HUMBERSIDE - 2
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MAN purchase of HUY
Doh!.. Tut tut! Nik Nak - MAN did not buy Humberside as sop to Mr Prescott in return for permission to build Runway 2. Permission for R2 was given in January 1997 by the John Major government, HUY was bought in 1999Memories fade, it seems.
Thread Starter
I am told £10 million, i know there was a debt of some £6 million when they took it on, dont know if that has been considered or not. Good investment though, one hopes a big player comes in.
Niknak must check the facts before accusing others of nonsense!!
The Council owners of HUY, pre-MAN, could doubtless have afforded to finance developments at HUY. The fact is that they chose not to do so, prefering to find a purchaser who would. Check the local council records and newspapers at the time.
DSA was the driving factor behind the MAN purchase, not runway 2 at MAN. Check the dates as stated by Higher Archie.
Apart from a brief attempt at Glasgow by Eastern, the only sceduled route attempted between 1996 and 1999 was the Paris operated by Gill Airways as an Air France franchise.
The fact is that there is inadequate catchment for scheduled services. Aberdeen is a niche market and Amsterdam meets the limited needs for schedules via its interlining facilities. The holiday market succeeds because leisure travellers are prepared to drive further to the airport [it being only an occasional journey] and because many people will use the local airport because of the simplicity and ease of transit.
HUY's best chance might have been to get on the low cost bandwaggon back in the mid 90's, however that option was not attempted and in the early days of MAN ownership , MAN did not want low cost! The penny only dropped after they bought EMA and realised that low cost was flavour of the day!
Only those with the facts at hand will know exactly why and why not the various decisions have been made. Some of the decisons will have been the right decisions and some, with the benefit of hindsight and the boundary viewpoint will have been wrong!
Sadly, particularly for the employees at HUY, the MAN relationship has done little for the simple reason that they only had one reason for purchasing it. They never thought as far as developing it!
H49
The Council owners of HUY, pre-MAN, could doubtless have afforded to finance developments at HUY. The fact is that they chose not to do so, prefering to find a purchaser who would. Check the local council records and newspapers at the time.
DSA was the driving factor behind the MAN purchase, not runway 2 at MAN. Check the dates as stated by Higher Archie.
Apart from a brief attempt at Glasgow by Eastern, the only sceduled route attempted between 1996 and 1999 was the Paris operated by Gill Airways as an Air France franchise.
The fact is that there is inadequate catchment for scheduled services. Aberdeen is a niche market and Amsterdam meets the limited needs for schedules via its interlining facilities. The holiday market succeeds because leisure travellers are prepared to drive further to the airport [it being only an occasional journey] and because many people will use the local airport because of the simplicity and ease of transit.
HUY's best chance might have been to get on the low cost bandwaggon back in the mid 90's, however that option was not attempted and in the early days of MAN ownership , MAN did not want low cost! The penny only dropped after they bought EMA and realised that low cost was flavour of the day!
Only those with the facts at hand will know exactly why and why not the various decisions have been made. Some of the decisons will have been the right decisions and some, with the benefit of hindsight and the boundary viewpoint will have been wrong!
Sadly, particularly for the employees at HUY, the MAN relationship has done little for the simple reason that they only had one reason for purchasing it. They never thought as far as developing it!
H49
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was there not supposed to have been a freight building or something being built to process fish deliveries, that seemed to be on the cards and talked about for ages but sweet FA seems to have happened.
£10m seems OK on the outside, but what about the inside, it makes one think what has MAG been spending any money on, if they used HUY to stop DSA. I would imagine that there is a considerable amount of money to be spent on the infrastructure.
As to routes (the usual non-subject of HUY)
THe big problem it faces is not the 'demand' but slots. No way are they able to get something into LHR, LCY or LGW at the correct time to provide an alternative to the 'Hull-London Express' A 6.30am HUY London service would have been a winner but with the three airports maxed out on slots, it leaves the more 'regional' airports as a drop-off point. LTN would be the only real alternative, no chance of any interlining but regular rail service into London (get to the City within 30 minutes) [there is however the bus ride to Parkway station to add on] This means three changes of transport, doubt your average commuter would stomach that! [That having been said, most Londoners have to use the train and tube and sometimes change lines, so it is not that bad] Overall the journey time would be about 3 hours including check-in and dwell times.
