkshire Post repeat TUI story https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/bus...iscussion-on-return-to-fantastic-site-5008765

Implication from the ‘Peel ran it into the ground to build on it’ camp that they accidentally did a good job of running it because it was a ‘fantastic experience’?

Open to discussions means that there are no firm commitments from them as yet. Their retail outlets have been told to tell customers no flights for 2026 because some people are waiting for DSA before they book and this will no doubt impact bookings in the area around DSA which is not helpful.

I’m sure Christian Foster will be employing his many years of experience of doing whatever he’s been doing to tempt his 5 target airlines in. Makes you wonder why Peel paid people like Steve Gill so much doesn’t it…

 

I’m sure Christian Foster will be employing his many years of experience of doing whatever he’s been doing to tempt his 5 target airlines in. Makes you wonder why Peel paid people like Steve Gill so much doesn’t it…

Christian Foster has been a bystander, FP and MAI are leading those negotiations, he only stops to interject, the talks are way over his head.

 

Christian Foster has been a bystander, FP and MAI are leading those negotiations, he only stops to interject, the talks are way over his head.

Well FP can be removed from those talks also having zero acumen when it comes to these discussions. Dont even know what part they’re playing other than to advise the hapless CDC on who they should target as SME and coming up with MAI.

MAI have said it’s far too early to talk about the scope of airline interest. They are of course ‘confident’ but it would be a bit weird if they said otherwise, because then they wouldn’t get paid. I don’t even know whether MAI are fully signed up yet, probably at an MOU stage because until the funding is approved they can’t actually get on and open, probably operating in a capacity of trying to jump through the regulatory hoops at the moment. That’s a long road if their target is CAT (including freight) before Spring 26.

I understand we are to expect another ‘update’ this week.

 

New 'Update' from Ros today, personally reading through all the droll, its nothing new.

Expecting 4/5 airlines.. again not a clue who she thinks will be in.. but she does mention TUI as expected..

Interestingly 10m to support the mobilisation process (undertake building works/buy equipment) I'm pretty sure you will a lot more then 10m for this..

Spring 2026 is not far away, I cant see that being a realistic opening day/any airline beginning operations from there.

 

New 'Update' from Ros today, personally reading through all the droll, its nothing new.

Expecting 4/5 airlines.. again not a clue who she thinks will be in.. but she does mention TUI as expected..

Interestingly 10m to support the mobilisation process (undertake building works/buy equipment) I'm pretty sure you will a lot more then 10m for this..

Spring 2026 is not far away, I cant see that being a realistic opening day/any airline beginning operations from there.

This is the below in full;

Update in relation to our South Yorkshire Airport City programme to reopen our airport #SaveDSA

Earlier this month I announced our partnership with Munich Airport International who are partnering with us and will provide operational and management services and FP Airports Ltd, aviation sector specialists in the UK as we work to reopen our airport in Spring 2026.

We have also had our chancellor speak out in support of our airport and pledged to work with us to make our vision a reality.

I cannot overstate the amount of work that has already been completed, but there is more work to do, and we are continuing at pace.

We are currently in discussion with UK Government around a number of areas, including regaining our airspace, plans around the Investment Zone and of course around potential additional funding.

We’re not just looking for others to support the opening of the Airport as we are backing ourselves.

Within the reports before Full Council today, there is £10m to support the mobilisation process. This is scheduled to be used in order to undertake building works on the site & buy equipment that will be needed to run the Airport. There is also the £10m that was recently approved by SYMCA as an initial draw-down of our gainshare funding.

This upfront £20m will also have the added benefit of reducing the gainshare requirements and the projected overall costs.

I am pleased that our partners Munich Airport International gave interviews last week where they said that they are “confident” it will be financially viable. Doncaster Airport will be a regional asset, driving economic opportunity and prosperity across the North, but this is our airport, and Doncaster will lead the way.

The amount of business interest is incredible, and we are continuing at pace to get our airport open in Spring 2026.

In terms of airlines, as a council we have maintained communication with a number of airlines throughout this process, and now Munich Airport International are now leading on this on our behalf. We expect a minimum of four to five airlines and that is what we will be working towards over time. Obviously, I cannot name any of these at this stage, but it is no secret that TUI have expressed an interest and we are currently engaging with them.

Our Full Business Case has been submitted to South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority and will be considered alongside the independent assessment by Bradshaws which is nearing completion as outlined in the recent SYMCA report.

As per the Subsidy Advice Unit report which stated, “In our view, the Assessment demonstrates that Doncaster Council has considered other options for reopening the Airport and clearly explains and evidence why a subsidy was the most appropriate option to achieve this outcome.”

