Knock still not been treated equally

mayotom

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Until you have the facts you can't make that kind of statement. I know more detail the the average poster about SNN-FR issues however will not discuss on a public fourm.

Feel free to PM, I do take an interest in seeing both airports Grow, I used to fly SNN - AGP quiet a bit, but the current schedules and links to the airport have put a stop to that

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Around 250,000 seats added for 2013 would say other wise.

Seats Added are not seats sold, I hope it does grow, but I stand by my statement that growth eastward has much more potential, where are all the potential tourists from India,. China and the Middle east, but that's a whole other thread

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

But would it, remenber its the Noth/West we are talking about all they have to do is go begging to the Goverment for money and they would get it.

What do you mean?

the money is simply not there.

yew_tree

Calm down lads. Some slagging match going on here. For my view:

1. As a Mayo person - I am proud of Knock Airport and it has done great over the past number of years. Can it expand more, yes but not to the extent Shannon is currently at. Unless there is a population explosion here in the west.

Fact is, our population is tiny in Ireland. Limerick, Galway, Cork, Waterford are all small cities/large town's by international standards.

2. I would not like to see Shannon go under. I hope it and Knock can compete and thrive together on the west coast.

Note: Just something that annoys me is all these people who seem to laugh at Knock and hope it closes. The airport is in effect a trust and is not designed to be a private company making money, but is for the benefit of the people of Connacht.

I had to laugh at an earlier comment by a lad from Wicklow - I wonder is he the same Wicklow resident that objected to a building being built a few years ago at the airport? How that objection from a person the other side of the country was allowed in beyond me.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

yew_tree wrote: »

I had to laugh at an earlier comment by a lad from Wicklow - I wonder is he the same Wicklow resident that objected to a building being built a few years ago at the airport? How that objection from a person the other side of the country was allowed in beyond me.

I'm not sure many will remember your reference; and I'm not sure if I remember it right. Was the case you are referring to about a proposal to relocate a central government department at the airport? Because, obviously, that has potential implications for everyone, and not just people in Mayo. If memory serves, the complaint was upheld as it was found that the airport just wasn't a suitable location for the development.

kub

How come this thread has become Shannon v's Knock? Infairness the 2 airports are a fair drive away from one another. I think even if Ryanair transferred flights to Shannon from Knock, would people from up around those parts really travel all that way, surely they would go to Dublin?

Also why would Shannon want Ryanair considering what they did there in the past?

irishbloke77

mayotom wrote: »

It would never have been free and you know it, that is the basis of all MOL's negotiations

As was already pointed out on another thread on this forum, Ryanair were charged a ridiculously low fee of 50c per passeng to use shannon. HOWEVER, part of the deal with Ryanair was that shannon airport spend what equated to €2 per passenger to promote ryanairs Shannon flights.

You are right to say it would never have been free. I COST SHANNON €1.50 per passenger to have ryanair there. The idea was that each passenger would then spend a few quid in the airport and at airport services, thus giving the airport their 1.50 back and maybe a little profit. In the end a lot of ryanairs passengers brought their own food, got a lift to the airport, stopped buying duty free etc... meaning the airport lost money.

Not having a go at ryanair passengers, most low cost airlines went the same way. Everybody wants to fly as cheaply as possible, understandidly. But ryanairs business model at shannon and the way people's spending changed at the airport left the airport high and dry.

Neworder79

kub wrote: »

How come this thread has become Shannon v's Knock?

I think Leo Varadkar is partly blame for the current heated debate as his recent comments have pointed to a deliberate policy change to actively prevent further growth at Knock.

Up until recently he had been engaging with the airport on tourism route development and advocating the policy set out in the regional airports report of 2008 (which recommended focusing resources on sustainable airports and rewarding efficiency). During the Glaway debate he repeatedly stated that all regionals must stand on their own feet and Government will support those who do.

However he made comments in the run-up to the Shannon decision to rally the troops behind his plan, effectively saying Knock would overtake Shannon and his Government couldn't allow that to happen.

Yesterday the tone of his reply to valid questions about the possible distorting effects of the Shannon package and budget incentives would have on other airports could have been made in a more subtle or soothing manner. Instead he chose to defiantly mock those concerns, put out an inaccurate (pre-prepared) figure of how much funding Knock had received, and made a thinly veiled threat that he would be "interested in the outcome if any regional would take legal action against the state while they depend on OPEX funding".

