What the airport could and should offer are items which have notional value but in actual fact cost either very little or in fact nothing at all. Free parking for passengers and crew.Free parking for idle or repositioning aircraft and free landing fees for them. All of course linked to the number of flights from the airport over the year.
After all it costs the same to have 20 cars in a carpark as it does to have 500 and there are at least 10 stands empty at all times to park aircraft.
Notional values are absolute c**p but can be used to entice any company to the airport.
On past form ,however , Peel would probably give the notional value items away without any contracted undertakings by airlines.
Anyone on the minimum wage should be sacked immediately to save money to pay the senior management.

That could be a good idea paarmo, offering people who book with the new airline or the current airlines for that matter free parking with their booking, or if they didnt want to go that far they could offer 50% of parking with their booking.

Free parking! Its the main income at the moment. Security go round and count the cars every day so that will not be happening.

And don't think the fence and gate between the hangars and terminal is totally for security, well its not. The Spar Hotel started a car park were you could walk to the terminal so the managment erected the fence so that your journey became almost a mile, so free parking no.

A deal between the Peel airports and airlines must be possible.

And finally they might be going to say no to diverts:ugh:watch this space.

This is the chicken and egg situation. If you don't have any flights you don't have any car parking.
From previous costings on similar contracts I could make a substantial profit on the car park by charging £150,000 a year for full security 24hrs a day 7 days a week with a checking supervisor as all of the infrastructure in place.
This will be recouped with 84 cars per week on full parking fees.
All I need are the flights to fill these spaces and I have a villa in the Canaries to retreat to during the poxy English Winter.
I could do it for half the price if I didn't want the villa and merely a decent return.
Parking is the new money printing scam.

I have reason to believe HUY's biggest revenue earner is car parking... I would assume its the same at DTV... Free parking=no revenue

Oh well just booked my next break in Paris my last post last week it was my trip back from NCL, this time its down the road to LBA, again wonder if any others will be on that flight to Paris who have to endure the trip south down A19 due to the pathetic offering from our local airport?

Ryanair will stop flying to Dublin from July 09

Great ideas in principle but little thought as to the overall business model !
Maybe a reduction in car parking may entice more pax, but this really is a total upside down way of addressing the problem.
Absolutely !:D
One needs flights to attract the pax in the first instance, at this moment airlines are not reflecting a favourable attitude to DTV and free car parking ain't going to impress them, nor I suspect is free aircraft parking, landing fees or even free refreshments for the crew;) if the perception is that they are unable to fill their aircraft with pax who are to pay for seats at a price that enables them to make an operating profit ! Do you note these words guys?, because all this talk of free & subsidised airport amenities & services only works when you are dealing in volume. Falling numbers of pax at DTV & few services, then the only pax you are going to attract (assuming that there is an appropriate destination on offer) are at the lower end & these individuals provide little contribution to revenues. To add one further point, then there is little scope for an airline to put flights into DTV and obtain decent seat revenues when the perception from the residents is that cheap travel is available either "up" or "down" the road.
As a note yesterday I was speaking with a Stockton resident who felt more than compensated in a lack of a local flight to the Greek islands by the deal he & his family had been offered at LBA. Now that to me says it all.:ugh:

Lots of coverage in local media about Ryanair's decision.
In the local paper "Mike O'Donovan aviation consultant" (no me neither) stated that the airport's quest for 3million passengers by 2015 was achievable. (I am not sure whether he meant in total by then or 3 million per year.)
Kerry Quinn was on the local news and if she was wearing the same blouse at the job interview I can understand how she got the job. It certainly dosen't seem like it was business acumen. I don't think she said anything at all although her mouth opened and closed and noise came out.
It was interesting that the quote used in the local paper came from someone at Peel and not at the airport. First time that has happened.

I disagree not everyone is out for a totally bargain bucket deal, many myself included are willing and able to pay a bit more for a better time of flight and the convenience of traveling from an airport on the doorstep.
Even the total bargain merchants put a price on the fuel getting to an airport further away and most will stump up a few extra quid not to have to leave the house at 3.00 in the morning for a 7.00am flight from Manchester.
Myself my next trip to Paris is costing three times the price of what I could have paid Ryanair from East Midlands, but the airport was further way, we would have less convenient flight times and at the other end I would not have been at Charles De Gaulle but at an airport with no TGV service to connect to.
No I did not like paying three times as much as the dirt cheap Ryaniair price, but I considered it to be worth it.

Is it just me or is the ryanair pull out out of the blue?!! However, as with the bmi pull out, we must remember MME is not the only airport to be affected (DSA being the closest affected) and as someone has already said we still are level with HUY re routes. I guess this has confirmed us as a true 'first division' airport rather than an apsiring premiership one to use the football analogy.

I just hope T3 and KL don't announce any cuts. Can anyone confirm this summer's charter routes?

The summer charter routes are (I believe)...

Balkan Hols: Bourgas (Balkan Hols)
Goldtrail: Bodrum (Onur), Dalaman (Onur)
Holidays4u: Dalaman (Onur)
Thomas Cook: Palma (bmi), Reus (Thomas Cook)
Thomson: Palma (Tfly)

Next winter is going to be very sparse with a grand total of 3 routes to Aberdeen, Alicante and Amsterdam :ugh:

On BBC Look North, DTVA looking to get £12M from BMI for breaking 10 year agreement.. and after they changed the name of the airport specially at BMI Babys request...:rolleyes:

£12m settlement from bmi/bmibaby
 

I'm sure this money will not be heading DTV's way and instead be diluted into Peel's other ventures or keep them in the black.

Does this mean we can call it TEESSIDE AIRPORT again?

Name change
 

I really do not see that Teesside Airport would be any more successful than DTV-after all the airport is in the same location so is Teesside in everything but name and that would not bring more people onto these routes or they wouldn't have changed it in the first place!I remember bmi, Ryanair and KLM all commented favourably when the name change was first mooted.

I see from the summer routes this says a lot about where most Teessiders are heading i.e. where the euro is not in circulation.

Reverting back to Teesside would be suicide purely because the residents of the North East would become even more confused than they are now.

Just travelled up the A1 and followed the signs for Teesside Airport.
On holiday in Spain and the Canaries both airports called flights for Tees-side(sic) airports. A174 at Eston signs Teesside Airport. What is suicidal about calling an airport what other people call it?
Naming it after a city which is exactly equidistant between it and Newcastle Airport obviously hasn't worked.
It can't be any worse and it may even generate some positive publicity for a change.

Yea, you've got a point - I take it back.

One could argue that rebranding MME was too costly, but if MME wants to receive traffic from people who reside outside the UK, it needs to be named after a geographical location that is well known.

Most non-Italians who see an advertisment for a cheap flight to 'Orio al Serio' will have no idea where it is and ignore the advertisement. Change the name to Milan-Bergamo and people start to take notice

In my humble opinion, EMA should be named after Nottingham or maybe Leicester. 'East Midlands' is a bland PC name that conveys little or nothing to people not living in or from the UK. It's almost a way of saying 'this is an airport only for English residents'

Durham may not accurately reflect the airport's location, but both name recognition and the city's inclusion in travel guidebooks do at least help market the airport to visitors. The money on rebranding has already been spent - MME needs to make use of the assets it currently has.