Lo-co is a strong possibility, as people travel to the fares. If the flight costs £10, it does not matter where it is from 'the flight is a tenner'. I think HUY attempted to levy charges to lo-co operators - it is not surprising they did not flock to HUY! One does not make money out of lo-co, the money is made from the travelling public who use the airport facilities. HUY is perfectly placed infrastructure-wise to be a lo-co airport as it fits the bill perfectly
Seriously though, it has a motorway junction within 2 miles and a rail station within 2 miles. At the moment it has a restaurant, money exchange and book shop, with lo-co the retail offer would no doubt expand so producing more income to the airport by way of rent.
The airport has tracts of land for aviation and non-aviation development, a great opportunity for someone who is prepared to take a risk and not expect mega-returns
Shame I did not win the Euro-millions on Friday
£10m seems OK on the outside, but what about the inside, it makes one think what has MAG been spending any money on, if they used HUY to stop DSA. I would imagine that there is a considerable amount of money to be spent on the infrastructure.
As to routes (the usual non-subject of HUY)
THe big problem it faces is not the 'demand' but slots. No way are they able to get something into LHR, LCY or LGW at the correct time to provide an alternative to the 'Hull-London Express' A 6.30am HUY London service would have been a winner but with the three airports maxed out on slots, it leaves the more 'regional' airports as a drop-off point. LTN would be the only real alternative, no chance of any interlining but regular rail service into London (get to the City within 30 minutes) [there is however the bus ride to Parkway station to add on] This means three changes of transport, doubt your average commuter would stomach that! [That having been said, most Londoners have to use the train and tube and sometimes change lines, so it is not that bad] Overall the journey time would be about 3 hours including check-in and dwell times.
Lo-co is a strong possibility, as people travel to the fares. If the flight costs £10, it does not matter where it is from 'the flight is a tenner'. I think HUY attempted to levy charges to lo-co operators - it is not surprising they did not flock to HUY! One does not make money out of lo-co, the money is made from the travelling public who use the airport facilities. HUY is perfectly placed infrastructure-wise to be a lo-co airport as it fits the bill perfectly
Seriously though, it has a motorway junction within 2 miles and a rail station within 2 miles. At the moment it has a restaurant, money exchange and book shop, with lo-co the retail offer would no doubt expand so producing more income to the airport by way of rent.
The airport has tracts of land for aviation and non-aviation development, a great opportunity for someone who is prepared to take a risk and not expect mega-returns
Shame I did not win the Euro-millions on Friday
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Leicester
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I seem to remember that Man Runway 2 was passed very shortly after the new national stadium site was given to Wembley, annoying Manchester and Birmingham and leaving the then Govt. open to accusations of southern favouritism. Hence R2 was seen as a 'gesture' of recognition that there is something north of Watford.
Thread Starter
The holiday market succeeds because leisure travellers are prepared to drive further to the airport [it being only an occasional journey] and because many people will use the local airport because of the simplicity and ease of transit.
The DUB flight had negligable effects on DSA and though didnt warrant interest from FR did manage 4-5000 per month.
There is scope there.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the DUB flight was a 900 operating an inside leg at a pretty lousy time of the day, so something at a keener time would certainly have been positive.
In simple terms 7,000 pax per month and say 3 lo-co flights Dublin/Brussels/Cologne or Dusseldorf would mean 21,000 or 250,000 a year -just under 50% of their peak traffic a few years ago.
In simple terms 7,000 pax per month and say 3 lo-co flights Dublin/Brussels/Cologne or Dusseldorf would mean 21,000 or 250,000 a year -just under 50% of their peak traffic a few years ago.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Barton Upon Humber
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Esbjerg?
7006 fan Was there not supposed to have been a freight building or something being built to process fish deliveries, that seemed to be on the cards and talked about for ages but sweet FA seems to have happened.
I think HUY attempted to levy charges to lo-co operators - it is not surprising they did not flock to HUY! One does not make money out of lo-co, the money is made from the travelling public who use the airport facilities.
As for DUB, FR at DSA could easily kill off any new HUY service such is their pricing power. Suddenly they would probably stick a load of 1p fares on DSA-DUB and trash the HUY's operators yields. Shame because would be perfect for Aer Arann
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HUY
Some further thoughts on the history behind the sale and purchase of HUY.
As I said before, there was no connection between MAG's purchase of HUY and MAN R2, however there was nothing to suggest MAG bought HUY to stop DSA. The Peel purchase of Finningley was made after the purchase of HUY, and MAG and others opposed the subsequent planning application for the development of DFA. The Yorkshire and Humber region has too many airports, but not enough pax.
