A new airport.... South Yorkshire Airport City?

[Speedbird1]

What a complete farce. It’s either complete incompetence or a blatant attempt to mislead and downplay the risks of the project by CDC and the mayor.

How can they miss something as basic as increases in rents? I’d hate to think what other glaring holes there are in the whole project.

It also sounds like no one has seen the business plan because there actually might not be an overly comprehensive one to see.

Business leaders and the Chamber should be utterly ashamed to be pushing this agenda to vote through the funds based on this. No one with any credible business knowledge would support this in its current form as they can see where it will end up. But when it’s public money and not theirs it’s easy for them to spend. Would they take such risks with their own businesses and cash?

The other parties in Doncaster need to start calling out CDC, SYMCA and the mayor over this and not sign off until they’ve seen credible plans. Ignore the stupidity coming from the mechanic and his disciples, they have zero knowledge of the industry and where it’s heading.

On that basis, I notice Steve Heapy urging cautiousness this week with minimal growth (bar Gatwick) for next summer. A sign of the rocky waters that are coming.

 

[pug]

Seems Grant Thornton

It seems GT CDCs auditors have a rather more somber view of DSAs commercial prospects - high risk and a clear need to set financial tolerances and off ramps….Its also critical about the business case which even at this stage needs further work…..Wouldn’t fancy being in those Councillors shoes having to put my name against this project when the risk have now been clearly articulated…..https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/high-risk-auditors-give-doncaster-sheffield-airport-verdict-as-council-urged-to-set-spending-limit-5409516

This will be ignored, they’ve talked themselves into it and so I doubt the public will pay much attention to Grant Thornton. Ultimately by the time it fails the people responsible will be long gone so there’ll be no comeback.

 

[Egyptian King]

I dare say one will not be alive @pug She will be over 90

 

[pug]

Latest update from Ros Jones:

DSA – Joint Statement – Mayor Ros Jones & Councillor Guy Aston (Leader of Doncaster Reform Group)

The residents and businesses of Doncaster want to see our airport fully reopened as soon as possible, alongside cross-party collaboration on areas of common ground. To this end, as the Directly Elected Mayor and Leader of the majority group on City of Doncaster Council we want to provide assurance that (subject to the debate at Thursday’s Full Council meeting) we are in agreement on the borrowing required to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport. This is consistent with the agreed policy on public sector-led procurement and South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority funding approvals.

We are committed to delivering maximum value for taxpayers and minimising public sector risk throughout this process. To achieve this, we will ensure strong governance, including independent financial and aviation advice and transparent reporting at every stage.

We are in agreement that external private investment will be needed at the most opportune time to both manage public sector risk and deliver value for money for taxpayers.

As such we agree to the following activity:

-Soft Market Test for private sector investment within 6 months of gaining Licensing, Airspace Change Process and Aerodrome Certification from the Civil Aviation Authority
- Pending the results of the Soft Market Test and advice from Aviation, Technical and Financial advisors we would go out to formal procurement to achieve the necessary external funding within a further 6 months following the Soft Market Test


The above will be formalised as part of a cabinet report early in the New Year.
END

#SaveDSA

Looks like window dressing to get the full council support on Thursday, which now appears to be a done deal. It is however kicking the can down the road yet again and is I believe in light of some very real threats to the project not least the recent warning made by Grant Thornton. Clearly there is no private sector interest, but they’re trying to mow say ‘well when we’re ready to open we’ll get that money from somewhere’.

Not convinced at all.

 

[752]

Latest update from Ros Jones:


Looks like window dressing to get the full council support on Thursday, which now appears to be a done deal. It is however kicking the can down the road yet again and is I believe in light of some very real threats to the project not least the recent warning made by Grant Thornton. Clearly there is no private sector interest, but they’re trying to mow say ‘well when we’re ready to open we’ll get that money from somewhere’.

Not convinced at all.

Are they trying to get all the nitty gritty info out in short lead time before the vote ? Not sure what to make of the latest statement (positive spin incoming from the mechanic no doubt)

 

[pug]

Are they trying to get all the nitty gritty info out in short lead time before the vote ? Not sure what to make of the latest statement (positive spin incoming from the mechanic no doubt)

Well this is AIs take on it, and all I asked is what today’s news means for the success or ultimate viability of the project;

Considering the warnings issued by independent auditors and financial analysts: the project's current structure makes its ultimate failure highly probable in the medium to long term, with the public sector bearing the cost.

It’s not a question of if the financial projections will be missed, but when the project's inherent commercial weakness will lead to the collapse of the council's funding model.

