|
Post by pug on Feb 13, 2023 11:14:44 GMT
The meeting was cancelled by Ros Jones according to Nick Fletcher due to no updates to report. Obviously ammunition for the political slanging match that ensues. But why have a meeting when there is nothing to report? And why is there nothing to report? Possibly because Ros Jones has received information that Peel have ended talks with the interested consortium that Ros Jones and Oliver Coppard put in front of them perhaps? Or maybe there is an outside chance that Peel have actually sold the site and awaiting public announcement, though that is the unlikely scenario for the reasons mentioned in my previous post, however the slight nugget in Nicks post suggests Peel may now not be terminating the land leases for the approach lighting…. Update on Save Dsa - nothing new apart from no mention of a change of plan on lease notices by Peel. Insistent UAE interest still live. New article in Financial Times 8th February reports "increasing concern in West" about UAE's financial connection with Russia. They've licenced a new Russian Bank to operate to service the large ex-pat Russian community. Highlighted last meeting with UAE consortium was 3rd February, the same day that dsamole updated PPrune to say that the deal was off. SaveDSA believe Peel would be shouting this from the rooftops, which is nonsense. Peel have sold the beacons, they just haven’t been removed yet. I don’t think he realises the cost of re-establishing everything. Just because the equipment is still in place means nothing. I believe the security equipment has gone too, that in itself would cost millions to reinstate.
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 13, 2023 11:27:20 GMT
Update on Save Dsa - nothing new apart from no mention of a change of plan on lease notices by Peel. Insistent UAE interest still live. New article in Financial Times 8th February reports "increasing concern in West" about UAE's financial connection with Russia. They've licenced a new Russian Bank to operate to service the large ex-pat Russian community. Highlighted last meeting with UAE consortium was 3rd February, the same day that dsamole updated PPrune to say that the deal was off. SaveDSA believe Peel would be shouting this from the rooftops, which is nonsense. Peel have sold the beacons, they just haven’t been removed yet. I don’t think he realises the cost of re-establishing everything. Just because the equipment is still in place means nothing. I believe the security equipment has gone too, that in itself would cost millions to reinstate. Yes, despite the optimistic gloss what is actually happening on the ground tells a different story.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 17, 2023 11:37:51 GMT
airspacechange.caa.co.uk/documents/download/5365Looks like LBA have applied to retain some of the DSA CAT and submitted the attached yesterday ahead of the proceedings to close the airspace starting today. Looks to me to be the Western side of the airspace they want to keep, and have asked that the altitude is increased from 2000ft to 4500ft. As far as I can see there is nothing from Peel as yet to halt the airspace closure.
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 17, 2023 13:46:01 GMT
airspacechange.caa.co.uk/documents/download/5365Looks like LBA have applied to retain some of the DSA CAT and submitted the attached yesterday ahead of the proceedings to close the airspace starting today. Looks to me to be the Western side of the airspace they want to keep, and have asked that the altitude is increased from 2000ft to 4500ft. As far as I can see there is nothing from Peel as yet to halt the airspace closure. So looks like the Mayor's request to delay for a year has been turned down -don't think many people are surprised.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 17, 2023 19:09:07 GMT
airspacechange.caa.co.uk/documents/download/5365Looks like LBA have applied to retain some of the DSA CAT and submitted the attached yesterday ahead of the proceedings to close the airspace starting today. Looks to me to be the Western side of the airspace they want to keep, and have asked that the altitude is increased from 2000ft to 4500ft. As far as I can see there is nothing from Peel as yet to halt the airspace closure. So looks like the Mayor's request to delay for a year has been turned down -don't think many people are surprised. Looks like it. However Nick Fletcher has posted another update confirming that Peel have now u-turned on their termination of the land leases for the approach lights and now wish to renegotiate the leases. I find this a strange approach to make, and can’t think why they would do this if they were not open to selling the airport on. It’s the one glimmer of hope for the airport when everything else appears to be going against it.