Sadly for HUY, it's an airfield with a limited catchment area, and no real market penetration to the North Bank. Brilliant surface access with the M180, and a railway line close mean nothing if there's not many passengers.
Loco might have given HUY an early market advantage in 2000 - 2002, but they chose not to chase it, and with hindsight, the airline market we have today, the airport is still where it is today. It seems not to now fit in the MAG strategic airport business, whereas BOH with a growing loco market does.
As I said before, there was no connection between MAG's purchase of HUY and MAN R2, however there was nothing to suggest MAG bought HUY to stop DSA. The Peel purchase of Finningley was made after the purchase of HUY, and MAG and others opposed the subsequent planning application for the development of DFA. The Yorkshire and Humber region has too many airports, but not enough pax.
Sadly for HUY, it's an airfield with a limited catchment area, and no real market penetration to the North Bank. Brilliant surface access with the M180, and a railway line close mean nothing if there's not many passengers.
Loco might have given HUY an early market advantage in 2000 - 2002, but they chose not to chase it, and with hindsight, the airline market we have today, the airport is still where it is today. It seems not to now fit in the MAG strategic airport business, whereas BOH with a growing loco market does.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick SWOT analysis by MAG would have identified the potential of DSA to damage its business (length of runway etc), so by buying HUY they hoped to show that with EMA, LBA and HUY there was no need for a new airport at DSA, however they did not bargain upon the aggressive marketing by Doncaster...I think they possibly relied upon the 'Government Green Agenda' that any new airport would be kicked into touch. But Economics overcame any objections and the '20,000 jobs' in an Objective 1 area won the day!
This then left MAG with, in their view, a lame duck airport. They held on to it for a couple of years...just in case DSA fell on its rear end, but that did not happen, did it.
Not sure about the 20,000 jobs though?
This then left MAG with, in their view, a lame duck airport. They held on to it for a couple of years...just in case DSA fell on its rear end, but that did not happen, did it.
Not sure about the 20,000 jobs though?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: East Yorkshire
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking about chasing low cost airlines at HUY, they did but not for very long remember Excel did one season of low cost from HUY and then changed business plans.
Huy do very well with the loads on charter flights, the schedules are 4 a day to AMS and ABZ and do not forget the off shore helicopter flights. One way to generate business from the north bank would be to scrap the Humber Bridge TOLL fees at £5.40 return, that is criminal in such a low income area
Huy do very well with the loads on charter flights, the schedules are 4 a day to AMS and ABZ and do not forget the off shore helicopter flights. One way to generate business from the north bank would be to scrap the Humber Bridge TOLL fees at £5.40 return, that is criminal in such a low income area
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is one big hot potato WB.
The Gvt only permitted its development because of the toll, and as we see from Dartford and the Severn, tolls -once in place on major roads, do not disappear-.
It would be about the one sensible thing Yorkshire Backward could do! I mean if HMG can blow billions on overspend for the Scottish parliament building, Wembley and 'the Games', I am sure a few million for a piddley little bridge (OK, the second largest single span bridge in the world!) is not beyond the whit of man? It would also reduce the pressure on the A62/M62, and make dualling of the A15 far more realistic.
The Gvt only permitted its development because of the toll, and as we see from Dartford and the Severn, tolls -once in place on major roads, do not disappear-.
It would be about the one sensible thing Yorkshire Backward could do! I mean if HMG can blow billions on overspend for the Scottish parliament building, Wembley and 'the Games', I am sure a few million for a piddley little bridge (OK, the second largest single span bridge in the world!) is not beyond the whit of man? It would also reduce the pressure on the A62/M62, and make dualling of the A15 far more realistic.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Barton Upon Humber
Posts: 1,984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This article is taken from an airport news website. Rather intersting but not excatly good news. Tax Credits appear to be proping up HUY
Crain's, the business newspaper, speculates that Manchester Airports Group (MAG) could lose money on the planned sale of its majority stake in Humberside Airport. It says that the Lincolnshire hub has generated a total of £640,000 of retained profit for MAG in nine years but paid no dividends, and describes it as ‘the airport that failed to take off’.
MAG announced last week that it is considering selling its majority stake in Humberside Airport, but it is far from clear whether it will emerge with much, if any, profit on the investment, the newspaper reports.
