Norman Normal, for viability you have to look at future potential as well as current/past performance.
DSA and SZD are very different airports, with very different potential (assuming SZD did re-open).
SZD would be aiming for a small market and competing with other small regional airports across the country with better facilities (longer runways and radar). The STOL market is very small and limited, with high fares - and operators that want radar. SZD tried business and general aviation, and that wasn't a success.
DSA is in a very different situation. The airport has the potential to handle any aircraft to any destination, in pretty much any weather, with the facilities that were sadly lacking at SZD. DSA has been unlucky in it's timing in starting operations. The economy started deteriorating in 2007 - just as passenger numbers were approaching decent levels for them. But the future potential is there, when the economy improves.
Liverpool (also owned by Peel) has never made a profit since it opened, but is a popular airport with many routes. And, if you go back 15-20 years ago, the future of all regional airports did not look good - and most had been operating for 30+ years. And had it not been for the rise in popularity of low-cost airlines, many would be struggling now.
SZD was reportedly losing £400k a year BEFORE Peel took over and BEFORE the airlines vacated, and the original developer/operator was struggling financially.
Last edited by wb9999; 7th Feb 2013 at 20:02.