So as the airports CEO said again in an interview today: this is not about Shannon, the airport aren't happy to be in this position, both can compete and co-exist. It's about the states parochial approach aviation and lack of coherent national aviation policy. And with the minister refusing to engage with them on several recent job, tourism and development proposals, they are rightly worried years of hard work will be washed down the drain.

kopbill78

jamie, snide digs arent welcome on this page, its contructive forum about both airports. From what I know Knock is operational at times when they have flights and at times which is commercially viable as Im sure youd agree is how you run a business toe nsure your somewhat viable at least. can you tell me its commercially viable to have an airport in the West of ireland open 24 hours when there are little or no commercial movements?? Hence airports become heavily loss making as they cant sustain staff and operational costs

eyeinthesky

Not going into the details of both airports as they have already been thrashed out here already, and not a Shannon basher but looking for fair play. Yes i do live near Knock and proud of the airport but Knock has not been spoon fed since it opened unlike Shannon. All the posts on the forum have not mentioned the compulsory touchdown for transatlantic flights, and the new proposed plan with amalgamating the business sector and the airport means that it will be subsidised once again.
I am all for fair play and if Shannon and Knock were competing on an even playing field then i think there is room for both, and then see what happens. The one thing i do not want as a taxpayer is to be paying for incompetent running of a business like the DAA which should be scrapped and replaced by business people who know what they are doing.

Neworder79

Director and Chairman of Ireland West were before the Oireachtas Transport Committee this morning. In my opinion they laid out clear evidence of how the instruments of the state are being used to remove Knock from aviation policy, and made compelling case for why it should instead be supporting their continued growth as a model for other airports.

Too much detail to follow but I wrote out some points outlined under questioning:

Not anti-Shannon
Both airports can co-exist and compete serving different regions if treated fairly
Evidenced by recent work with Shannon Development on enterprise plan for Knock
Scollon proposed single western strategic approach in past, was on board of Shannon task force while CEO of Knock
Airports remit is regional access and enterprise development

Government policy of distortion
Booze report warned no package without understanding competitive implications, ignored, parochial approach
Minister statement on policy, if nothing is done for Shannon it stands in danger of being pssed out...it is only a matter of time without change of policy - unprecedented, devise language, want cooperative culture for West
Despite nearing Shannon figures, department still see them as "not in the big league"
Department refuse to acknowledge airport as strategic
DAA statements "Knock taking passengers from Shannon", should not dictate gov policy
Week after Knock met with a US airline Minister met to advocate Shannon

Dep of Transport stonewalling
Excellent working relationship with Department in terms of operations, legal and audits etc
Have had 50 meetings in 18 months with department civil servants, met Minister July, Minister Ring re tourism, now looking Taoiseach
8 proposals to Gov, double tourism and enterprise proposals to create 500 jobs, all plans rejected
Airport don't air grievances in public, prefer to make business case behind the scenes, now reluctantly going public having exhausted all avenues with the Minister
Grant aid package for Shannon flys in face of competition, rewards failure, panic reaction to losses

Infrastructure in NW
No major infrstructural development north of Galway in last decade, still access problems
No motorway/road access to NW despite decade of investment linking other airports
22 years to get Bus Eireann to engage on serving the airport (while launching bus routes from region to Dublin airport)

Role of IWAK
Offering something different, a successful commercial airport model, lean low cost - Minister acknowledged
Not private, statutory trust signed by Minister brennan in 1991, handed back to region, community trust, remit to stimulate regional development
Grew out of cooperation, €8.5 from state and €4.5m local fundrasing
All dividends reinvested, voluntary management board
Ernst & Young report - supports 900 jobs in region, tourism spend €100m+, Tax return €17m+

Grew 350% in 10 years, 11% in 2011, strategy for continued steady growth
800,000+ catchment including Donegal, border counties and Midlands
Turnover €12.5m, net loss €390,000 2012, debt €10m based from funding capital investments shared with previous Government
Fund own ATC, Fire services, ground handling (given free to DAA airports)
99% flight operating record - no delays
100 fulltime, 50-60 seasonal staff, cross trained and multitasking
OPEX 87c per passenger (Shannon ext €6-€8, figures not available), will get no funding from 2014

Aims and needs
1m+ passengers to remain self sustaining
Longterm approach from Government and fair treatment
Deserve recognition of strategic role, investment to support growth
Engagement from Government on enterprise and jobs proposals
Double tourism numbers, proven ability to attract airlines and routes, need marketing support from Tourism agencies
Strategic national aviation policy, stop exclusion of Knock

Recording should be up on this page at some stage...
http://www.oireachtas.ie/ViewDoc.asp?DocId=-1&CatID=127&m=o

Neworder79

And some of the points raised by the Committee members:

Pascal Mooney,
- Shannon business plan statement about removing routes from Knock "frightening"
- Airport has survived aginst the odds
- Blueprint at Government to close Knock, need to "haul Minister in before committee to explain"
- Funded to 2014, treacherour position beyond

