Teesside-2
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: North Yorkshire
Age: 35
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"there would be NO MME by now"
Peel had a comprehensive funded plan to develop the airport that you can find on the Movements site and fortunately the mayor adopted most of their plan. The close the airport and build houses was a political invention to justify the masive investment of tax payers money and still gets churned out.
Peel had a comprehensive funded plan to develop the airport that you can find on the Movements site and fortunately the mayor adopted most of their plan. The close the airport and build houses was a political invention to justify the masive investment of tax payers money and still gets churned out.
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of ifs, buts and maybes. If the councils had not sold the airport off to Peel on the cheap, if Peel had invested in the mid-late 90s, if Peel had implemented their masterplan etc etc.
The fact is that we are where we are today as the residents of the Tees Valley elected a mayor who had a clear mandate to acquire the airport which has led to the current ownership structure. We have a nicely refurbished terminal, some good bucket & spade flights and progress with cargo & movements. However, at the same time the ABZ link is not what it was, the LHR flights didn't succeed and we have a £2.50 drop off charge for the car park. Teesside is a tertiary UK airport operating in a world where airlines are reluctant to pay big money to land their planes - therefore the airport needs to generate significant income directly from passengers (car parking, lounges, retail) as well as the cargo ops, general aviation and site development.
If people don't like that, then let's see what is on offer at next year's election. Maybe one candidate will commit to a triple daily MME-JFK, whilst another might say close the airport altogether - it's in the gift of the electorate.
The fact is that we are where we are today as the residents of the Tees Valley elected a mayor who had a clear mandate to acquire the airport which has led to the current ownership structure. We have a nicely refurbished terminal, some good bucket & spade flights and progress with cargo & movements. However, at the same time the ABZ link is not what it was, the LHR flights didn't succeed and we have a £2.50 drop off charge for the car park. Teesside is a tertiary UK airport operating in a world where airlines are reluctant to pay big money to land their planes - therefore the airport needs to generate significant income directly from passengers (car parking, lounges, retail) as well as the cargo ops, general aviation and site development.
If people don't like that, then let's see what is on offer at next year's election. Maybe one candidate will commit to a triple daily MME-JFK, whilst another might say close the airport altogether - it's in the gift of the electorate.
Last edited by tigertanaka; 31st Jul 2023 at 11:24.
If the councils had not sold the airport off to Peel on the cheap
who had a clear mandate to acquire the airport which has led to the current ownership structure.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Teesside
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was sold on the cheap. In April 2002 75% stake was sold to Peel for £500k, when land value was £40m. Then in 2012 14% more was gifted to Peel by the Councils. Taking Peels shareholding to 89% & 11% 6 Councils.
£500k split between 6 Councils. Didn't give each Councils much money.
£500k split between 6 Councils. Didn't give each Councils much money.
Ah yes - a politicians promise
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North East
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Southside is around 270 acres arable land is what,about £8k and acre! Lest be really conservative and say its worth £2k and acre! That's £540k...... please tell me how you believe that the whole site being given away for roughly £500k is not 'on the cheap'.
Let's not even look at the figure that Peel were quoting for the North side housing project.
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"At least the Mayor has said he would never sell the airport in the future"
Although he handed over 90% of the South Side in secret to his special friends.
The terms of the compulsory purchase during WW2 dictate what can be done with the land if it is no longer used for aviation which is another reason why the close the airport and build houses story is a myth.
Although he handed over 90% of the South Side in secret to his special friends.
The terms of the compulsory purchase during WW2 dictate what can be done with the land if it is no longer used for aviation which is another reason why the close the airport and build houses story is a myth.
It certainly wasn't worth £40m - and it was an airport requiring considerable inverstment being sold, not a farm. The sale was conditional on money being put in.
Same old stories regurgitate every day.
Truth is..as many have said in the past..use it or lose it!
£2.50 car parking charge means nothing! That’s not really a revenue generating idea..but will ..as been seen on here..might put the ‘floating voters’ off!
Middle of summer season sees two schedules today.
Unless the ancillary business really starts to kick in..who knows what will happen?
A long term profit seems a long way off?
I’m sure the mayor will have some fantastic spin soon….
Truth is..as many have said in the past..use it or lose it!
£2.50 car parking charge means nothing! That’s not really a revenue generating idea..but will ..as been seen on here..might put the ‘floating voters’ off!
Middle of summer season sees two schedules today.
Unless the ancillary business really starts to kick in..who knows what will happen?
A long term profit seems a long way off?
I’m sure the mayor will have some fantastic spin soon….
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North East
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly you lot are really laughable.
Firstly a compulsory purchase criteria can be over turned/amended. Also would you care to state what that order states?
Secondly can you show me definitive proof that he has handed 90% over to his friends? Shareholding etc?
Why don't/didn't you call out the labour councils when the airport was handed over for a pittance?
This suggest your motivation is political. That or an alligence to another airport in the area and you just hate to see progress at MME.
Peel valued it enough to not sell it back at £500k.
