Peel to buy MAN?

[AOG-YYZ]

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).
:confused:

[160to4DME]

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

[Buster the Bear]

Can the combined councils accept investment into Manchester airport from developers such as Peel? A joint venture to grow the business.

[niknak]

The same applied at Liverpool, but..................

[682ft AMSL]

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

[jocko0102]

Dont see why Peel cant own MAN and LPL operating with different types of service the London airports already operate on this basis with BAA.

[682ft AMSL]

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

[160to4DME]

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

[frb98mf]

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.

[EGCC4284]

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.:p :p :p

[Caslance]

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.

[chiglet]

Thanx Cas;)
I wuz rollocked for a post about [the "Original"] MIA:rolleyes:
KLM did a service EGCB-EHAM IN THE '30s :p
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[EGCC4284]

chiglet

Why wuz you rollocked and by who???

[Ringwayman]

Chiglet

I thought KLM only did one test flight at Barton, decided it wasn't suitable and operated to Liverpool instead? Or is that what you mean by a service in the 30s?

[captain ochre]

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.

[niknak]

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:rolleyes:

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....... :D

[Rockwell]

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? :rolleyes:

[Caslance]

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.:confused:

[dwlpl]

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.

[captain ochre]

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.

[jetset445]

Just read a very informative article by a member of the lancashire aero club regargding peel and barton. Apparently one of the things peel is interested in is a complete redevelopement of all the land round barton including high class lesuire facillitys including golf course, and a horse racing course with landing-refuling facillities

[chiglet]

'445
FYI there already is an 18 hole Golf Course at Barton, It's called "Boysnope" :)
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[canberra]

just a few points about manchester and peel.
1 would peel be allowed to own or have a large shareholding in both airports?
2 wouldnt be suprised if peels plan is to make lpl a cargo airport only and have easy and ryanair at man.
3 as a second man airport what about woodford?
4 on the subject of finningley this almost closed 20 years ago due to subsidence from all the mining activity, same problem as burtonwood.
5 if finningley were to open i think lba would probably close.
6 just why was sheffield opened? its multis only, so they get no revenue from the light aircraft fraternity, the phrase white elephant springs to mind!

[HOODED]

Canberra, some interesting points! I can't see EZY and RYR moving from LPL and it becoming a cargo airport. As for Finningley opening and LBA closing, not a chance! LBA has a large catchment area but a huge population within 10 miles(Leeds and Bradford together are fairly large) and getting to finningley from Leeds city centre takes almost as long as it does to Manchester!LBA may have its problems georaphically but has grown steadily since the runway was extended and CAT 3 installed. With decent road/rail links it would grow even more rapidly being in the centre of Yorkshires largest populous. Finningley is in the middle of nowhere and the subsidence from mining has already been mentioned. Pehaps Peel would be better making a bid for LBA, it would be cheaper to expand and has huge potential under decent management.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's dificult to soar with eagles when you work for turkeys!

[canberra]

the thing that makes me think that lba may shut if finningley reopens as a civvy airport is the fact that lba has such low traffic levels. yes it may have a big population in the local area but it has less traffic than inverness!!!!! my point about lpl becoming a cargo port is mainly based on the fact that lpl is of course still a working seaport and the fact that the port is close to lpl and the rail line is not that far, neither is the m62. what i didnt realise until recently was that peel wanted to build a new terminal on the site of where emeralds offices are located, but the land belongs to emerald. i believe peels are negotiating with emerald.

[682ft AMSL]

canberra -

re your point - "[LBA] has less traffic than inverness"

According to the CAA, Inverness currently handles 350,000 pax per annum compared to 1.5 million at LBA. Perhaps your stats are out of date!

Also, your hypothesis on the impacts of Finningley on LBA doesn't show much evidence of actually understanding a) how the Yorkshire market is currently served or b) the mix of traffic using LBA and c) how Peel actually intend to develop Finningley should planning permission be forthcoming.