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 17, 2023 20:45:09 GMT
So looks like the Mayor's request to delay for a year has been turned down -don't think many people are surprised. Looks like it. However Nick Fletcher has posted another update confirming that Peel have now u-turned on their termination of the land leases for the approach lights and now wish to renegotiate the leases. I find this a strange approach to make, and can’t think why they would do this if they were not open to selling the airport on. It’s the one glimmer of hope for the airport when everything else appears to be going against it. What's the old saying - "if it doesn't sound right it probably isn't." Hard to believe that whatever is allegedly going on re lease and lights is a signal of a change of Peel's plan. The actions of Peel and DMBC now need to be viewed as part of preparation to fight (Peel) or advance (DMBC) a compulsory purchase of the site.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 17, 2023 20:51:37 GMT
Looks like it. However Nick Fletcher has posted another update confirming that Peel have now u-turned on their termination of the land leases for the approach lights and now wish to renegotiate the leases. I find this a strange approach to make, and can’t think why they would do this if they were not open to selling the airport on. It’s the one glimmer of hope for the airport when everything else appears to be going against it. What's the old saying - "if it doesn't sound right it probably isn't." Hard to believe that whatever is allegedly going on re lease and lights is a signal of a change of Peel's plan. The actions of Peel and DMBC now need to be viewed as part of preparation to fight (Peel) or advance (DMBC) a compulsory purchase of the site. Very true, it’s also been suggested that maybe the lights have not been sold as yet and would be best placed in situ rather than dismantled and put in storage somewhere. But they will need to be ready to fight a CPO if the council push on with it.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 22, 2023 13:11:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 22, 2023 14:38:24 GMT
I guess this just registers DMBCs request formally in the consultation phase of closure proposal and will sit against LBAs application. In Nick Fletcher's report of contact with CAA he states that they ponted put to him how important safety was in their consideration ( of course ) so, maybe, a reminder that safety trumps local desire to have a nearby airport!!
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 23, 2023 9:23:19 GMT
I guess this just registers DMBCs request formally in the consultation phase of closure proposal and will sit against LBAs application. In Nick Fletcher's report of contact with CAA he states that they ponted put to him how important safety was in their consideration ( of course ) so, maybe, a reminder that safety trumps local desire to have a nearby airport!! Am I missing something about all this? If Peel really thought there was a good deal in the making from this supposed UAE bidder why would they not support holding off for a while on closure as proposed by DMBC? Surely it would enhance the appeal of the site. I'm assuming this would have to be done publicly via CAA website.(Maybe you've pointed this out already PUG and I've not picked it up.) The idea they would make the site a less appealing to a buyer with whom they are still supposedly in serious negotiations with just does not make sense.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 23, 2023 17:35:18 GMT
I guess this just registers DMBCs request formally in the consultation phase of closure proposal and will sit against LBAs application. In Nick Fletcher's report of contact with CAA he states that they ponted put to him how important safety was in their consideration ( of course ) so, maybe, a reminder that safety trumps local desire to have a nearby airport!! Am I missing something about all this? If Peel really thought there was a good deal in the making from this supposed UAE bidder why would they not support holding off for a while on closure as proposed by DMBC? Surely it would enhance the appeal of the site. I'm assuming this would have to be done publicly via CAA website.(Maybe you've pointed this out already PUG and I've not picked it up.) The idea they would make the site a less appealing to a buyer with whom they are still supposedly in serious negotiations with just does not make sense. I’ve no idea to be honest. The only thing still in my mind which suggests something may be happening is the apparent u-turn by Peel to not end approach lighting land leases and instead renegotiate. DSA Ltd is to be wound up in May, so are Peel Holdings going to take on this lease? Is this more about keeping the local land owners on side in the interests of future development? Do they just not want to disassemble the lighting if they haven’t yet found a buyer? Or are they taking supposed talks with UAE based consortium seriously? Guy from Save DSA claimed yesterday in a response to someone posing some serious questions to him that he is in regular contact with UAE Investor, which he then ignored when was pressed on it. Find it hard to believe he is any way informed as he makes out, possibly occasionally tipped off by someone within DMBC. However, he maintains that talks are ongoing, who are we to say they aren’t until such time that there is a form of public announcement? Could be that this NDA has been signed and Peel have told them to bugger off… We don’t know, but the lack of official updates leads me to believe that they haven’t sourced a buyer, nor are they interested in selling and any work is a preemptive measure to fight a CPO. As for the airspace proposals, expect that the CAA are just going through the motions. Not sure how regularly civilian controlled airspace is closed in this county, I imagine very rarely. Usually MATZ that get closed with the closure of a military airfield. With that in mind it looks like the CAA are pressing ahead regardless. LBA will take those two zones at the north western side of the CTA to allow for continuous descent approaches into RWY32, as for the rest, who knows. I don’t expect it will be disassembled over night anyway and I expect it will be removed from the 1/4 and 1/2 mil VFR charts now. No harm in NOTAM closed for 12 months as the DMBC letter suggests, and I think it would take around that time for it to completely go anyway. Notice the ATZ was formally closed on 17th Feb. EDIT: Just been informed elsewhere that DSA CTA has in fact now been removed from the VFR charts, a subtle reminder to myself too, that I need to purchase the new ones now also.