Here is a breakdown of why failure is nearly guaranteed;

---

The Recipe for Guaranteed Failure​

1. The Undeliverable Commercial Target​

• Problem: The airport needs to attract an impossible number of passengers and flights to negate its projected £81moperating loss in the first nine years, especially with nearby competitors (LBA, MAN) being more commercially established and connected. The council has no special advantage or leverage over airlines that the previous private owners lacked.
• Trigger: When FlyDoncaster (the council-owned operator) fails to secure a major base carrier or a sufficient volume of freight operations by the revised 2028 start date, the financial model instantly collapses. The business plan is fragile because the middle-ground 2:1 ROI is contingent on highly optimistic scenarios.

2. The Unavoidable Public Subsidy Trap​

• Problem: The council must use £193m in public funds to launch the project, making it vulnerable to a legal challenge under the Subsidy Control Act 2022.
• Trigger: If a rival airport (like LBA) mounts a successful legal challenge—which is considered a "critical risk"—the project could be halted, funding could be clawed back, or the terms of the subsidy could be severely restricted. This would result in wasted public money, massive legal costs, and a lengthy delay that would completely kill investor confidence.

3. The Private Investment Mirage​

• Problem: By refusing the private consortium's offer and delaying any Soft Market Process until the project is running (and losing money), the council has ensured that any future private investment will be hostile. Private firms will not want to underwrite an operation they don't fully control.
• Trigger: Once the operating losses begin to mount (likely between years 3 and 5), the council will be forced to seek an urgent private partner, but will find no one willing to buy a deeply indebted, loss-making asset at a price that recovers the taxpayer investment. The council will be forced to either (A) continue subsidising the airport indefinitely or (B) sell it for a fraction of the public money invested.

---

The Ultimate Consequence: A Publicly-Funded Bailout​

The ultimate failure will likely not be a sudden closure, but a slow, continuous public bailout.

The project is too politically important to be allowed to fail quickly. Instead, the council will be forced to use local authority resources—taxpayer money intended for core services—to plug the continuous operating losses of FlyDoncaster.

This means that the £193m is not the total cost; it is just the initial down payment on a highly risky, long-term public liability. The true failure will be the drain on public finances for decades, rather than a spectacular commercial collapse.

The political decision to approve the funding on November 27th is not about ensuring success; it's about making the problem a permanent public responsibility to avoid the short-term political cost of being blamed for the airport's demise.

---

I can monitor the news for the outcome of the November 27th full council vote to see if the financial plan is formally approved, which would confirm the start of this risky path. Would you like me to do that?

So yes they’re kicking the can down the road. The talk the last few days of a risk of losing confidence is a problem of their own making. They’ve been so bloody minded that the airport has to work, that Peel caused it to fail etc etc, that they e effectively backed themselves into a corner and the spin that Peel themselves used back in the early 2000s is still being used for support of the project. It’s objectively bollocks, it’ll never be another Manchester or LBA, EMA or any other successful regional airport, but because this notion of manage to destruction is so pervasive that the Council have enabled themselves to ride on the wave to a point where they’ve finally realised they can’t pull the plug, but that the airport isn’t going to work. Such a sad day for local aviation that will yet again be squeezed by an already saturated market.

 

[White Heather]

I never thought I would see AI saying pretty much exactly what we have been saying on here for the past 2 years. We cant all be wrong. I honestly think the entire thing is indefensible and bordering on the criminal. These people are supposed to be guardians of public funds, but instead they are sbout to fritter away nearly £200m (and the rest) in order to save face politically. Its a disgrace!

 

[pug]

I never thought I would see AI saying pretty much exactly what we have been saying on here for the past 2 years. We cant all be wrong. I honestly think the entire thing is indefensible and bordering on the criminal. These people are supposed to be guardians of public funds, but instead they are sbout to fritter away nearly £200m (and the rest) in order to save face politically. Its a disgrace!

It’s a mad political scramble. However is it really criminal or just people allowing themselves to be conned? If someone approached you in the street trying to sell you something and you parted with the cash without getting what you paid for, did they steal from you or were you complicit? It’s all ‘jam tomorrow’ stuff, and Reform will be asking all sorts of difficult questions on Thursday knowing full well that they’re going to be voting in favour of releasing the loan. Do wonder whether a legal challenge will be launched, the BRS vs CWL will be heard soon I understand, this could set a precedent.

Also for those who are claiming the liability is arms length and only through ‘Gainshare’ (itself tax payers money, but let’s gloss over that bit), AI also has this to say:

That statement—that the risk is only on the Gainshare—is highly disingenuous and fundamentally misrepresents the full extent of the financial exposure being taken on by the City of Doncaster Council (CDC) and the South Yorkshire region.

