|
|
Post by pug on Nov 20, 2022 20:12:19 GMT
Some interesting dimensions to this aticle- the Russian money aspect for one. Plenty on the net from reliable news agencies reporting international concerns about UAE and Russian money over the last year. (UAE don't apply the sanctions against Russian many countries do). It also names some names and has a direct quote from the potential buyer suggesting they have not even started their due diligence -presumably because Peel say there has not been full disclosure of funders. As Pug says some of this was alluded to a few weeks ago so I'm confused. Is this UAE bid the current one Peel are being encouraged to take or is it another one that has fallen away. I don't expect we will hear much more before Wednesday when DMBC appear at the High Court to ask if they are qualified to apply for a Judicial Review. It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? |
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 21, 2022 8:07:17 GMT
Some interesting dimensions to this aticle- the Russian money aspect for one. Plenty on the net from reliable news agencies reporting international concerns about UAE and Russian money over the last year. (UAE don't apply the sanctions against Russian many countries do). It also names some names and has a direct quote from the potential buyer suggesting they have not even started their due diligence -presumably because Peel say there has not been full disclosure of funders. As Pug says some of this was alluded to a few weeks ago so I'm confused. Is this UAE bid the current one Peel are being encouraged to take or is it another one that has fallen away. I don't expect we will hear much more before Wednesday when DMBC appear at the High Court to ask if they are qualified to apply for a Judicial Review. It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Thanks Pug. Yes,it does seem that this is the "bid" being called credible by the local authorities. IF the content of the article reflects the situation correctly as it stands now 1) There is only interest in investing - nothing more 2) they (the prospective buyer) haven't been allowed to look at DSAs books because they have withheld information on their identity 3) Niether party is bothered whether it comes to anything or not. 4) Talks as such are stalled and there is no commitment to get them moving. IF the substance of the article has any truth I find it difficult to understand why the local authority is not more cautious about statements such as operating flights again by Spring. Is this news to them? Re Judicial Review it will be the initial hearing and the judge will decide what happens after that. I guess DMBC are using the process to buy time in their fight to keep aviation critical land, equipment and people in place as long as they can. All costly for someone - could become a legal bean feast. Meanwhile many people have moved on to other jobs, businesses have left the airfield and TUI and Wizz are embedding elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 21, 2022 8:25:26 GMT
It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Thanks Pug. Yes,it does seem that this is the "bid" being called credible by the local authorities. IF the content of the article reflects the situation correctly as it stands now 1) There is only interest in investing - nothing more 2) they (the prospective buyer) haven't been allowed to look at DSAs books because they have withheld information on their identity 3) Niether party is bothered whether it comes to anything or not. 4) Talks as such are stalled and there is no commitment to get them moving. IF the substance of the article has any truth I find it difficult to understand why the local authority is not more cautious about statements such as operating flights again by Spring. Is this news to them? Re Judicial Review it will be the initial hearing and the judge will decide what happens after that. I guess DMBC are using the process to buy time in their fight to keep aviation critical land, equipment and people in place as long as they can. All costly for someone - could become a legal bean feast. Meanwhile many people have moved on to other jobs, businesses have left the airfield and TUI and Wizz are embedding elsewhere. Wasn’t Oliver Coppard quoted as saying that if it was saved it ‘could be open again in Spring’ at a Q&A on Friday 13th November? So they would be before talks appear to have stalled after Monday 16th due to Peel being evasive with this interested investor due to doubts over the source of the money assuming this article is correct. This could be a bit of a red herring as it may be that there is a more experienced interested party, there were supposedly three after all, and one had already dropped out. I’m expecting this one was the ‘above market value’ bidder. The other was an experienced airport operator but I imagine they would know the value of the site as an airport and probably wouldn’t offer all that much. The legal team at DMBC clearly think they have grounds, I wonder whether we will hear anything about this on Wednesday? |
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 21, 2022 10:00:20 GMT
Some interesting dimensions to this aticle- the Russian money aspect for one. Plenty on the net from reliable news agencies reporting international concerns about UAE and Russian money over the last year. (UAE don't apply the sanctions against Russian many countries do). It also names some names and has a direct quote from the potential buyer suggesting they have not even started their due diligence -presumably because Peel say there has not been full disclosure of funders. As Pug says some opo f this was alluded to a few weeks ago so I'm confused. Is this UAE bid the current one Peel are being encouraged to take or is it another one that has fallen away. I don't expect we will hear much more before Wednesday when DMBC appear at the High Court to ask if they are qualified to apply for a Judicial Review. It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 21, 2022 14:12:38 GMT