Now, with our operational partners on board we will be working through the many business interests we’ve received to determine which of these should be taken forward to use the existing infrastructure on site and develop further. We’ll also be working with the Civil Aviation Authority and Department for Transport to secure our airspace. So, there is lots to do as we move into this mobilisation phase.

Exciting times ahead and I will keep you updated as we progress on this incredible journey. Thank you.

#DoncasterIsGreat #Delivering4Doncaster #saveDSA SAVE Doncaster Sheffield Airport

So much wrong with it it’s infuriating and worrying, but it’s interesting to note the only reference to the SAU feedback was the tiny bit (of a much bigger and more damning report which has already been discussed on here) relating to the reason they’ve decided to subsidise the reopening after exploring other opportunities. This is not a positive, the private sector have rejected it and this should be sounding alarm bells! Not only that, but the only reason the council haven’t explored other uses of the site is because there are planning restrictions currently in place, planning restrictions that the council themselves have set!

Its wilful neglect of their obligations to be open and honest with the people who put them there and pay their wages. I’m not au fait with all thing in the corporate legal world but I’m pretty sure there’d be dire consequences if they were issuing such misleading reporting to private sector investors!

Then there is the fact they appear to be using Bradshaws to do the independent scrutiny of the business case. Is this who SYMCA are using or have CDC commissioned them? Why not Grant Thornton? Why not one of the big 4 they used previously? Wouldn’t be because EY based their results on having a private sector investor would it?

So they’ve told MAI they expect 4-5 airlines ‘over time’. I bet this will form part of their contractual obligations and any performance related bonuses. At the moment all MAI have said is that they think they can make money from low-cost airlines. Peel had to pay them to fly from there, so id be interested to see what’s changed. It may well be that MAIs own ideas of potential change once they are actively involved in these discussions. We saw it in the past with Vancouver Airport Services, only this time CDC are paying MAI to go out and do it, what will be the back stop in these negotiations? Get them in at ALL cost? Can’t see that going down well with their competitors.

Seen that an ex DSA fire service employee has posed a question to Ros Jones regarding the lead in time for recruiting vital services such as his former role and why this isn’t being done yet for a 2026 reopening. He claims that there are 18 month lead in times to securing things like fire equipment. That would push them well beyond the Spring 2026 opening and they couldn’t handle any passengers OR scaleable freight without that provision or indeed a CAA licence. Not only this but no idea where they’ll source the ATC staff as I understand that’s quite tricky at the moment, perhaps they’re looking at going fully remote like they have done at LCY? I think they might find it tricky to get far with their CAA licence application without these processes at least in an advanced stage of mobilisation.

 

New 'Update' from Ros today, personally reading through all the droll, its nothing new.

Expecting 4/5 airlines.. again not a clue who she thinks will be in.. but she does mention TUI as expected..

Interestingly 10m to support the mobilisation process (undertake building works/buy equipment) I'm pretty sure you will a lot more then 10m for this..

Spring 2026 is not far away, I cant see that being a realistic opening day/any airline beginning operations from there.

There is one little bit which I think is new and tucked away is that they are looking for 'extra funding' from the Government.

This is the below in full;


So much wrong with it it’s infuriating and worrying, but it’s interesting to note the only reference to the SAU feedback was the tiny bit (of a much bigger and more damning report which has already been discussed on here) relating to the reason they’ve decided to subsidise the reopening after exploring other opportunities. This is not a positive, the private sector have rejected it and this should be sounding alarm bells! Not only that, but the only reason the council haven’t explored other uses of the site is because there are planning restrictions currently in place, planning restrictions that the council themselves have set!

Its wilful neglect of their obligations to be open and honest with the people who put them there and pay their wages. I’m not au fait with all thing in the corporate legal world but I’m pretty sure there’d be dire consequences if they were issuing such misleading reporting to private sector investors!

Then there is the fact they appear to be using Bradshaws to do the independent scrutiny of the business case. Is this who SYMCA are using or have CDC commissioned them? Why not Grant Thornton? Why not one of the big 4 they used previously? Wouldn’t be because EY based their results on having a private sector investor would it?

So they’ve told MAI they expect 4-5 airlines ‘over time’. I bet this will form part of their contractual obligations and any performance related bonuses. At the moment all MAI have said is that they think they can make money from low-cost airlines. Peel had to pay them to fly from there, so id be interested to see what’s changed. It may well be that MAIs own ideas of potential change once they are actively involved in these discussions. We saw it in the past with Vancouver Airport Services, only this time CDC are paying MAI to go out and do it, what will be the back stop in these negotiations? Get them in at ALL cost? Can’t see that going down well with their competitors.