Ditto your points on LPL You fail to take into account the strategy that Peel are following there. The intention was always to get the low cost and charter operators into LPL by offering them low landing and handling fees in return for a long-term committment to base a/c and develop routes out of the airport. Once securd, Peel then had confidence to construct new terminal facilities to cope with the resultant growth in passengers. Recently completed and with pax numbers approaching 2.4 million, Peel are now in a position to start getting payback on their investment, through concession income from retailers and catering outfits as well as car parking etc. For them to suddenly ditch all this in favour of cargo or is simply nonsense. As is the view that it would be value adding to shift the operation lock, stock and barrel to MAN

682

[dwlpl]

682ft AMSL

Some stats re. LPL:

Annual Pax 2001 = 2258341
MAT (up to May 2002) = 2358982
Jan 2002 to May 2002 = 982851 (+11.4%)

Because of growing demand, Liverpool is in the process of gaining planning permission to increase passenger throughput, as well as other enhancements, to its terminal. A terminal, may I remind you, that is still being built.

[682ft AMSL]

Thanks dwlpl, this is as I said. With pax numbers now approaching 2.4 million Peel will be approaching the sort of critical mass needed to begin leveraging some real value of its investment. A sound business plan on their part it would seem.

682

[canberra]

sorry wot i meant on traffic levels was the ammount of aircraft movements. however as disraeli said there are lies damned lies and statistics, the passenger figures you state for lba are very small for the catchment area compared to inverness. i still maintain that should finningley open as a civil airport lba will close.

[captain ochre]

Canberra

Ed Anderson , Chief Exec of LBAsaid recently that hardly any of lba's pax come from south yorks and finningley isn't a threat to lba

So what do CAA stats show - basically that he's right - about 4%of South Yorks pax presently use lba- so its a different catchment area on the whole. Plenty of room it seems for bmibaby at lba and ezy and ryanair at finningley.

[canberra]

thats if finningley opens!! i must say i was v suprised at what peel have got planned, especially as the raf almost pulled out in the mid eighties due to the subsidence problems.

[RAFAT]

I'd just like to correct a popular misconception that Finningley has a big problem with mining subsidence - it doesn't.

Looking at the plans in front of me, there are 5 disused coal seams under a small part of the 906 acre Finningley site. Non of these affect the runway, which was totally resurfaced in 1989 because the MoD have a tendancy to spend huge amounts on airfields they are just about to close!! An extensive survey of the site was carried out in the mid nineties on behalf of the MoD, and concluded that a disused taxiway had suffered a limited amount of subsidence. British Coal took immediate remedial action after admitting liabilty. RJB Mining have stated that any residual ground movements would cease by 1999.

The story about the RAF pulling out due to subsidence 20 years ago is also wrong, the closure rumour was brought about by the decision to scrap the Vulcan. Finningley is not about to collapse into a huge hole in the ground!

As an aside, I would like to praise Peel for sticking with the plan despite extensive 'faffing' & bias by a succession of Transport Ministers ('Jabba' et al). In this fickle industry or ours I'm sure many others Companies would have understandably given up long ago.

[canberra]

a few points about finningley.
1, why would finningley have been due to close because the vulcan was going out of service? finningley hadnt been a vulcan base since 1969.
2, as to the subsidence problems it is FACT that in the rearly 80s the raf was looking to close finningley due to subsidence. they looked at moving lock stock and barrel to binbrook, but their lordships decided to just have binbrook as an rlg for cfs at scampton.
3,it was common knowledge in the early 90s in the raf that finningley was on borrowed time due to the subsidence, however the stories i heard were that the problems had been sorted out. so why was finningley closed? i have my own theories and im not going to voice them here.
4, as to why the runway was resurfaced, well why was west raynham resurfaced at the same time?

[RAFAT]

Finningley was not DUE to close because of the Vulcans going out of service, this was simply a rumour at the time. Although the fleet was moved out of Finningley at the start of the 70s, the airfield was still very much part of the Vulcan equation. Therefore when the fleet was retired in the 80s, the Finningley closure rumours started. Although closing the base was no doubt considered by the MoD at the time, the subsidence stories simply served to give the closure rumours a bit more credit.

I myself have no idea why Finningley closed, especially as at the time we were one of the busiest Units in the RAF, in terms of flying hours. However, runway subsidence was not, and is not, a concern, then or now. One only has to look at the mining plans to see why.

[AOG-YYZ]

Thanks EGCC4284
Having since consulted with my source and he does concure with your information. It is indeed Barton that Peel have purchased.