It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. I’ve seen elsewhere that it has been confirmed that Peel had nothing to do with the article released in the Telegraph over the weekend, and that this is solely as a result of someone from the ‘interested conglomerate’ approaching the press for comment. Reason I highlight this is because the save DSA group are trying to throw doubt on the article and blame Peel for delay tactics. It seems there are some things going on behind the scenes with that group, which naturally is averse to anything it perceives to be negative. They have also suggested the Judicial Review isn’t actually a Judicial Review. If it’s not that then why say it is? More straw clutching. Also seen evidence that Peel did approach DMBC/SYMCA for equity stake in exchange for £20million, this was declined because Peel were unable to provide a solid plan of how they were going to make the business profitable. So somebody in the council has been playing with words. |
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 21, 2022 17:38:06 GMT
It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. . I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. Yes, plenty of conspiracy nonsense going around about Peel but objectively they have been the clear and consistent in their communications. As for the Judicial Review stuff its sound quite possible that the term has been used to describe a legal challenge of sorts not the process of challenging public authorities. The only public authority connection DSA has that I can see is with the CAA. Maybe the Council will try to establish the airport somehow acts for them I.e as a public authority. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 21, 2022 18:23:14 GMT
Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. Yes, plenty of conspiracy nonsense going around about Peel but objectively they have been the clear and consistent in their communications. As for the Judicial Review stuff its sound quite possible that the term has been used to describe a legal challenge of sorts not the process of challenging public authorities. The only public authority connection DSA has that I can see is with the CAA. Maybe the Council will try to establish the airport somehow acts for them I.e as a public authority. I think that theory is far too tenuous, there must be something in it.. Perhaps the funding already been put in to the airport from the local authorities? Either way it’s not a Judicial Review as that is highly likely to be thrown out. What has also not been mentioned is that Peel and an independent aviation consultancy firm drew up a detailed report into the strategic review and its findings and anyone who has seen a copy has been bound by NDA. I think it’s unlikely that Oliver Coppard and Ros Jones haven’t seen this report. Ultimately it’s quite clear that SYMCA and DMBC know the dire financial situation DSA is in, it’s why they didn’t buy an equity share earlier this year, and it’s why Oliver Coppard has been pretty vocal about the airport needing to be under private ownership. It feels somewhat disingenuous therefore that they are not being more open about the airports prospects. I don’t think this will resolve itself quickly, I think it will drag on for years sadly, assuming Peel do not sell. |
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 21, 2022 19:03:32 GMT
It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. Yes, its tenuous and I don't see how it would get them anywhere. Whatever is going-on on Wednesday I feel it will be associated to the local authorites aim of keeping the capability for an airport in place - preservation of aviation essential infrastructure etc while they continue with compulsory purchase. Tough ask and yes, they must think its worth a try. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 21, 2022 22:48:18 GMT
Courts file reports but don't know how quickly. More likely a press report or statement by parties. Yes, its tenuous and I don't see how it would get them anywhere. Whatever is going-on on Wednesday I feel it will be associated to the local authorites aim of keeping the capability for an airport in place - preservation of aviation essential infrastructure etc while they continue with compulsory purchase. Tough ask and yes, they must think its worth a try. Further update from ‘SaveDSA’. The chap heading up the group is still claiming that the article released over the weekend is false and that somebody has broken an NDA, he claims he had been ‘reliably informed’. By who? The article directly quoted someone from the UAE conglomerate not Peel! Staff still employed as they have to be to retain an operating licence. He reckons that the court proceedings start tomorrow, this is where they will attempt to secure an injunction on Peel formally closing the airport. He believes of this wins the appeal then Peel will be forced to sell? However if not then DMBC will begin CPO proceedings which I suspect would be costly and time consuming. I’m starting to wonder whether this self appointed spokesperson is trying to retain support by himself spreading fake news and misinformation? |
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 22, 2022 7:36:02 GMT
Yes, its tenuous and I don't see how it would get them anywhere. Whatever is going-on on Wednesday I feel it will be associated to the local authorites aim of keeping the capability for an airport in place - preservation of aviation essential infrastructure etc while they continue with compulsory purchase. Tough ask and yes, they must think its worth a try. Further update from ‘SaveDSA’. The chap heading up the group is still claiming that the article released over the weekend is false and that somebody has broken an NDA, he claims he had been ‘reliably informed’. By who? The article directly quoted someone from the UAE conglomerate not Peel! Staff still employed as they have to be to retain an operating licence. He reckons that the court proceedings start tomorrow, this is where they will attempt to secure an injunction on Peel formally closing the airport. He believes of this wins the appeal then Peel will be forced to sell? However if not then DMBC will begin CPO proceedings which I suspect would be costly and time consuming. I’m starting to wonder whether this self appointed spokesperson is trying to retain support by himself spreading fake news and misinformation? Application for an injunction sounds like a more appropriate action than a Judicial Review. DMBC would claim loss/damage in the planned closure.,The Court would need to be satisfied they had a case worthy of a trial before they issued an order halt the closure. Will be interesting to see what they argue - loss of opportunity for the local economy?? Difficult to prove if Peels alternative provides more jobs. As you said, it could go on and on. Peel will have the best commercial lawyers no doubt and bills will mount. DMBC should be careful what they wish for. If they end up owning the airport and dont get a good deal from a new operator/ owner they could be at risk of sanction for bad use of public money. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 22, 2022 8:07:43 GMT