Seen that an ex DSA fire service employee has posed a question to Ros Jones regarding the lead in time for recruiting vital services such as his former role and why this isn’t being done yet for a 2026 reopening. He claims that there are 18 month lead in times to securing things like fire equipment. That would push them well beyond the Spring 2026 opening and they couldn’t handle any passengers OR scaleable freight without that provision or indeed a CAA licence. Not only this but no idea where they’ll source the ATC staff as I understand that’s quite tricky at the moment, perhaps they’re looking at going fully remote like they have done at LCY? I think they might find it tricky to get far with their CAA licence application without these processes at least in an advanced stage of mobilisation.

Even going 'remote' as before (or part remote) in respect of ATC is still likely to require recruitment with the delays that it will no doubt entail - as reported previously by @radar the Liverpool unit looking after DSA 'approach' are long gone.

 

This is the below in full;


So much wrong with it it’s infuriating and worrying, but it’s interesting to note the only reference to the SAU feedback was the tiny bit (of a much bigger and more damning report which has already been discussed on here) relating to the reason they’ve decided to subsidise the reopening after exploring other opportunities. This is not a positive, the private sector have rejected it and this should be sounding alarm bells! Not only that, but the only reason the council haven’t explored other uses of the site is because there are planning restrictions currently in place, planning restrictions that the council themselves have set!

Its wilful neglect of their obligations to be open and honest with the people who put them there and pay their wages. I’m not au fait with all thing in the corporate legal world but I’m pretty sure there’d be dire consequences if they were issuing such misleading reporting to private sector investors!

Then there is the fact they appear to be using Bradshaws to do the independent scrutiny of the business case. Is this who SYMCA are using or have CDC commissioned them? Why not Grant Thornton? Why not one of the big 4 they used previously? Wouldn’t be because EY based their results on having a private sector investor would it?

So they’ve told MAI they expect 4-5 airlines ‘over time’. I bet this will form part of their contractual obligations and any performance related bonuses. At the moment all MAI have said is that they think they can make money from low-cost airlines. Peel had to pay them to fly from there, so id be interested to see what’s changed. It may well be that MAIs own ideas of potential change once they are actively involved in these discussions. We saw it in the past with Vancouver Airport Services, only this time CDC are paying MAI to go out and do it, what will be the back stop in these negotiations? Get them in at ALL cost? Can’t see that going down well with their competitors.

Seen that an ex DSA fire service employee has posed a question to Ros Jones regarding the lead in time for recruiting vital services such as his former role and why this isn’t being done yet for a 2026 reopening. He claims that there are 18 month lead in times to securing things like fire equipment. That would push them well beyond the Spring 2026 opening and they couldn’t handle any passengers OR scaleable freight without that provision or indeed a CAA licence. Not only this but no idea where they’ll source the ATC staff as I understand that’s quite tricky at the moment, perhaps they’re looking at going fully remote like they have done at LCY? I think they might find it tricky to get far with their CAA licence application without these processes at least in an advanced stage of mobilisation.

It gives airlines a better bargaining power, they are clearly going to be desperate for airlines trying to get them in. Let the airlines bargain / push back to MIA and they'll start getting heavy subsidies to operate.. win for the airlines anyway, they will minimise any risk.

 

There is one little bit which I think is new and tucked away is that they are looking for 'extra funding' from the Government.


Even going 'remote' as before (or part remote) in respect of ATC is still likely to require recruitment with the delays that it will no doubt entail - as reported previously by @radar the Liverpool unit looking after DSA 'approach' are long gone.

Very true, particularly for a H24 operation that they aspire to. Lots of hoops to jump through and all of this will increase the costs significantly above the headline figure of £145million. Interested in how anyone might interpret the bit about the lower necessary Gainshare drawdown owing to the £10million that was approved by Council. Are they saying this is part of the £105million and they now be asking for £95million minus the £10million they got from SYMCA a couple of weeks ago? Or is it more wordplay designed to mislead?

It gives airlines a better bargaining power, they are clearly going to be desperate for airlines trying to get them in. Let the airlines bargain / push back to MIA and they'll start getting heavy subsidies to operate.. win for the airlines anyway, they will minimise any risk.

The airlines hold all the cards here. With LBA expanding overnight stand capacity they are only doing this because they have received tangible interest to take up that capacity. It also provides further ammunition for LBA to pursue legal challenges against the public subsidy that will inevitably be required. Publicly owned airport pays airlines to move from LBA/distort the market to the extent that neither airport gains in the long term - not going to go down too well I don’t think.

 

Very true, particularly for a H24 operation that they aspire to. Lots of hoops to jump through and all of this will increase the costs significantly above the headline figure of £145million. Interested in how anyone might interpret the bit about the lower necessary Gainshare drawdown owing to the £10million that was approved by Council. Are they saying this is part of the £105million and they now be asking for £95million minus the £10million they got from SYMCA a couple of weeks ago? Or is it more wordplay designed to mislead?


