DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Costs of running DTV airport.
Does that mean DTV will be just a glorified Bagby or Fishburn airfield for a select few but with a longer runway?
Surely Peel can't justify keeping the ILS and other systems running, or employing staff such as firemen and ATC under a reduced operator list?
Peel removed the ILS system at Sheffield prior to closure which is why the operators pulled out.
How much of the promised £20m was ever invested by Peel? £1m or less?
Have Thomson made an official announcement yet?
Surely Peel can't justify keeping the ILS and other systems running, or employing staff such as firemen and ATC under a reduced operator list?
Peel removed the ILS system at Sheffield prior to closure which is why the operators pulled out.
How much of the promised £20m was ever invested by Peel? £1m or less?
Have Thomson made an official announcement yet?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P330
Surely you don't really believe that this is a viable business model !
Where is the profit?, i.e. "Revenue less costs & overheads " ...I guess Peel are hoping that there are many more who share your view,... though I wonder what KL are to make of all of this..
I don't want to lose the IT flights, but I would rather a business remain and if that means focussing on profit and diversity, whilst retaining some regionally important services like KLM, then so be it.
Where is the profit?, i.e. "Revenue less costs & overheads " ...I guess Peel are hoping that there are many more who share your view,... though I wonder what KL are to make of all of this..
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
Surely you don't really believe that this is a viable business model !
NS
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Viable Model?
Skyman - I have no way of knowing whether this is a viable model or not, as I am not on the inside. As I have said before, being prepared to lose flights does not strike me as a sensible move, but one can only assume that it costs more than you earn OR the move isn't sensible.
As for a future without IT flights and whether that is viable - that entirely depends on whether there is enough profit in the non-passenger sector. You would hope someone has done their sums and figured out the answer is 'yes'.
In all honesty; none of us know what is going on. But I am clear that the future has to be different to the past and DTVA has to be a differentiated or niche product to survive and prosper. It would have been nice to think we could have achieved this difference and niche WITH charter flights however....
As for a future without IT flights and whether that is viable - that entirely depends on whether there is enough profit in the non-passenger sector. You would hope someone has done their sums and figured out the answer is 'yes'.
In all honesty; none of us know what is going on. But I am clear that the future has to be different to the past and DTVA has to be a differentiated or niche product to survive and prosper. It would have been nice to think we could have achieved this difference and niche WITH charter flights however....
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KLM
P.S. I don't think KLM will care. KLM will only be interested in their own yields. Providing those yields remain above the minimum they seek for the route, or a more lucrative yield can't be achieved by deploying the aircraft elsewhere, then I think KLM will remain.
Of more concern to KLM right now must be the slow but steady decline in passenger figures recently and I'd be interested to know how close we are to that yield minimum.
Of more concern to KLM right now must be the slow but steady decline in passenger figures recently and I'd be interested to know how close we are to that yield minimum.
KL may find there are No friends of DTV this year to help clear the snow for Whittaker who has £2,300million stuffed in his back pocket
No wages to pay. No national insurance to pay. Not even any extra employers' liability insurance as they're not employees. If they slip on ice and break a limb, the NHS pays the medical costs and any claim for injury is probably invalidated by virtue of volunteering and not acting under supervision. And, even better, FoDTV want to spend their free time actively promoting your company. If you're the boss of the company just give a few scripted words telling these people what a great and important job they're doing and then retire to your warm office while they do the work for you.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such a shame...
So, now confirmed - pretty much the end of an era.
We are now an airport that will rely on KLM and Eastern all year round for passenger numbers. I expect the pending announcement will talk about restructure, focus on non-aviation revenue and non- passenger aviation revenue. I would expect that the terminal will be slimmed down and that no-one will be spending money chasing new services with all but non-essential support functions dropped.
Let's hope the new future is a more sustainable one and one that fits the 21st century.
We are now an airport that will rely on KLM and Eastern all year round for passenger numbers. I expect the pending announcement will talk about restructure, focus on non-aviation revenue and non- passenger aviation revenue. I would expect that the terminal will be slimmed down and that no-one will be spending money chasing new services with all but non-essential support functions dropped.
Let's hope the new future is a more sustainable one and one that fits the 21st century.
Based on CAA stats up to 30 Sept 2013, and also for Oct/Nov/Dec 2012, it looks like passenger numbers will fall to about 158,000 for 2013, putting the airport for the first time below the level achieved in 1972.
As a comparable, Plymouth airport achieved 157,933 passengers in 2009
As a comparable, Plymouth airport achieved 157,933 passengers in 2009
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also a very large advert in tonights Evening Gazette.
Its for caravan storage at DTV.
I bet that lone DTV night security guard wont be sacked for a while, unless Peel tell the duty officer to start manning the camera
Its for caravan storage at DTV.
I bet that lone DTV night security guard wont be sacked for a while, unless Peel tell the duty officer to start manning the camera
For 2014 (Jan-Dec) if everything remains unchanged except for the loss of Thomson passengers, you are probably looking at between 135,000 and 140,000 passengers, putting DTV at about the same level as 1971.
This is of course a rather wild guess as it depends very much on there being no other significant changes between now and Dec 2014
This is of course a rather wild guess as it depends very much on there being no other significant changes between now and Dec 2014
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have Thomson axed the flights or have Peel told them to leave as was mentioned as a possibility earlier this month when the master plan was first mentioned? Either way, very very sad.
FoDTVA knew exactly what they were getting into, they're not stupid people, if they didn't like the terms of their agreement with the airport or felt they were in any way being conned, they would shut up shop without a seconds hesitation.
P330 has more or less got the right idea. I would feel a lot better if Peel was able to say "OK we're not really a passenger airport anymore but we are now going to make the aircraft movements go through the roof in other areas".
