As you can probably imagine, such comments get directed at me a lot, and it always makes me laugh because every time they apply equally as much to the persons saying them - so you first!

As for the brainwashing comment, let's just say we realised this was a possibility when we started the friends scheme and took steps to ensure we were immune to it. It would take a very good individual to brainwash a couple of the higher profile members.

Ah Highwideandugly, I had not considered the political aspect, obviously Cobham will be propping up the bill via the MOD as they have a quiet and free reign into the North Sea as and when required. It makes sense why the place is still open, and with Peel playing the long game for housing when Cobham pull out it makes even more sense. After all, how much is the bill for Air Traffic Services? Peel must be expecting a huge profit in the next decade, after all they have already stated their is a pull out clause in 5 years, but I imagine a few thousand acre brownfield site in a prime location is worth a pretty penny.

CO, I have no idea where your unfounded belief of the future of the airport comes from, maybe DTFT and Skydive make a few pennies, but that's about it. I think your wishes are based in nostalgia, maybe the airport never made a profit, after all, for at least the last 20 years it has been in decline generally. I wish you best of luck escaping the psychosis that envelops your thinking.

One of the things I hate about this site is the lack of hard facts (more fool me given it is a rumour mill after all), anyway to get to the point, my beliefs are anything but unfounded and are based on facts, and I unlike most others on here, do not take the place at face value, do not believe half the crap the media reports, I scratch beneath the surface, dig a little deeper and make informed decisions based on solid evidence. Sadly, a lot of the time, it's difficult to translate that onto here, least of all because I'm heavily outnumbered, but thankfully, being in the minority does not mean that I'm wrong.

CO I supported the airport before you came on the scene, you only have to check back over the years on this site!
I ve alway been happy to back up with facts. You on the other hand state you have fact but never deliver!
With regards to the airport making profit I have accounts (somewhere) that show profit has been made in the past.

To me it's unfortunately of little relevance that certain small business are in a small way contributing revenue to a loss making business. The fact is that from a trading perspective DTV is in a loss making situation.
Contracts and agreements either expire eventually or can be worked around. I am unclear as to what "aviation only" business plan has been put forward that will at some time in the future reflects a sustainable business in it's own right. As for current activity, then surely the DTV - Aberdeen route is exposed, and as to references ref Cobham / MOD, then again no monopoly at DTV given the proximity of Leeming ?
It may take some time, & Peel have the patience to wait it out, but eventually a situation will arise "one way or another" providing the oportunity for Peel to divest itself of all unwanted activity on the DTVA site.

So in a nut shell we still know nothing!

We know that the airport is losing money, has lost money for years and its a big brownfield site with which would make Peel a lot of money if they could redevelope it without any avaition activity

Politically eventualy it will suit the locaol councils to plonk a load of new development at DTV rather than upset loads of voters by approving new sites on greenfield sites close to their homes

I assume you are thinking along the basis that the airport is a loss leader? Which in accounting means that one business sector makes a loss so that the business can make more money overall. However, MME is not a 2l bottle of cola selling for 17p at a loss of a couple pence a unit to millions of shoppers so as to entice people to buy all their groceries there, henceforth making up for the loss of a couple pence a pop. But rather, is an airport serving 150,000 passengers a year and losing £2.5 million a year, to give that some context, last year on the straight-line regression basis, for every passenger served, it lost £16.67.

What, pray, is going to recoup £16.67 per person that will go into Peel's coffers? MME is not a loss-leader, just a loss maker.

As an aside to all the previous listings... ,I notice that there now seems to be an increase in the availability of ATC services at DTV. Anyone know the reason why? This coupled with a rather fragmented AFS service doesn't give the best impression of an airport going places???
Build it and they will come springs to mind!
Figures also down yet again in May..so much for the promised increases,over to you CO for the explanation ,as I for one have no idea what is happening to Goosepool,MME,Teesside or even DTV.

They were recently advertising for ATC staff so presumably they've hired someone allowing breaks to be covered? What do you mean "yet again?" as with the exception of Aberdeen which we all know is due to the oil industry and out of Peel's hands, the last few sets of figures I've seen have been consistently up, might have missed a couple mind but even then I bet a "yet again" comment is unjustified...!

Ah explains the ATC shortage?

To quote the CAA figures,which I accept is subject to correction...

Flights May 309. %change on last year is -9.4% down. % change of -3.6% running total for year.
Passengers. -10.5% month compared to last year. % change of -2.4% running total

So I make that down ,,passengers and movements or am I mis reading the figures?

Last set I saw, which is whatever's on the movements website, we were up 2% on last year, I can't imagine we've plummeted that much in such a short time but I'll have another look when I get home from work

Previous month (April) saw a 15% drop in ATMs and 11% drop in pax compared to same month last year. But there was a 29% increase in total aircraft movements, so the non-commercial side seems to be doing better.

Must be Aberdeen dragging us down still as Amsterdam and Jersey continue to perform strong, I understand the CAA didn't release figures for a couple of months?

Turns out the April and May CAA route analysis stats didn't record any passenger numbers between Aberdeen and DTV so that'll be the reason for the apparent decline in those months - just a statistical omission. Presumably they'll correct the figures at some point.

Amsterdam pax in the provisional May stats were up 0.79% on the previous year.

Anyone know the link into all movement figures? Interesting to see how the airport got a 29% increase in movements but looks down in passengers?
Maybe you count departing para jumpers but not landers!!

Also 29%? Joking apart....10 para drops a day,gives approx 560 movements per month.Add a couple of police and air ambulance per day gives maybe another 200. movements..so that's say 700-800 per month.Times that by say 10 months only of good weather(para) and that's approx 8000. And that's underestimating? So 29% increase..I will let you guys do the maths,but 29% increase doesn't seem too good to me.Thats not withstanding the revenue stream which I have no Idea about? Not much me thinks..hence debt.

Thanks. But I can't find the non scheduled flights?

High wide...only you could turn something positive into negative!! It's 29% we didn't have previously...be glad!!

Sorry CO wrists slapped! But can you see what I am getting at? If the 29% increase amounts to multiple para drop movements...it doesn't really make good financial reading.

It's like saying I have measles but % 29 less spots today than yesterday!