DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5
I think that Steve Gibson has more sense than to buy a pup.
Seriously though, there seems to be an awful lot of 'community leaders' banging on about how vital DTVA is who seem quite happy for somebody else take the hit in the pocket as there aren't any suggestions as to how it can make any money!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Onion
This isn't going to happen!!, as in reality what is there to be achieved, throwing ever more money to reach the conclusion that Peel were inept in running an airport, whether through their Airports subsidiary, or simply in appointing / endorsing those that held the senior management positions at DTV on acquisition?
From what I can see there has not been any misappropriation of public funds, it is not an offence for a company on acquiring another to review all assets and liabilities, and following this revise future planning. So long as the funds were used for a relevant purpose, such as in your explanation that funds for hangar repairs were used for alternate essential site maintenance purposes.
However if you are suggesting that such activities were in effect paid for twice by the injection of public funds (unlikely!), or that subsequent public funds simply disappeared (even more unlikely!!) then you should consider your options, otherwise it is simply best, however difficult, to try and accept that those trusted with the job of running MME/DTV over the years were simply inept and at times clueless.
There has clearly been much rhetoric emanating from all sides over the years as to what has been expended on DTV, maybe it would be appropriate to run through the various statements dealing with £x million that was to be spent on whatever. No doubt you will find that what actually was spent (altogether completely different!) is completely accounted for.
There is a chain of thought that irrespective as to how ever large a sum of money was made available, it would never have been sufficient
To be honest I want to see a Public Enquiry on the airport
From what I can see there has not been any misappropriation of public funds, it is not an offence for a company on acquiring another to review all assets and liabilities, and following this revise future planning. So long as the funds were used for a relevant purpose, such as in your explanation that funds for hangar repairs were used for alternate essential site maintenance purposes.
However if you are suggesting that such activities were in effect paid for twice by the injection of public funds (unlikely!), or that subsequent public funds simply disappeared (even more unlikely!!) then you should consider your options, otherwise it is simply best, however difficult, to try and accept that those trusted with the job of running MME/DTV over the years were simply inept and at times clueless.
There has clearly been much rhetoric emanating from all sides over the years as to what has been expended on DTV, maybe it would be appropriate to run through the various statements dealing with £x million that was to be spent on whatever. No doubt you will find that what actually was spent (altogether completely different!) is completely accounted for.
There is a chain of thought that irrespective as to how ever large a sum of money was made available, it would never have been sufficient
could it be that the owners just wanted to run it into the ground, and so build on it when nobody wanted the pup?
I bet if they were offered a very good rate they would be falling over themselves to locate to MME.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just maybe....turning DTV into a General Aviation airfield would be a viable option for some company. With NCL and LBA in such close proximity, attracting any meaningful scheduled operations will always prove difficult. Military and charter operations could remain so long as the technical operating criteria are maintained.
Lets hope the solution is realised early in 2012.
Lets hope the solution is realised early in 2012.
Restricted Opening
Noticed over the Xmas period and up to today the airport has had restricted hours of opening. Cost wise this may be the way to go? Spread the staffing out while retaing a hard core of suitably qualified until the up turn comes?
It must be more cost effective than long hours with nothing happening at all?
just a thought
It must be more cost effective than long hours with nothing happening at all?
just a thought
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
I wish people would see the bigger picture, based on the long-term trends. It's not that long ago that the vast majority of airports in the UK were owned either by local authorities, or the Board of Trade, or the state-owned British Airports Authority. The reason airports were owned by those bodies is that it was recognised that (a) these facilities are public infrastructure assets, whose continued operation is essential to the local/regional/national economy and society, and (b) private capital is not an appropriate vehicle for owning/operating airports because they will look for returns which are unlikely to be reliably delivered and will cut costs and restrict investment in order to meet their profit requirements. DTVA is relatively unusual in still having an (albeit reduced) local authority stake. But local authorities have no money, will have even less in future, and simply cannot afford to support high-maintenance assets such as airports.
The net result is, surely, that because there is no public sector support left for airports, if they're "not big enough to succeed", then they will fail.
If you don't agree with the way things have developed, then you should be supporting a big shift back from private to public resources. It's all down to public imagination and will.
NS
The net result is, surely, that because there is no public sector support left for airports, if they're "not big enough to succeed", then they will fail.
If you don't agree with the way things have developed, then you should be supporting a big shift back from private to public resources. It's all down to public imagination and will.
NS
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure what will happen in terms of passenger services from DTVA, I do believe demand does exist, but my understanding is all interested parties in negotiations with Peel want the airport for some form of engineering.
I would imagine we'll hear something as early as this week now the hols are over, I have it on good authority a deal is quite close.
I would imagine we'll hear something as early as this week now the hols are over, I have it on good authority a deal is quite close.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Teesside
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not returning but returned!!!!!! Oh ye of little faith. The end of April/beginning of May could be interesting. It really depends on who wins the auction. Too late for the summer season but just in time for the Winter programme I would hope.
Interesting and exciting times ahead I would suggest.
Interesting and exciting times ahead I would suggest.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: England, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notice only five Falcons returned, I understand this is permanent as both DTVA and Bournemouth have each lost an aircraft due partly to government cuts.
Might be wrong but 80% sure.
Might be wrong but 80% sure.