Yes it is a use it or lose it situation, but the airport is on the right track, its not all about passengers through the terminal. Never has been.
Firstly a compulsory purchase criteria can be over turned/amended. Also would you care to state what that order states?
Secondly can you show me definitive proof that he has handed 90% over to his friends? Shareholding etc?
Why don't/didn't you call out the labour councils when the airport was handed over for a pittance?
This suggest your motivation is political. That or an alligence to another airport in the area and you just hate to see progress at MME.
Peel valued it enough to not sell it back at £500k.
Yes it is a use it or lose it situation, but the airport is on the right track, its not all about passengers through the terminal. Never has been.
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Onion demands proof of ownership in respect of the South Side. Thought this was resolved in April when it was established that:
"The South Side is owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED which is owned by the airport and a company called TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED, which is owned by Martin Trevor CORNEY and Joseph Christopher MUSGRAVE" In other threads it was shown that the airport and thus the taxpayer retains only a 10% share.
No doubt Onion will point us to the transparent public process inwhich the transfer of assets only occurred after an open tendering process.
Quote
"The South Side is owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED which is owned by the airport and a company called TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED, which is owned by Martin Trevor CORNEY and Joseph Christopher MUSGRAVE" In other threads it was shown that the airport and thus the taxpayer retains only a 10% share.
No doubt Onion will point us to the transparent public process inwhich the transfer of assets only occurred after an open tendering process.
Quote
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North East
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Onion demands proof of ownership in respect of the South Side. Thought this was resolved in April when it was established that:
"The South Side is owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED which is owned by the airport and a company called TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED, which is owned by Martin Trevor CORNEY and Joseph Christopher MUSGRAVE" In other threads it was shown that the airport and thus the taxpayer retains only a 10% share.
No doubt Onion will point us to the transparent public process inwhich the transfer of assets only occurred after an open tendering process.
Quote
"The South Side is owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED which is owned by the airport and a company called TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED, which is owned by Martin Trevor CORNEY and Joseph Christopher MUSGRAVE" In other threads it was shown that the airport and thus the taxpayer retains only a 10% share.
No doubt Onion will point us to the transparent public process inwhich the transfer of assets only occurred after an open tendering process.
Quote
TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED is first of all at last set of account dormant and secondly is 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED and 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED. Its clear on Companies House or are you now saying that information has been filed incorrectly?
In fact I have pointed the above out before. You still haven't been able to show your 90% ownership claim. Hence why i asked for the share holding!
I can't see from the companies house details TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED has had the land transfered to them or if they are just an operator of the business park!
I'm sure Grumpy you can provide the answer from you magic 🎩 to that one too!
Wrong.....
TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED is first of all at last set of account dormant and secondly is 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED and 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED. Its clear on Companies House or are you now saying that information has been filed incorrectly?
In fact I have pointed the above out before. You still haven't been able to show your 90% ownership claim. Hence why i asked for the share holding!
I can't see from the companies house details TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED has had the land transfered to them or if they are just an operator of the business park!
I'm sure Grumpy you can provide the answer from you magic 🎩 to that one too!
TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED is first of all at last set of account dormant and secondly is 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL LAND LIMITED and 50% owned by TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED. Its clear on Companies House or are you now saying that information has been filed incorrectly?
In fact I have pointed the above out before. You still haven't been able to show your 90% ownership claim. Hence why i asked for the share holding!
I can't see from the companies house details TEESSIDE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK LIMITED has had the land transfered to them or if they are just an operator of the business park!
I'm sure Grumpy you can provide the answer from you magic 🎩 to that one too!
https://find-and-update.company-info...mpany/13281287
….and why did Stobart/Esken disappear after only half of their agreed term?
It’s not like they’ve got anything to hide is it, otherwise why would you set up a charitable trust to avoid scrutiny of your accounts?
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks to Onion for his research and for confirming that a proportion of the South Side is indead no longer owned by the taxpayer. Not sure that only giving away 50% compared with 90% at the Teesworks makes that much different as it's the apparent secrecy of it all that is of concern and has of course resulted in the ongoing corruption enquiry. Assume that nobody has found any evidence of a public process before the deal was done.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North East
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks to Onion for his research and for confirming that a proportion of the South Side is indead no longer owned by the taxpayer. Not sure that only giving away 50% compared with 90% at the Teesworks makes that much different as it's the apparent secrecy of it all that is of concern and has of course resulted in the ongoing corruption enquiry. Assume that nobody has found any evidence of a public process before the deal was done.
I have no proof that a transfer of asset has taken place. There is a dormant company that is 50% split that may only be an operating vehicle for the business park and own nothing.
Your ignorance and stupidity is amazing.
Again if a transfer of asset has occurred in the accounts to the companies there will be the corresponding entries. Have you been able to find them?
I think I have proved beyond doubt that your ramblings are for the time being unfounded and quite frankly childish 'Chinese whispers'. I suggest you grow up and do some research. Before making outlandish claims..... just because you hide behind a keyboard doesnt make you immune from responsibility to do you checks correctly.