Mark Chadwick has gone into full meltdown mode. Throwing posts out demanding that the reporting is fair (or basically his view only) and that Vincent Hodder and John Strickland are in cahoots and being hypocritical.
I don’t know about getting himself in trouble, he’s a useful mouth piece for the project so I expect SYMCA and CDC will want to keep him on side, despite the lack of professionalism. What I find interesting through is how he’s now saying it’s no longer if DSA opens it’s when, why he feels the need to be defensive rather than confident.
If he continues to allege publicly that Vince Hodder is in collusion with John Strickland, then he could be in a different kind of trouble, facing a slander case. He often skates on thin ice with his accusations, many of which include Vince Hodder who according to him, is also in bed with the Yorkshire Post and YEP (quite funny given we tend to think both, historically, have been pro DSA and anti LBA)!
Heathrow of the North? Well think back to 2004, that’s exactly what it was being sold as then, I remember it being mentioned that they could easily build a second runway on the land. But then they realised easyjet couldn’t even get profitable loads on a single outstationed aircraft, aer Lingus franchise partners had on average a handful of passenger's on board, a weekly Toronto flight by Flyglobespan likewise had on occasion forward bookings in the single digits. But it’s going to be Heathrow of the North?
Yes we’ve established that, they’re hoping for continuation to occur at DSA. I agree, in order for it to work without a slurry of new airline startups then yes they’d have to have airlines consolidating at DSA because 20% of traffic from elsewhere doesn’t add up.
There is also a BBC report similar to the Sky one but done by everyone’s favourite Look North reporter, who yet again can’t help little quips like Vincent Hodders opinion being that of a “competing airport”. He should have also held John Stricklands warnings in more weight than he actually did. It’s clear that the view of Doncaster is that 130,000 people wanted it open so we will do that at any cost. Less than 10% of the population of South Yorkshire and nowhere near enough to sustain a passenger base.
Well have to just get used to this BS as it’s basically history repeating itself. Last time it was Peel appointed people, this time it’s politicians. What will be interesting to see is if this fanciful nonsense carries on into tomorrow or whether there’s a more cautious narrative over risk, responsibility etc.
I've stopped looking at that page - wildly unbalanced!
You know - I think Coppard knows exactly what the risk are in spite of the BS - he's had enough due diligence advice which will be 'noted' but otherwise ignored and that this is a repeat performance of the Peel debacle but he is in too deep and politically needs to save CDC from oblivion. I wonder whether he has much choice - after all as has already been alluded to on here the folk taking these decisions will probably not be around to shovel the sh+t back into the bucket in 10 years time.
Well a lot of the BS on that page is coming from a former ramp worker at DSA who transferred to LBA (Swissport) when DSA closed with a brief spell at Jet2. He’s posting updates that basically say SYMCA now own DSA. For a start this is false until such time that it’s signed off and agreed by the Peel Board as Coppard himself accepts there’s still a bit to do there, but I’ve no doubt that will go through. The unanimous support was a formality, Coppard knew he had the support over a week ago, hence going to the press last Monday.
I’m certain it will carry on. I’ve spotted another batch of recruits including a new Head of Landside and Customer Experience. Someone who will have very little to do until 2028 at the earliest.
Well the recruitment is coming quite fast now as promoted by Save DSA. I notice Coppard is to host a live Q&A on the matter, but I’ve also seen on his Facebook post with a letter to South Yorkshire that the comments overwhelmingly cynical and asking questions of him. Strangely he’s not replied to any that I can see, what he usually does is say ‘are you coming to the Q&A?’. There’s a clear reason for this, and this is because he doesn’t want to tie himself to written statements made. The letter itself is a piece of fanciful wordplay which might sound good to supporters, but doesn’t answer any questions whatsoever. I’d go so far to say it actually raises more questions.
The court of appeal clearly thinks there might be something to answer here. The government has relaxed the subsidy control laws because they were concerned it might restrict ‘growth’, but commercial aviation is an interesting test of this law. Unlike other forms of transport, no region has a right to air services, airlines have to operate on a principle of allocating their high unit cost assets to maximise profitability. So for instance DSA might try to attract t easyjet to base there, this is fine as they currently do not operate from anywhere nearby apart from MAN. However they will probably also try to get Ryanair and jet2 to operate from there too, which they’d have to prove has no impact on the services at LBA and EMA. I’m not convinced of this. So if say Ryanair decide they’d rather be at DSA because the subsidies are better, that would be a net loss to a private business in favour of a publicly subsidised one.Well, with a publicly owned DSA 2 using public money to try to prise airlines away from those that are privately owned, especially LBA, it would appear that they may yet find that doing so is not allowed, as Bristol Airport have been granted leave to appeal to the Appeals Court after losing their case against Cardiff Airport earlier this year.
Cardiff Airport and Bristol Airport to go back to court over £205m subsidy row
Bristol Aiport has taken its fight to a higher court after losing a tribunalwww.walesonline.co.uk
A bit more background to the Bristol appeal here. Confirms that for an application to appeal to be granted it must have “a real prospect of success”. https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.c...subsidy-control-case-heads-to-court-of-appeal
I think the interesting bit now is what the Court of Appeal might actually change.
