Peel to buy MAN?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peel to buy MAN?
I heard a rumour yesterday that Peel Hodings PLC are in negotiations with Manchester city officials with a view to Peel buying, or taking a majority stake, in Manchester Airport. My informant said that if Peel is succesful then Sheffield will be closed and plans for Doncaster airport will be shelved and the land turned to other uses (light industry and distribution facilities).
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Bermuda Shorts and Cessna Caravans
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Off the top of my head......
As an asset shared by all the metropolitan councils of Greater Manchester, it is laid down in legislature that the airport cannot be sold either in part or wholly. Any sale would involve a change in the law and would also have to be put to the whole electorate of the holding councils.
160
As an asset shared by all the metropolitan councils of Greater Manchester, it is laid down in legislature that the airport cannot be sold either in part or wholly. Any sale would involve a change in the law and would also have to be put to the whole electorate of the holding councils.
160
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't shed any light on the rumour, but a couple of thoughts on the matter:
1) todays confirmation of the Easy / GO deal will have undoubtedly made the guys at Peel somewhat less enthusiastic about Finningley. Easy were the main proponent of the development and their existing relationship with Peel at LPL was believed to make them a strong favourite to get services off the ground in South Yorks. As of today Easy have a base down the road at EMA and it must be extremely unlikely that they will consider Finningley as a base if/when it opens.
2) ..I'm therefore not surprised that Peel might be considering an alternative to Finningley, but MAN seems unlikely. The whole business model at LPL has been designed to steal pax away from the full service guys at MAN. On the routes launched so far, particularly AMS & BFS, it has worked. Whilst there are examples in other businesses of subsideries competing with each other, the prospect of Peel owning both MAN and LPL just doesn't seem to fit. Peel could sell LPL of course, but would do so in the knowledge that as of today they would leave behind Europe's largest low-cost airline operating there, who are signed up to a long-term committment for future route development.
682
1) todays confirmation of the Easy / GO deal will have undoubtedly made the guys at Peel somewhat less enthusiastic about Finningley. Easy were the main proponent of the development and their existing relationship with Peel at LPL was believed to make them a strong favourite to get services off the ground in South Yorks. As of today Easy have a base down the road at EMA and it must be extremely unlikely that they will consider Finningley as a base if/when it opens.
2) ..I'm therefore not surprised that Peel might be considering an alternative to Finningley, but MAN seems unlikely. The whole business model at LPL has been designed to steal pax away from the full service guys at MAN. On the routes launched so far, particularly AMS & BFS, it has worked. Whilst there are examples in other businesses of subsideries competing with each other, the prospect of Peel owning both MAN and LPL just doesn't seem to fit. Peel could sell LPL of course, but would do so in the knowledge that as of today they would leave behind Europe's largest low-cost airline operating there, who are signed up to a long-term committment for future route development.
682
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Leeds
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point and as I say, there are plenty of examples in other businesses owning competing subsidiaries (HBOS and 'IF' in banking for example). Compared to say LHR and STN though, there seems to be a stronger correlation between the growth of a low-cost route and the reduction in the full-service equivalent at LPL/MAN. If this is true, management of both would be tricky given that most of MAN's traffic is fair game for the low-cost boys - e.g short-haul european scheduled and charter flights and domestic services. Not impossible though.
682
682
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Bermuda Shorts and Cessna Caravans
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It'll never happen for the reasons already stated.
It would also be political suicide; airport profits have contributed towards subsidising the Council Tax of Greater Manchester's electorate for years.
160
It would also be political suicide; airport profits have contributed towards subsidising the Council Tax of Greater Manchester's electorate for years.
160
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Age: 44
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feel sorry for MAN then
As long as Peel don't find ways to screw the city of Manchester like they did to Sheffielders like me. We're trying to attract business here, having a mile-long lump of disused concrete in addition to the miles of disused factories and warehouses has hardly helped the cause. If Finningley dies a death (and I always reckoned it would) I hope Peel have the decency to offload Sheffield airport to someone who might actually make it viable.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North West, UK
Age: 56
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since they have just bought the land that Barton is sat on,
could they consider developing that into Manchester's 2nd Airport.
That would make a few people happy.
could they consider developing that into Manchester's 2nd Airport.
That would make a few people happy.
Not Manchester
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Salford
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A-HAAA!!
Barton WAS the site of the original Manchester Municipal Airport.
The poorly-drained site was unsuitable for the construction of runways, so an alternate site was chosen. The rest is history.
Nowadays, the close proximity of power cables and a b****y great bridge carrying the M60 across the Manchester Ship Canal reduce it's suitability even further.
Barton WAS the site of the original Manchester Municipal Airport.
The poorly-drained site was unsuitable for the construction of runways, so an alternate site was chosen. The rest is history.