Further update from ‘SaveDSA’. The chap heading up the group is still claiming that the article released over the weekend is false and that somebody has broken an NDA, he claims he had been ‘reliably informed’. By who? The article directly quoted someone from the UAE conglomerate not Peel! Staff still employed as they have to be to retain an operating licence. He reckons that the court proceedings start tomorrow, this is where they will attempt to secure an injunction on Peel formally closing the airport. He believes of this wins the appeal then Peel will be forced to sell? However if not then DMBC will begin CPO proceedings which I suspect would be costly and time consuming. I’m starting to wonder whether this self appointed spokesperson is trying to retain support by himself spreading fake news and misinformation? Application for an injunction sounds like a more appropriate action than a Judicial Review. DMBC would claim loss/damage in the planned closure.,The Court would need to be satisfied they had a case worthy of a trial before they issued an order halt the closure. Will be interesting to see what they argue - loss of opportunity for the local economy?? Difficult to prove if Peels alternative provides more jobs. As you said, it could go on and on. Peel will have the best commercial lawyers no doubt and bills will mount. DMBC should be careful what they wish for. If they end up owning the airport and dont get a good deal from a new operator/ owner they could be at risk of sanction for bad use of public money. Here’s the listing. Application for interim relief, sounds like an application for injunction against Peel formally closing the airport for a set period. Could get quite costly, presumably trying to prove that Peel have not undertaken due process, be interesting to see the result. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 22, 2022 20:07:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by flyer on Nov 23, 2022 7:35:58 GMT
Some interesting dimensions to this aticle- the Russian money aspect for one. Plenty on the net from reliable news agencies reporting international concerns about UAE and Russian money over the last year. (UAE don't apply the sanctions against Russian many countries do). It also names some names and has a directuu quote from the potential buyer suggesting they have not even started their due diligence -presumably because Peel say there has not been full disclosure of funders. As Pug says some of this was alluded to a few weeks ago so I'm confused. Is this UAE bid the current one Peel are being encouraged to take or is it another one that has fallen away. I don't expect we will hear much more before Wednesday when DMBC appear at the High Court to ask if they are qualified to apply for a Judicial Review. It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Despite all the "its not fair and a buyer is around the corner" arguments of DMBC the core of this will still be, in my opinion, can a private company be subjected to Judicial Review. Reading up on this there are very specific tests to be applied and a bit of case law to look at. The Judge will no doubt be applying these to this case but he also needs to fully understand the role of any governmental actors in the functioning of the airport e.g CAA and what this means in this case. Does the CAA involvement mean that DSA is a rule maker for government that government would do but for their absense or is DSA a rule taker applying the rules and regulations of government. Maybe there are other governmental actors??? The odds must be that DMBCs request will be denied when the Judge has done his research but you can never be sure. I assume the agreement to keep DSA open expires at the end of the month? |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 23, 2022 10:35:31 GMT
It mentions the update by the UAE party was on Monday, which is since the last updates were made by Oliver Coppard and Peel through the media. So I would suggest this is one of the three they were talking to. There was one other that apparently has other airport interests and they were still in the running I believe. But I expect that this was the one offering ‘above market value’. I hadn’t realised that they were appearing to request a Judicial Review, Ros Jones has led us to believe that there will be a review on Wednesday. Word play? Despite all the "its not fair and a buyer is around the corner" arguments of DMBC the core of this will still be, in my opinion, can a private company be subjected to Judicial Review. Reading up on this there are very specific tests to be applied and a bit of case law to look at. The Judge will no doubt be applying these to this case but he also needs to fully understand the role of any governmental actors in the functioning of the airport e.g CAA and what this means in this case. Does the CAA involvement mean that DSA is a rule maker for government that government would do but for their absense or is DSA a rule taker applying the rules and regulations of government. Maybe there are other governmental actors??? The odds must be that DMBCs request will be denied when the Judge has done his research but you can never be sure. I assume the agreement to keep DSA open expires at the end of the month? Not clear as it appears Peel are running through redundancy packages, wouldn’t be surprised if the staff are going to get a decent pay off.. I think DMBC are coming from a mismanagement following significant public funds and grants that DSA has received over the years, but I wonder if that itself could backfire on DMBC in that itself becoming grounds for a Judicial Review? Clearly quite an emotive topic and the court will be aware of this so they will be reluctant to dismiss this out of hand. Suggestions that it could cost DMBC £1.1million just to get to the point of initiating a CPO. |
|
|
|
Post by pug on Nov 25, 2022 11:49:12 GMT
Apparently ATC staff to be made redundant on 2nd December, which looks to me like the airport will be closing on 3rd December. If this is true it would appear that Peel are pretty confident that the legal applications by DMBC for a Judical Review and an injunction to stop asset stripping will be thrown out.
|
|
