|
Post by elmfield on Nov 13, 2012 14:34:46 GMT
A last ditch attempt by local businessmen and the Federation of Small Businesses is being mounted to stop demolition of the runway and, eventually, return the Airport into a centre for business -travel... a role for which it was solely intended when conceived. A petition can be signed on: www.petitionbuzz.co/petitions/sheffieldcityairport
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 21, 2012 12:52:39 GMT
The petition has well over 600 signatures, so far,...including a number of notable local businessmen protesting at the lack of services from DSA after the promise of 'better services'
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 21, 2012 14:27:33 GMT
Its good to see so much support on there is such a short time, however do you see anyone taking notice of it? The LEP have already shown their cards on the matter, and Sheffield Council themselves stated that they dont think business links are important with EMA and MAN being so close. Perhaps the FSB and these local business people need to be more vocal in the media once the 1000 number is reached.
I'm hoping this does generate discussion on a larger scale. Failing this though, I think the LEP and the airport should be pushing for a based operation by the like of easyjet at DSA, who could link the region up with a number of European business destinations at reasonable price and frequency (assuming their previous experiences at DSA haven't lead them to completely rule DSA out). Even if it means the LEP helping to subsidise start up costs, which at the moment seems to be the carrot needed to get any interest from easyjet.
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 21, 2012 15:34:07 GMT
I am not privy to what the FSB is planning but I do know there is a growing, critical body of opinion which is questioning the decisions made in the past. Many half -truths have been said and I am sure some of the myths will be proved to be just that. The LEP has certainly made known its attitude hasn't it.?.....but Newman may have said something he comes to regret. His remarks about "the 500 buying it" begs the question are Sheffield Business Parks prepared to sell? They weren't four years ago! As for what happens at DSA a fairly wise and experienced aviation expert I know has already remarked that in the end it's the airline that decides from where it will fly... not Councils or Governments. (well not in a free market) With the lowest passenger numbers since opening and with what looks like only three movements today things don't seem at all rosy for aviation in South Yorkshire. Incidentally, the proposal to build SCA came not from the SDC ....who arranged to build it... but rather from Sheffield Council as far back as 1986. It was to have been built by British Coal in return for planning consent to opencast the site. The Coal Act of 1990 stymied the scheme and the rest is history.
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 23, 2012 11:59:40 GMT
900 and climbing with some very serious economic and development questions now being asked of the 'decision -makers'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2012 12:31:26 GMT
Out of a population of circa 1M in the local area 900 is pretty poor for the time the petition has been going and the media interest.
I mirror most of your sentiments on SZD but the petition isn't going to make decision makers sit up and listen, rather those in fairly high places with little aviation knowledge who want to jump on a bandwagon to further their own name.
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 24, 2012 8:37:55 GMT
The petition is mainly aimed at the business community and , of the over 1,000 names, it includes some very important local businessmen and politicians. I agree that petitions , in general, have little real effect...However, the advice is that they are useful in publicising issues.
The FSB has achieved more in 2 weeks than the small band of concerned activists ( of which I am one) has in years. The abject failure of DSA to attract any suitable business-services, despite promises that it would, is a real concern of a business-community which has suffered poor communications for far too long ( the question of an airport for Sheffield was first raised in 1928)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 1:52:36 GMT
Although the petition is sanctioned by the FSB, all and sundry are signing it.
You can't argue with the fact though that in its busiest year of ops the airport only handled 75k passengers. I don't see that on the FSB 10 myths release, is 75k enough to turn a profit...
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 26, 2012 9:49:42 GMT
True!....However, it was never intended that in its first year of operation it would actually handle even that many passengers. The likes of KLM coming in ,within months of opening, was never planned for...nor was it expected that any financial return would be made for at least seven years. Another myth the FSB might have busted is the entire matter of financial viability and the truth behind the intended financial contribution of the Business Park to the Airport. I might also point out that the very succesful LCY was a basket case for several years but that its owners had faith in the project...SCA's new owners ,in 2001, had only one intention and that was closure ... after just three years of opening
SCA was sacrificed on the alter of Finningley...which isn't profitable either. It is managing only around 40% of its predicted passenger numbers; its freight traffic is minimal and it offers not a single business oriented service, let alone any internal flights. It caters for the leisure market ...which was what DMBC were told would likely happen in an independent report five years before it opened.It was built by a company whose sole aviation experience was serving the lo-co trade and that hasn't materialised in any significant way either... except with the rather specialised Wizzair services to eastern Europe!
That's why the FSB are demanding , at the least,an enquiry;)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2012 13:09:09 GMT
It would be great if the council took the land from Peel for not holding their end of the agreement, but they don't have the balls or intelligence. If only there was something legally binding in the councils agreement with Peel, alas the text was far from watertight.
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 26, 2012 13:27:06 GMT
And that, as they say, is the whole problem! The agreement was 'soft'and such safeguards as existed were largely disregarded. The appeal for intervention to the European Parliament, in the end, resulted in a statement that they couldn't interfere in what ,essentially, meant the re-opening of a closed airport. I agree with your statement about our Council . Could it be they have other interests.?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2012 14:54:19 GMT
I can't see it, I think they were railroaded into a series of ill informed decisions as they didn't have the knowledge from within and secondly were fearful of having a disaster on their hands. Thus they passed the buck to Peel who they saw as the experts and blindly trusted...... and inevitably the disaster happened anyway (as could have been predicted by any expert who the council could have consulted). Whatever happened to anti-trust/competition rules.
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 28, 2012 15:08:43 GMT
The Council certainly had no expertise and those of its members who sat on the Airport's JLC swiftly changed their position once Peel came on board. Without Peel they may well have been left with a bankrupt operation,but I somehow doubt that possibility. They certainly put their trust in their "economic partners" and that result was a Memorandum of Agreement signed on 31st July 2001 which after making noises about continuing operations with short haul going to SCA and the rest to Finningley...the main thrust is contained at the end of the agreement which makes it abundantly clear that the site will be redeveloped!
The Council only consulted York Aviation ( whose earlier report for Sheffield and Rotherham Councils and Yorkshire Forward is almost entirely at odds with the latter). Our Council, our MP's, our MEP, as well as several Government ministers have all been made aware of the anti-competitive spirit of the takeover with no interest from them whatsoever....I come back to what I last asked..." Could it be they have other interests ( or, maybe, priorities)"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2012 19:40:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by elmfield on Nov 29, 2012 9:23:18 GMT
A runway extension of 120 metres ( similar to the starter strip at LCY) was planned and approved by the Directors shortly before Peel's acquisition of a 50%stake.
|
|