Nowadays, the close proximity of power cables and a b****y great bridge carrying the M60 across the Manchester Ship Canal reduce it's suitability even further.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: manchester
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it seems the rumour started with the purchase by Peel of Barton which was mistaken for Manchester. I doubt they could ever afford Manchester anyway as it would cost a hundred x's more than Liverpool or Finningley. Manchester's own expression of interest into Finningley said F would grow to 6million pax and not affect Manchester-they only dropped the idea to focus on R2.
682 - The strongest supporter of Finningley was Ryanair ,and in any case easyjet went on record saying it was the only Yorkshire opportunity, so EMA's growth may concern any airport but its only the delay that will concern Peel. All the charter operators said at the inquiry that Finningley is a different catchment area - there will be some overlap but its marginal.
frb - Peel bought 50% of SZD in August 2001 - the existing owners said without Peel's investment they would have closed SZD by XMas 2001 as only BRAL jetstream to BFS and Aer Arann Dublin was left. AA left after 9.11 and BRAL said they had no long term future - i don't think you can blame Peel for SZD's limited runway length which restricts 95% of the world's commercial aircraft fleet. Once the old SZD management lost KLM and SN there was no way back - once bitten twice shy for those airlines. Peel ought to get the 1 engine restriction lifted and get more focussed on GA and the heliport.
682 - The strongest supporter of Finningley was Ryanair ,and in any case easyjet went on record saying it was the only Yorkshire opportunity, so EMA's growth may concern any airport but its only the delay that will concern Peel. All the charter operators said at the inquiry that Finningley is a different catchment area - there will be some overlap but its marginal.
frb - Peel bought 50% of SZD in August 2001 - the existing owners said without Peel's investment they would have closed SZD by XMas 2001 as only BRAL jetstream to BFS and Aer Arann Dublin was left. AA left after 9.11 and BRAL said they had no long term future - i don't think you can blame Peel for SZD's limited runway length which restricts 95% of the world's commercial aircraft fleet. Once the old SZD management lost KLM and SN there was no way back - once bitten twice shy for those airlines. Peel ought to get the 1 engine restriction lifted and get more focussed on GA and the heliport.
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My spies tell me that management at Manchester keep a close eye on pprune, allegedly other NATS bods there have had there ears whispered into over posting the truth
As for Chiglet, well, you know the big dungeon below terminal 2 equipped with wall chains and big rats, he's got cell 3 and is chained upside down......... bleeding jailers pet.......
As for Chiglet, well, you know the big dungeon below terminal 2 equipped with wall chains and big rats, he's got cell 3 and is chained upside down......... bleeding jailers pet.......
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Onan [AOG-YYZ's mirror image for those who don't know]
Still getting a dig in at that 'vile' city down the road, eh?
Study this basic equation:-
Manchester Ship Canal Company = Manchester City Council
Manchester Ship Canal Company is 49% of Peel Holdings, a
Manchester company specializing in commercial developments.
[It has to be 49% for legal reasons which will take too long to explain].
This means, near as damit, [given a few shares here and there,
a nod and a wink], it's all one and the same. Think 'Peel' think 'Manchester'.
Now tell me who owns Liverpool Airport?
Still getting a dig in at that 'vile' city down the road, eh?
Study this basic equation:-
Manchester Ship Canal Company = Manchester City Council
Manchester Ship Canal Company is 49% of Peel Holdings, a
Manchester company specializing in commercial developments.
[It has to be 49% for legal reasons which will take too long to explain].
This means, near as damit, [given a few shares here and there,
a nod and a wink], it's all one and the same. Think 'Peel' think 'Manchester'.
Now tell me who owns Liverpool Airport?
Not Manchester
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Salford
Posts: 506
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope, to me he'll always be Onan.
No mention at all on Peel Holdings' website. Strange, considering what a coup it would be, and given Peel's usual impeccable sense in the area of publicity.
No mention at all on Peel Holdings' website. Strange, considering what a coup it would be, and given Peel's usual impeccable sense in the area of publicity.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rockwell,
Not quite correct.
Peel now holds 100% stake in Manchester Ship Canal Company and has done so since 1991.
Peel have asked to buy out the remaining 24% share of the local councils interest in Liverpool Airport. I am not sure if this has gone through all the legal channels yet.
Not quite correct.
Peel now holds 100% stake in Manchester Ship Canal Company and has done so since 1991.
Peel have asked to buy out the remaining 24% share of the local councils interest in Liverpool Airport. I am not sure if this has gone through all the legal channels yet.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: manchester
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rockwell, i think your formula is flawed - remember the Trafford Centre that Peel own was fought against by Manchester City Council for years and dwlpl appears right its 100% not 49%. DWLPL - According to companies house Peel have owned 100% of Liverpool JL for over a year.