NorthSouth - you make a good point about public versus private ownership of infrastructure assets. However demographics change - e.g. local Govt sometimes having to close schools and health facilities because of local population change - either decline or perhaps because of an population whose average age changes. Air transport only really became available to the masses about 30 years ago, so we have seen very few closures in the past. Why are the fortunes of MME any different from other local social infrastructure ?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
I agree, they're not. And the Middlesbrough area has suffered especially badly in the last few years in terms of plant closures etc. Public spending cuts on top of that makes the situation particularly bleak.
NS
NS
Airport ‘must rid itself of passenger burden’
Open Letter from Private Aircraft Owners Ltd:
Durham Tees Valley Airport (From The Northern Echo)
Story from Northern Echo - including comment from Cobhams:
Durham Tees Valley Airport
Durham Tees Valley Airport (From The Northern Echo)
Story from Northern Echo - including comment from Cobhams:
Durham Tees Valley Airport
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paarmo
What you really should be saying is "Oh ye of little business knowledge", as with most arrangements then contracts are entered into which amongst many other clauses & conditions have those dealing specifically with cancellation & periods of notice. This is even before condidering those employed by Cobham.
I for one didn't even think that those who suggested/claimed that the company had upped sticks & moved on, deserved a response !!
In reality the situation is probably in reverse, Cobhams have a strong desire to retain an oprating base at DTV, and are looking to assurances that the contract that they have entered into with Peel can be fulfilled. Otherwise the commercial view is that in a closure of DTV, they would be looking into their contract to see as to what compensation they could seek from Peel +/or any new owner!!
Not returning but returned!!!!!! Oh ye of little faith.
I for one didn't even think that those who suggested/claimed that the company had upped sticks & moved on, deserved a response !!
In reality the situation is probably in reverse, Cobhams have a strong desire to retain an oprating base at DTV, and are looking to assurances that the contract that they have entered into with Peel can be fulfilled. Otherwise the commercial view is that in a closure of DTV, they would be looking into their contract to see as to what compensation they could seek from Peel +/or any new owner!!
My understanding is that the expensive bit is operating as an airport (i.e. available for public transport flights in large aircraft such as used by KLM) - I would imagine if somebody buys the field for maintenance purposes these are the costs they would look to eliminate.
Suppose the question is can MME provide what these types of operation want at a better price than you can get elsewhere (hangar space, skilled staff?)
Doubt whether the price Peel are asking will be in the public domain and if the Canadians referred to are Vancouver - see my post 1525
Suppose the question is can MME provide what these types of operation want at a better price than you can get elsewhere (hangar space, skilled staff?)
Doubt whether the price Peel are asking will be in the public domain and if the Canadians referred to are Vancouver - see my post 1525
Just to clarify the position with Vancouver Airport Services - they bought a 65 per cent share in Peel Airports Limited, with the Peel Group retaining a 35 per cent share in Peel Airports Limited and a presence on the board.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Hartlepool
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peel - vancouver
Thanks SWBKCB, it appears to have been sliced and diced doesnt it!
Its like a spiders web of shares. Re the vancouver lot (canadians), are they selling their pile of shares as well? as they havent said much about what they intend to do?
It looks to me as though Peel have already gained from the sale of the majority of their shares to Vancouver, and are now trying to off load the rest after realising the shopping centre would never happen.
How much did Peel get from the sale of the shares to Vancouver, (wasnt it last year?) and who now owns the south side if it doesnt belong to the airport which someone mentioned?
I would be suprised if anybody would want to share DTV with more than one partner. Its not looking good is it
The councils should just make a compulsory purchase order on the place and buy the lot back for the £500k which Peel paid and take back the south side which appears to have been given away!
The BMI compensation money should go to supporting the airport further, and send Peel packing.
Maybe the press can get a quote off Vancouver as to what they intend to do??
Its like a spiders web of shares. Re the vancouver lot (canadians), are they selling their pile of shares as well? as they havent said much about what they intend to do?
It looks to me as though Peel have already gained from the sale of the majority of their shares to Vancouver, and are now trying to off load the rest after realising the shopping centre would never happen.
How much did Peel get from the sale of the shares to Vancouver, (wasnt it last year?) and who now owns the south side if it doesnt belong to the airport which someone mentioned?
I would be suprised if anybody would want to share DTV with more than one partner. Its not looking good is it
The councils should just make a compulsory purchase order on the place and buy the lot back for the £500k which Peel paid and take back the south side which appears to have been given away!
The BMI compensation money should go to supporting the airport further, and send Peel packing.
Maybe the press can get a quote off Vancouver as to what they intend to do??
Last edited by Northbound A1; 20th Jan 2012 at 19:50.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: London
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think the local Authorities would get the BMI money, depends entirely on which entity brought the legal action, I think it was probably Peel.
In these straightened financial times, would the Council or the majority of Council Tax payers want the Council to spend money on what is often viewed as a "white elephant"?
I might be wrong of course.
In these straightened financial times, would the Council or the majority of Council Tax payers want the Council to spend money on what is often viewed as a "white elephant"?
I might be wrong of course.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Teesside, UK
Age: 34
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which bit don't people get about Peel Airports??
Peel Airports Ltd own 75% of DTVA. Peel Airports Ltd is owned 65% by Vancouver Airport Services and 35% by Peel Holdings.
Peel Airports Ltd own 75% of DTVA. Peel Airports Ltd is owned 65% by Vancouver Airport Services and 35% by Peel Holdings.