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 23, 2023 18:55:30 GMT
Am I missing something about all this? If Peel really thought there was a good deal in the making from this supposed UAE bidder why would they not support holding off for a while on closure as proposed by DMBC? Surely it would enhance the appeal of the site. I'm assuming this would have to be done publicly via CAA website.(Maybe you've pointed this out already PUG and I've not picked it up.) The idea they would make the site a less appealing to a buyer with whom they are still supposedly in serious negotiations with just does not make sense. I’ve no idea to be honest. The only thing still in my mind which suggests something may be happening is the apparent u-turn by Peel to not end approach lighting land leases and instead renegotiate. DSA Ltd is to be wound up in May, so are Peel Holdings going to take on this lease? Is this more about keeping the local land owners on side in the interests of future development? Do they just not want to disassemble the lighting if they haven’t yet found a buyer? Or are they taking supposed talks with UAE based consortium seriously? Guy from Save DSA claimed yesterday in a response to someone posing some serious questions to him that he is in regular contact with UAE Investor, which he then ignored when was pressed on it. Find it hard to believe he is any way informed as he makes out, possibly occasionally tipped off by someone within DMBC. However, he maintains that talks are ongoing, who are we to say they aren’t until such time that there is a form of public announcement? Could be that this NDA has been signed and Peel have told them to bugger off… We don’t know, but the lack of official updates leads me to believe that they haven’t sourced a buyer, nor are they interested in selling and any work is a preemptive measure to fight a CPO. As for the airspace proposals, expect that the CAA are just going through the motions. Not sure how regularly civilian controlled airspace is closed in this county, I imagine very rarely. Usually MATZ that get closed with the closure of a military airfield. With that in mind it looks like the CAA are pressing ahead regardless. LBA will take those two zones at the north western side of the CTA to allow for continuous descent approaches into RWY32, as for the rest, who knows. I don’t expect it will be disassembled over night anyway and I expect it will be removed from the 1/4 and 1/2 mil VFR charts now. No harm in NOTAM closed for 12 months as the DMBC letter suggests, and I think it would take around that time for it to completely go anyway. Notice the ATZ was formally closed on 17th Feb. EDIT: Just been informed elsewhere that DSA CTA has in fact now been removed from the VFR charts, a subtle reminder to myself too, that I need to purchase the new ones now also. Mayor's post tonight more or less says its unlikely a buyer will come forward until a CPO is obtained. She's clearly damping down expectations- talking about a 2 year timeframe.She still maintains there is interest from investors - why wouldn't there be "interest"- converting that to a sale is another thing.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 23, 2023 21:29:05 GMT
I’ve no idea to be honest. The only thing still in my mind which suggests something may be happening is the apparent u-turn by Peel to not end approach lighting land leases and instead renegotiate. DSA Ltd is to be wound up in May, so are Peel Holdings going to take on this lease? Is this more about keeping the local land owners on side in the interests of future development? Do they just not want to disassemble the lighting if they haven’t yet found a buyer? Or are they taking supposed talks with UAE based consortium seriously? Guy from Save DSA claimed yesterday in a response to someone posing some serious questions to him that he is in regular contact with UAE Investor, which he then ignored when was pressed on it. Find it hard to believe he is any way informed as he makes out, possibly occasionally tipped off by someone within DMBC. However, he maintains that talks are ongoing, who are we to say they aren’t until such time that there is a form of public announcement? Could be that this NDA has been signed and Peel have told them to bugger off… We don’t know, but the lack of official updates leads me to believe that they haven’t sourced a buyer, nor are they interested in selling and any work is a preemptive measure to fight a CPO. As for the airspace proposals, expect that the CAA are just going through the motions. Not sure how regularly civilian controlled airspace is closed in this county, I imagine very rarely. Usually MATZ that get closed with the closure of a military airfield. With that in mind it looks like the CAA are pressing ahead regardless. LBA will take those two zones at the north western side of the CTA to allow for continuous descent approaches into RWY32, as for the rest, who knows. I don’t expect it will be disassembled over night anyway and I expect it will be removed from the 1/4 and 1/2 mil VFR charts now. No harm in NOTAM closed for 12 months as the DMBC letter suggests, and I think it would take around that time for it to completely go anyway. Notice the ATZ was formally closed on 17th Feb. EDIT: Just been informed elsewhere that DSA CTA has in fact now been removed from the VFR charts, a subtle reminder to myself too, that I need to purchase the new ones now also. Mayor's post tonight more or less says its unlikely a buyer will come forward until a CPO is obtained. She's clearly damping down expectations- talking about a 2 year timeframe.She still maintains there is interest from investors - why wouldn't there be "interest"- converting that to a sale is another thing. Him at SaveDSA seems to think that because the UAE investor hasn’t announced anything it must therefore mean talks are still ongoing. Surely if they broke down there would be no will to announce that, only a positive announcement would be made..? So yes, DMBC are relying on the CPO and that’s it.