The airlines hold all the cards here. With LBA expanding overnight stand capacity they are only doing this because they have received tangible interest to take up that capacity. It also provides further ammunition for LBA to pursue legal challenges against the public subsidy that will inevitably be required. Publicly owned airport pays airlines to move from LBA/distort the market to the extent that neither airport gains in the long term - not going to go down too well I don’t think.

Again begs the questions which ones will actually move?

Jet2 take any planes out, FR or EZY would jump in a heartbeat..

TUI offering is pretty much the same as it was when DSA was open..

Wizz reportedly happy at LBA..

Aer Lingus ? Tried DSA obviously looking at frequencies LBA is a strong preformer

KLM moving? Nope.

4/5 airlines is pretty adventurous considering there was barely 4 never mind 5 different airlines at DSA at any one time throughout the 17 years.

 

Again begs the questions which ones will actually move?

Jet2 take any planes out, FR or EZY would jump in a heartbeat..

TUI offering is pretty much the same as it was when DSA was open..

Wizz reportedly happy at LBA..

Aer Lingus ? Tried DSA obviously looking at frequencies LBA is a strong preformer

KLM moving? Nope.

4/5 airlines is pretty adventurous considering there was barely 4 never mind 5 different airlines at DSA at any one time throughout the 17 years.

KLM will absolutely be on their target list, as will Jet2 and easyjet. Suspect emerald will also feature, plus the smaller ones like BH Air. They’ll probably want Lufthansa but we know how they are in the uk market. Much like all the others (except KLM) they’ve never been interested in serving the regions and are quite happy serving the major centres like Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh etc outside of London.

The Commercial guy at HUY some years ago did a good job of attracting SAS so it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that if they engage local stakeholders they’ll see some results. Only problem is as we’re aware SAS lasted about 6 months at HUY and not much longer at LBA.

I can’t emphasise enough just how tough this is going to be, and although MAI may have their oven ready relationships with airlines, it’s meaningless when it comes to the market DSA purports to serve. It’s just not attractive when it is so close to other operating bases. The local population aren’t well off generally speaking and they don’t fly much either. It’s just stupid to try to sell it as economic regeneration because you need the market there first, you don’t build airports in the hope that one day people will fly enough to sustain it! The Spanish examples are a case in point, operated by an experienced operator but it’s ultimately on the airlines as to whether they see any advantages of flying from an airport and it’ll be no different under MAI than it was under Peel and VAS. Anyone who thinks differently is deluded.

I remember chatting with a KLM regional manager once many years ago now, I asked whether they would relocate from HUY and he said no, it wasn’t an attractive proposition because HUY was high yielding and a relatively low cost base. The flying time is so small and they can just drop in from the airways at Skeggy/Mablethorpe and fly straight in, fuel savings compared to DSA were significant I was told, plus they could drop in and get back out rapidly. We saw with LPL and more recently EMA that airports much more popular than DSA couldn’t sustain the KLM flights, don’t see why DSA would be any different and it would only displace the cluster at HUY that’s been decades in the making.

 

Again begs the questions which ones will actually move?

Jet2 take any planes out, FR or EZY would jump in a heartbeat..

TUI offering is pretty much the same as it was when DSA was open..

Wizz reportedly happy at LBA..

Aer Lingus ? Tried DSA obviously looking at frequencies LBA is a strong preformer

KLM moving? Nope.

4/5 airlines is pretty adventurous considering there was barely 4 never mind 5 different airlines at DSA at any one time throughout the 17 years.

I don't think it's a question of moving. Airlines don't give up a steady market share at existing bases to take a gamble at a new airport that previously failed over a 17 year period, especially if they tried there first time around and failed themselves. The best they're likely to do is operate a limited number of routes that are pretty much guaranteed to sell and where they can do so without damaging their ops at existing bases. A slow build up, not going in all guns blazing with high frequencies or on dodgy routes.

I'm told by those in high places that Lufthansa will not entertain airports that have less than 5m passengers per year generally. KLM haven't enough aircraft to serve existing and successful routes. They are not going to give up LBA or HUY to risk DSA. Emerald may offer a few flights to see how it goes. Wizz have said they're happy at LBA but money talks. If the deal offered and their last passenger figures suggest their profits at DSA would exceed LBA then who knows. But it will take a major about turn by them and there's no doubt LBA managenent will be aware of the threat, and doing their best to renegotiate contracts to tie airlines down at LBA for the forseeable. In the case of Easyjet they'll be doing their damnedest to get further growth and potentially a base post 2026. But if they won't base at LBA yet why on Earth would they go back to DSA? Been there, done that.

So, maybe TUi. Maybe a handful of flights from other operators. But 4 or 5 airlines means nothing if most only offer a daily or twice daily turboprop . DSA needs way more or it'll be haemmoraging money so fast it won't last 5 years.