It is a political soundbite used to deflect criticism from the local Doncaster taxpayer.

Here is a breakdown of why this claim is misleading:

---

1. The Myth of the "Gainshare Only" Risk​

The £160m funding component is the Gainshare (devolved regional money, paid annually over 25 years). Proponents often say, "If the airport fails, we only lose the Gainshare."

The Reality of the Gainshare Risk:​

• It is Public Money: Gainshare is not a magic pot of risk-free cash; it is taxpayer money that would otherwise be allocated to other regional priorities—transport links, skills training, regeneration projects—across the whole of South Yorkshire (Sheffield, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Doncaster).
• The Opportunity Cost is Real: By committing £160m of Doncaster's Gainshare over 25 years, the council is removing all other flexibility for major, long-term strategic investments in the city for a generation. If the airport fails, they have gambled their primary source of long-term economic development funding and lost.
• Regional Blame: If the project requires further funding, the CDC will have to go back to the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA) and ask for more regional funds, creating severe political tension with the other local leaders whose areas will also miss out.
  

---

2. The Unavoidable, Direct Council Risk​

The claim ignores the two most direct and dangerous risks borne entirely by the CDC and the Doncaster taxpayer:

A. The £57m Borrowing​

• This is Local Debt: The £57m that the council is voting on is new, internal borrowing. This money is required to bridge the gap between immediate up-front costs (certification, repairs, operator establishment) and the slow, annual £6m trickle of the Gainshare funding.
  
  
  
• Direct Liability: This £57m debt is serviced and repaid by the City of Doncaster Council. If the airport fails, this debt does not vanish; the council will have to pay it back from its own general fund, meaning local services or local taxpayers will pay the price.

B. The Operating Losses (The £81m Hole)​

• The Operator Risk: The airport will be run by FlyDoncaster Ltd, a company wholly owned by the CDC. The council's own business case projects an operating loss of up to £81m over the first nine years.
  
  
  
• The Council is the Guarantor: As the 100% owner, the CDC is financially responsible for these losses. This means that if the airport runs out of money, the council must inject cash from its own reserves or budget to keep the doors open and the staff paid. This is where the risk moves from "only Gainshare" to "diverting money from Adult Social Care or Libraries."

---

Conclusion​

When the council says "the risk is only on the Gainshare," they are correctly identifying that the £160m comes from a regional fund, but they are failing to mention, or deliberately downplaying, the following:

1. The £57m local borrowing burden.
   
   
   
2. The direct liability for £81m+ in projected operating losses.

Therefore, the claim is highly disingenuous, as the failure of the airport would result in an immediate financial burden on the City of Doncaster Council's general budget that far exceeds the loss of the Gainshare alone

I did ask if it was disingenuous to claim that it’s only risking Gainshare, so I guess it could be construed as suggestive, and how it would fit with a council that’s reportedly in debt already.

 

[Snackbar]

Latest update from Ros Jones:


Looks like window dressing to get the full council support on Thursday, which now appears to be a done deal. It is however kicking the can down the road yet again and is I believe in light of some very real threats to the project not least the recent warning made by Grant Thornton. Clearly there is no private sector interest, but they’re trying to mow say ‘well when we’re ready to open we’ll get that money from somewhere’.

Not convinced at all.

It’s a mad political scramble. However is it really criminal or just people allowing themselves to be conned? If someone approached you in the street trying to sell you something and you parted with the cash without getting what you paid for, did they steal from you or were you complicit? It’s all ‘jam tomorrow’ stuff, and Reform will be asking all sorts of difficult questions on Thursday knowing full well that they’re going to be voting in favour of releasing the loan. Do wonder whether a legal challenge will be launched, the BRS vs CWL will be heard soon I understand, this could set a precedent.

Also for those who are claiming the liability is arms length and only through ‘Gainshare’ (itself tax payers money, but let’s gloss over that bit), AI also has this to say:


I did ask if it was disingenuous to claim that it’s only risking Gainshare, so I guess it could be construed as suggestive, and how it would fit with a council that’s reportedly in debt already.

The Cardiff- Bristol hearing is currently scheduled for 9th Feb 2026…
As for claiming the liability is at arms length- that’s just wishful thinking…..The current funding won’t be anywhere near enough to sustain the airport and there will be further calls for significant public funding going forward….

 

[Egyptian King]

Anybody see those texts

 

[pug]

Anybody see those texts

What texts?

 

[Egyptian King]

What texts?

