DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5

[Robert-Ryan]

It would also make sense for any interested parties to wait for Peel to put the facility into administration, then they could buy it for a £1 or some other stupid amount, thus getting it cheap and without the debt/liabilities etc.

I do believe a plan has been put together should no buyers come forward to keep the place minimally-operational.

[DTVAirport]

Rumour has it he's tried to buy it before.

[skyman771]

If in administration, all contracts incl. those of employment canx. Interested party could bid for assets / company wipe out existing debt & put plan to go forward employing essential workers wrt "new plan". This would have to make financial sense to backers i.e. banks etc, but would give new owner(s) full control of a facility supported by new capital.
Difficult for anyone connected with current entity to get formally involved in such a new arrangement, but there are ways & means that contol could again vest in a spin off company in future years.
Peel of course would gain substantial CTax relief on write off,s though obviously not ideal. Problem with Admin is that they potentially loose control of destiny of their previous asset. As ever loosers ore the good people of Teesside

[Northbound A1]

Peel finally speak up! £25m!!!!

Peel say they have spent £25m on DTV !!
Have they been digging tunnels, as I can't see what its been spent on

Owner of Durham Tees Valley Airport responds to council criticisms (From The Northern Echo)

[N707ZS]

25 million on?

They spent some money on the runway lights, sub stations and stop bars.

Prefab terminal front. New security gate and an office.

Anyone else.

[LGS6753]

'Investment' doesn't have to be capital.
A company can 'invest' in trading losses if they believe the business can pull through, make a profit and repay the losses. Perhaps this is what Peel are referring to.

[apaul]

That's also my assumption. The airport is losing £10,000 per day at present according to the headlines on today's Look North.

[Hipennine]

It would take nearly 7 years at £10000 per day to burn through £25m.
Presumably the quoted £10k per day is the current levels, and represents the worst position so far. One would assume that the other shareholders (the councils) would have access to more detailed information as to where exactly £25m has been spent (I glanced quickly at the last 5 years accounts, but can't see any evidence of that level of investment in any form (whether as capital or loss-support)).

[david.crosby]

question for you guys, Do you beleive an airline with UK domestic routes would do well at MME. Or would it be a waste of time`

[mccdatabase]

Other than a low cost service to ABZ which might break even (if lucky) you would be wasting both money and time, there is simply not the demand at MME any more, the glory days of the 5 flights a day to LHR are sadly long gone, poor management and marketing of the airport and lack of demand for business flights are to blame

[N707ZS]

David.crosby. If marketed and priced correctly yes.

[skyman771]

Peel say they have spent £25m on DTV !!

"Spent" as I have said incorporates subsidising losses. The company has spent very little in development projects in respect of improving airport facilities.
One needs to note that where Peel introduce figures then they need to be seen as "on paper" only. This is more than demonstrated that things were not as published when an impairment review resulted in them having to reduce the value of the assets of DTVA by some £17Million. Peels accounting policies have even less credibility when Robin Hood is also considered, where I believe they were forced to write off >£60 Million also in a corresponding impairment review
However one should consider :-

Alternatively, Peel Airports may try to buy back its shares from Vancouver Airport Services, putting it back in full control.

Now why would Peel be interested in such an action????

[LN-KGL]

I think you are all playing the blame game here. The reality is: passengers are missing at MME. Compared with the top year 2006 with 917,963 passengers, only 190,284 passengers flew in 2011 at Durham Tees Valley. That equals to only 20.7% of 2006 level.

A consolation can be that this is an east England problem - negative growth starts in the south at Stansted and ends in the north at Newcastle with the only exception being East Midlands (EMA).

Souce passenger numbers: UK CAA

[Hipennine]

Skyman,

I noticed the impairment review affects of the individual airport companies, but do you know why there was a corresponding increase in the assets of Peel Airports Ltd in the same year ?

[Northbound A1]

A point about Peel made on another thread

I noticed this point made about Peel on another airport thread.
Peel certainly know how to play the system.

EGCA mentions a few details on the Glocestershire Airport thread about what happened at Sheffield Airport:

Quote: "Eventually in around 2002 Peel Airports became involved, at about the time they were developing Doncaster/Finningley, some will say therefore that Peel had little incentive to develop EGSY.
There was also controvesy at the time regarding a 10-year reversionary clause in the original land sale agreement whereby the land could be bought back for a nominal £1 if the airport was shown not to be financially viable.
Anyway as they say, the rest is now history, and as far as I am aware the proposed business park on the site has not (yet) been built." End quote.

Its a case of dejavu with Peel and how they can run rings around local councils who own the various airports.

[andrewmcharlton]

but do you know why there was a corresponding increase in the assets of Peel Airports Ltd in the same year

If a debt was re-assigned within the group or it's subsidiaries an impairment on one means an asset (debt due to be paid) to another, nothing fishy about that.

Its a case of dejavu with Peel and how they can run rings around local councils who own the various airports.

What is it you think they might do with all this industrial land if ops came to an end? There are umpteen vacant sites and we're hardly in a time of plenty where the land has any premium value let alone a value.

[DTVAirport]

Not sure it would matter if they did have several options for the land should the airport close, I've been told in the past that these property developers tend to sit on it for years before doing anything.

[Northbound A1]

Other Peel sites

While browsing the other Peel airports such as Doncaster/Sheffield, Peel as a group do make interesting reading and seem to be looked on as having no interest in aviation so its not just DTV

Maybe with the magnifying glass of the press and MP's now firmly on them they will do the right thing and hand the DTV airport shares back?
That'll be the day

[andrewmcharlton]

Northbound, are you seriously suggesting Peel have for many years only deliberately tried to run the airport(s) into the ground in order to gain some land grab so that many years hence they might use them for development? They may be many things depending on your view but you seem to have an obsessive view of some big deception.

I assume someone at Peel was Cuban and sent Lee Harvey Oswald to Dallas as well....

[Northbound A1]

Are you suggesting Peel have links with america as well

Re the Peel Sheffield council contract which had a clause about what would happen if the airport was not viable, is the same ten year clause included in the Peel DTV contract?