|
|
|
Post by pug on Feb 25, 2023 16:12:10 GMT
I’ve no idea to be honest. The only thing still in my mind which suggests something may be happening is the apparent u-turn by Peel to not end approach lighting land leases and instead renegotiate. DSA Ltd is to be wound up in May, so are Peel Holdings going to take on this lease? Is this more about keeping the local land owners on side in the interests of future development? Do they just not want to disassemble the lighting if they haven’t yet found a buyer? Or are they taking supposed talks with UAE based consortium seriously? Guy from Save DSA claimed yesterday in a response to someone posing some serious questions to him that he is in regular contact with UAE Investor, which he then ignored when was pressed on it. Find it hard to believe he is any way informed as he makes out, possibly occasionally tipped off by someone within DMBC. However, he maintains that talks are ongoing, who are we to say they aren’t until such time that there is a form of public announcement? Could be that this NDA has been signed and Peel have told them to bugger off… We don’t know, but the lack of official updates leads me to believe that they haven’t sourced a buyer, nor are they interested in selling and any work is a preemptive measure to fight a CPO. As for the airspace proposals, expect that the CAA are just going through the motions. Not sure how regularly civilian controlled airspace is closed in this county, I imagine very rarely. Usually MATZ that get closed with the closure of a military airfield. With that in mind it looks like the CAA are pressing ahead regardless. LBA will take those two zones at the north western side of the CTA to allow for continuous descent approaches into RWY32, as for the rest, who knows. I don’t expect it will be disassembled over night anyway and I expect it will be removed from the 1/4 and 1/2 mil VFR charts now. No harm in NOTAM closed for 12 months as the DMBC letter suggests, and I think it would take around that time for it to completely go anyway. Notice the ATZ was formally closed on 17th Feb. EDIT: Just been informed elsewhere that DSA CTA has in fact now been removed from the VFR charts, a subtle reminder to myself too, that I need to purchase the new ones now also. Mayor's post tonight more or less says its unlikely a buyer will come forward until a CPO is obtained. She's clearly damping down expectations- talking about a 2 year timeframe.She still maintains there is interest from investors - why wouldn't there be "interest"- converting that to a sale is another thing. Even Nick Fletchers update yesterday didn’t really add anything new. CPO appears to be the preferred option and the legal team acting on behalf of DMBC appear to be cautious not to give anything away for obvious reasons. Still, if it’s the same legal team that pushed for a halt on Peel Holdings ‘asset stripping’ then I’m not sure what clout they’d have in more drastic legal actions of which a CPO surely would be? It’s not clear how much DMBC are committing to this, they suggest that a CPO would cost £1.1million, however the actual cost of purchasing the freehold must be a couple of hundred times that amount, a figure that DMBC just cannot have. So where is the money coming from? Note that they are now calling the project ‘South Yorkshire City Airport’ which would suggest they have either gained full support from the other local authorities that make up South Yorkshire, or they are trying to get them on side. The updates on social media led by Ros Jones seem to suggest that a private sector investor may wait until a CPO has been completed, subtext - this is where the money is coming from. A private sector interested party will simply stump up the cash once the CPO has been successfully agreed in the courts. Not sure if there is any precedent for this? Is this even a legally viable way of acquiring the freehold from Peel? Can the council use the courts to force a sale of a proven insolvent business to another private sector business? In DMBC official papers there is an emphasis on the amount of money Peel received in public grants from various sources, which appears to be the backbone of their justification for forcing a sale. This might be a difficult argument to make, as surely questions will be asked as to how Peel were seemingly given a blank cheque for all these years, with the liability falls squarely on the various organisations which provided Peel with these funds, and not Peel for accepting them. Clearly that money tap was switched off last March, airport consultative committee minutes highlight how Peel were rebuffed after their approach to the public sector for a £20million investment from SYMCA in return for equity in the business. The reason cited was lack of assurances from Peel regarding a ‘roadmap to profitability’. This point was mischievously twisted by Oliver Coppard to make it look like Peel had refused to open their books, flies in the face of the evidence available to us. So this has been bubbling under the surface for far longer than DMBC/SYMCA have led the public to believe. It also shows that closure was, after exhausting all alternatives, the final solution for Peel, not the intended outcome as people on social media (including Mark Chadwick) want everyone to believe.
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Feb 25, 2023 17:32:22 GMT
One things certain - the local authorities are on the back foot in this saga. They have to make a compelling case for CPO and that is going to be hard, costly and time consuming. Can they line-up an airport operator/buyer in anticipation of success? No - not likely without terms being known and a public sector tendering process. Interest the Mayor talks about in buying can only be just that and DMBC could end up being the owner of the land with no immediate prospect of selling or leasing. They would be in a market in which prospective airport buyers would have the advantage. A risky venture with public money.
|
|