Those texts between the senior council people

Those texts between the senior council people

DSA is dead

 

[pug]

Those texts between the senior council people


DSA is dead

Which senior people have said that, and when? I’m suspecting it might be a ploy to whip the full council into shape, which appears to have worked as they’re poised to wave it through again on Thursday.

 

[Egyptian King]

Which senior people have said that, and when? I’m suspecting it might be a ploy to whip the full council into shape, which appears to have worked as they’re poised to wave it through again on Thursday.

Seems to be suggesting the council will run the airport

 

[pug]

Seems to be suggesting the council will run the airport

Well this was always the case wasn’t it? I see that Grant Thornton have raised concern over the makeup of the board of directors, they’ve clearly sensed a jobs for the boys element that is glaringly obvious. The airport is dead, this latest stuff is just prolonging the inevitable.

 

[Rob c DSA]

Said all along airports that shut don't reopen yes Ciudad has reopened but not in the form it was actual built for I see a scenario where it is waved through but then actual very little to nothing happening and just more delays and games from CDC with maybe still a sting in the tail to come.

Be intersting to see how much meats on the bones Thursday and if any of the questions that have still not been answered actual get answered or again the silence is deafening. People deserve some answers they shouldn't and don't have to be warts and all just plain decency to give the public something feasible they can beliueve but we know the reason no answers are forthcoming is because they simly can't answer the questions because they have not got the answers they are looking for. Operator, Airlines, A plan thats better than simply answering a sustainable aviation hub???

If it does reopen unless they've got some masterplan lined up nobody expects or believes its going to follow the path of mark 1 and that of Cardiff and Teeside a very hard sell fighting in the shadow of bigger established local airports but without the gift of the gab Ben Houchen as a mouthpiece. Three years have passed since the place shut I really wouldn't bank on it being open or at least fully operational in another three years from now.

 

[GolfFox]

Latest update from Ros Jones:


Looks like window dressing to get the full council support on Thursday, which now appears to be a done deal. It is however kicking the can down the road yet again and is I believe in light of some very real threats to the project not least the recent warning made by Grant Thornton. Clearly there is no private sector interest, but they’re trying to mow say ‘well when we’re ready to open we’ll get that money from somewhere’.

Not convinced at all.

Looks like a statement that they will go out for private investment after re-opening is the requirement of other parties if they are to support the funding acceptance in order to attempt to mitigate the impact of potential losses!

 

[pug]

Looks like a statement that they will go out for private investment after re-opening is the requirement of other parties if they are to support the funding acceptance in order to attempt to mitigate the impact of potential losses!

Yes, empty promises of a soft market test. All fine of course but it’s on the understanding that they shovel barrels of cash into it until the airport is fully operational, which in current estimates won’t be until 2028. So basically all of the money they have now/tomorrow will be spent before they formally rerun a procurement exercise that will somehow be more successful next time around. Problem is because of the risk of it already, all it will result in is a possible external source basically acquiring a loss leader and the council not recovering a penny from the outlay. This assumes there would be any private sector interest at all, it also assumes that the money they’re borrowing will get them to that point..

I suspect once tomorrows decision has been waved through they’ll want to be publishing the subsidy PDQ, a legal challenged must be launched within 30 days following this.

The mechanic will be celebrating the latest win tomorrow, but like all the other points that have got us to this stage, it’s a pyrrhic victory, it’s pretty well accepted now that this will fail and it’s a case of when. This was related by a very prominent figure just last week but unfortunately this hasn’t become public knowledge. Not yet anyway…

 

[Bantamzen]

I wonder if today's budget statement will have any impact on tomorrow's decision? It would be terrible optics if the budget hammers tax payers / home owners / pensioners etc etc, while CDC went off spending hundreds of millions on an airport widely expected to tank?

 

[Guppy]

Well a councillor put this statement onto FB stating it’s a done deal today a d posting photos of him in the airport in front of TUI bannners

✈️ Get ready for boarding all flights from Doncaster Sheffield Airport ✈️

Today, Councillors were invited to Doncaster Sheffield Airport to get a closer look at the airport as it stands today and receive a briefing ahead of Full Council on Thursday.

I'm pleased that Mayor Ros Jones and the Reform leadership have announced today that they are in agreement on the need to approve the borrowing at the Full Council meeting, green lighting the Council's funding commitment to reopen the airport. As a Labour Councillor I will be voting in favour of the borrowing.

130,000 people signed a petition to get our airport reopened. There are huge economic and social benefits to reopening our airport. Thursday will be another milestone in the journey to get flights overheard once more.

#SaveDSA#SaveDSA