Losing the flights is one thing, I just hope we remain in a position to take them back some day. A number of suits have been seen in the terminal over the last few days with tape measures so I would expect a resurrection of the 'split terminal' concept.
In any event, the airport still has a future even IF Peel didn't want it to have one - it simply cannot be closed, even Peel themselves admit that much!!
FoDTVA knew exactly what they were getting into, they're not stupid people, if they didn't like the terms of their agreement with the airport or felt they were in any way being conned, they would shut up shop without a seconds hesitation.
P330 has more or less got the right idea. I would feel a lot better if Peel was able to say "OK we're not really a passenger airport anymore but we are now going to make the aircraft movements go through the roof in other areas".
Losing the flights is one thing, I just hope we remain in a position to take them back some day. A number of suits have been seen in the terminal over the last few days with tape measures so I would expect a resurrection of the 'split terminal' concept.
In any event, the airport still has a future even IF Peel didn't want it to have one - it simply cannot be closed, even Peel themselves admit that much!!
Yes, were TOM pushed or did they jump? Maybe Peel were courting TOM as we had been led to believe and then got wind that TOM were actually pulling out and decided to dress that up as a strategy ("Oh charter was never really the future and we can save money by not serving them...") or put it another way "I haven't been dumped, I dumped her first!".
I'm a bit baffled though as to where the savings are - you still need a terminal for AMS and ABZ, and the flights aren't that far apart that you can shut up shop for large parts of the day. And while there probably wasn't a load of money in two flights a week, symbolically it sends out the message that you aren't open for business.
Ah well, all will be revealed in the master plan...
I'm a bit baffled though as to where the savings are - you still need a terminal for AMS and ABZ, and the flights aren't that far apart that you can shut up shop for large parts of the day. And while there probably wasn't a load of money in two flights a week, symbolically it sends out the message that you aren't open for business.
Ah well, all will be revealed in the master plan...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry this getting silly now. It's over.
Management appears to be saying they can't deal with IT business at a profit, this is a loud,clear and seemingly intentional message to the market signalling that even if you want to come here, we don't really want you. KLM won't lose anything by dropping MME as the exisiting traffic will use KLM at NCL or even LBA.
The exisiting owners have a plan, never mind what they're saying, it's clear what they are doing. Teesside as it is now, isn't commercially viable and couldn't be sold as a going concern for any price Peel would accept. It's the next Coventry, who can honestly see passenger operations much beyond next summer?
Head over heart? This is a painful thread to read as there's no one to help like the Scottish or Welsh governments, though mainly because MME lacks strategic value sadly in a way PIK and CWL do not.
Management appears to be saying they can't deal with IT business at a profit, this is a loud,clear and seemingly intentional message to the market signalling that even if you want to come here, we don't really want you. KLM won't lose anything by dropping MME as the exisiting traffic will use KLM at NCL or even LBA.
The exisiting owners have a plan, never mind what they're saying, it's clear what they are doing. Teesside as it is now, isn't commercially viable and couldn't be sold as a going concern for any price Peel would accept. It's the next Coventry, who can honestly see passenger operations much beyond next summer?
Head over heart? This is a painful thread to read as there's no one to help like the Scottish or Welsh governments, though mainly because MME lacks strategic value sadly in a way PIK and CWL do not.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like that Balkan Holidays is to pull the plug on their MME flights soon.
Only 3 departures confirmed for the S14 so far.
Newmarket Air Holidays have confirmed just ONE flight to Verona.
That would mean MME will be left with almost no charter flights at all.
S14 will see just a couple of scheduled flights to AMS and ABZ plus the weekly Jersey.
Only 3 departures confirmed for the S14 so far.
Newmarket Air Holidays have confirmed just ONE flight to Verona.
That would mean MME will be left with almost no charter flights at all.
S14 will see just a couple of scheduled flights to AMS and ABZ plus the weekly Jersey.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dubai and Sunderland
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like Peel want to get rid of more fireman or pax's totally!! Could be turned into 'industrial' type airport with fire cover when if required!!
Last one out..........
Last one out..........
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contradiction
The latest echo piece is interesting.
It appears to confirm that Thomson were pushed. That being the case, it would seem certain that the one-off charters, Jersey and Balkan will follow suit.
There appears a contradiction with the councillor who says the punters should have used them or risk losing them, as it seems Thomson would have been quite happy to continue. So, to blame the public in this case doesn't seem entirely fair.
Whilst I generally refrain from "bashing", I have to say I'm shocked the owners are letting all the negativity and comment come out first. Surely, in a major announcement like this, you would expect them to get on the front foot - tell the public what is happening and at least "try" and show there is a sense of purpose and direction to the plans, however difficult the message is. Instead, the public are fed rumours, snippets and the truth via the back door with nothing other than a "watch this space" from the owners. I am a Director in business and this is not the way you treat customers.
Interesting to see what the plans will be!
It appears to confirm that Thomson were pushed. That being the case, it would seem certain that the one-off charters, Jersey and Balkan will follow suit.
There appears a contradiction with the councillor who says the punters should have used them or risk losing them, as it seems Thomson would have been quite happy to continue. So, to blame the public in this case doesn't seem entirely fair.
Whilst I generally refrain from "bashing", I have to say I'm shocked the owners are letting all the negativity and comment come out first. Surely, in a major announcement like this, you would expect them to get on the front foot - tell the public what is happening and at least "try" and show there is a sense of purpose and direction to the plans, however difficult the message is. Instead, the public are fed rumours, snippets and the truth via the back door with nothing other than a "watch this space" from the owners. I am a Director in business and this is not the way you treat customers.
Interesting to see what the plans will be!