MAG paid £10m for an 87.2 percent stake in 1999, and a further £7m has been spent on infrastructure improvements. However, although Humberside's turnover has increased from £6.5m in 1999 to £12m in 2007, operating profit has slumped in the last four years. In 2004 operating profit was £1.6m but in the year ending March 31, 2007, that fell to £476,000.
Retained profits have fluctuated during MAG's ownership from a high of £3.1m to losses of £1.7m. In 2007, the last year for which accounts are available, the airport made a pre-tax loss of £622,000 but thanks to a £938,000 tax credit this was turned into a retained profit of £316,000. The previous year a pre-tax loss of £673,000 was reported while the retained loss was £705,000.
Humberside's accounts show a negative net asset value of £1.2m, and experts who have spoken to Crain's find it difficult to estimate what the business might be worth. They say finding a buyer may not be easy given the poor financial performance, stagnant passenger numbers and competitive threats.
In addition, the airport is isolated in a sparsely populated area, and faces huge competition from Peel Holdings-owned Robin Hood Airport, near Doncaster - just 28 miles away - and MAG's own East Midlands Airport, 70 miles away.
In the last six years annual passenger numbers have fluctuated at around 500,000 while in 2007 passengers dropped by 10 per cent. Robin Hood by contrast has grown to 1m passengers, according to CAA figures.
MAG insists the airport is a ‘solid business’ and said it is considering a sale because it wants to concentrate on its other bigger airports, Manchester, East Midlands and Bournemouth. It said Humberside Airport had maintained passenger volumes of 500,000 passengers annually during a ‘period of intense competition’ and had broadened its aviation activities to include scheduled and charter passenger services, freight, North Sea gas rig services, air maintenance, pilot training and a variety of other specialised niches.
MAG announced last week that it is considering selling its majority stake in Humberside Airport, but it is far from clear whether it will emerge with much, if any, profit on the investment, the newspaper reports.
MAG paid £10m for an 87.2 percent stake in 1999, and a further £7m has been spent on infrastructure improvements. However, although Humberside's turnover has increased from £6.5m in 1999 to £12m in 2007, operating profit has slumped in the last four years. In 2004 operating profit was £1.6m but in the year ending March 31, 2007, that fell to £476,000.
Retained profits have fluctuated during MAG's ownership from a high of £3.1m to losses of £1.7m. In 2007, the last year for which accounts are available, the airport made a pre-tax loss of £622,000 but thanks to a £938,000 tax credit this was turned into a retained profit of £316,000. The previous year a pre-tax loss of £673,000 was reported while the retained loss was £705,000.
Humberside's accounts show a negative net asset value of £1.2m, and experts who have spoken to Crain's find it difficult to estimate what the business might be worth. They say finding a buyer may not be easy given the poor financial performance, stagnant passenger numbers and competitive threats.
In addition, the airport is isolated in a sparsely populated area, and faces huge competition from Peel Holdings-owned Robin Hood Airport, near Doncaster - just 28 miles away - and MAG's own East Midlands Airport, 70 miles away.
In the last six years annual passenger numbers have fluctuated at around 500,000 while in 2007 passengers dropped by 10 per cent. Robin Hood by contrast has grown to 1m passengers, according to CAA figures.
MAG insists the airport is a ‘solid business’ and said it is considering a sale because it wants to concentrate on its other bigger airports, Manchester, East Midlands and Bournemouth. It said Humberside Airport had maintained passenger volumes of 500,000 passengers annually during a ‘period of intense competition’ and had broadened its aviation activities to include scheduled and charter passenger services, freight, North Sea gas rig services, air maintenance, pilot training and a variety of other specialised niches.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Brigg
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it beggars the question, if MAG consider it a fully functioning airport, why sell it...apart from the concentrating on bigger airports, the rest is BS IMHO. I reckon they have their eyes on LGW and HUY is the lamb! MAG owns 4 airports BAA owns 5 Airports in UK, OK a greater magnitude of business, but still equitable in dominance. So if MAG offloads 1 airport it can say, 'we are only a small airport business Mr Competition Commission!'
Thread Starter
They are an operator of large airports gaining much bigger numbers than HUY can ever get. It makes sense to offload it and i hope it will be for the better. To be honest, Omniport can come in for me, they seem ruthless enough not to be pushed around by the airlines. You need a strong and focused team geared at expansion, theyve put BE off NWI but they soon arranged a deal with LTU (something unexpected) if they can find a niche at HUY im sure people would pay... Afterall they havent annoyed KL have they?