John O'Mahony
- Serving region from West Meath, to Cavan and Donegal
- Other airport figures in decline
- Far higher subsidy to Shannon
- State airports ATC free, €2-3m subsidy
- Infrastructure deficit north of Galway, N18 focus of DAA

Noel Harrington
Can you survive this? - Reply: any company would say they have no future in face of this, but Knock will not give up
MOL said Knoc better structure to survive, delighted he has confidence

Michelle Mulhern
- Shannon is of strategic importance, Knock should be recognised also
- State airports should be benchmarked on efficiency
- Skew competition do dep acknowledge disadvantage as a result of Shannon package?
- Minister only engaging with "state" airports
- Need national policy

Dara Calleary
- Subsidy paid back in tax, business, VAT etc
- Dep playing airports against each other

Denis Naughtan
Mindset within dep against regionals

Michael Colreavy
Subsidy is investment not just a cost
Is there a policy of closure by stealth, national strategy?

Neworder79

Neworder79 wrote: »

And some of the points raised by the Committee members:

Pascal Mooney,
- Shannon business plan statement about removing routes from Knock "frightening"
- Airport has survived aginst the odds
- Blueprint at Government to close Knock, need to "haul Minister in before committee to explain"
- Funded to 2014, treacherour position beyond

John O'Mahony
- Serving region from West Meath, to Cavan and Donegal
- Other airport figures in decline
- Far higher subsidy to Shannon
- State airports ATC free, €2-3m subsidy
- Infrastructure deficit north of Galway, N18 focus of DAA

Noel Harrington
Can you survive this? - Reply: any company would say they have no future in face of this, but Knock will not give up
MOL said Knoc better structure to survive, delighted he has confidence

Michelle Mulhern
- Shannon is of strategic importance, Knock should be recognised also
- State airports should be benchmarked on efficiency
- Skew competition do dep acknowledge disadvantage as a result of Shannon package?
- Minister only engaging with "state" airports
- Need national policy

Dara Calleary
- Subsidy paid back in tax, business, VAT etc
- Dep playing airports against each other

Denis Naughtan
Mindset within dep against regionals

Michael Colreavy
Subsidy is investment not just a cost
Is there a policy of closure by stealth, national strategy?

It appears Varadkar is on a lone mission to make it government policy to close Knock to try and keep Shannon open. All this exposure is making Varadkar look very incompetent and corrupt, almost as bad as Shannon management I think he has bit off more than he can chew this time. A whole region will not let there only decent transport link close and certainly not to help keep Leo's anti competitive charade on track.

Do you know when he is expected to be hauled before the committee to explain his insanity ? or when Knock plan on proceeding to a fair legal resolution ?

The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport and Communications today heard calls for greater recognition of the strategic importance of Ireland West Airport Knock for Ireland’s national aviation infrastructure.
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/mediazone/pressreleases/name-14144-en.html

Chairman Liam Scollan this week said that the decision was a “financially disastrous policy for hard-pressed taxpayers” and could cause serious damage to an “efficient, growing airport” like Knock, which had begun to compete with Shannon at “a fraction of the cost”.
“This decision is connected to Knock’s emergence as a credible, international airport,” he said.
http://galwayindependent.com/stories/item/5058/2012-49/Knock-Airport-slams-'terminal'-Government-measures

Stovepipe

Anyone who says that Knock is efficient is delusional. The ramp is far too small, the baggage hall is tiny and unable to handle more than one aircraft at a time and the service road is clutter with scrap cars and junked airport equipment. When I was there last year, in a light aircraft, the handler told me that they were short baggage trollies, access stands and the baggage hall was too small. Time they did an actual useful audit of what the airport actually has on hand, as opposed to what it dreams of.

regards
Stovepipe

lotusm

Stovepipe wrote: »

Anyone who says that Knock is efficient is delusional. The ramp is far too small, the baggage hall is tiny and unable to handle more than one aircraft at a time and the service road is clutter with scrap cars and junked airport equipment. When I was there last year, in a light aircraft, the handler told me that they were short baggage trollies, access stands and the baggage hall was too small. Time they did an actual useful audit of what the airport actually has on hand, as opposed to what it dreams of.

regards
Stovepipe

Will Maybe if they same Financial supprt that Shannon has received down through the years it would have all these things...:eek:

irishbloke77

lotusm wrote: »

Will Maybe if they same Financial supprt that Shannon has received down through the years it would have all these things...:eek:

Here we go again, poor little knock against the big angry giant shannon.........

Knock have learnt highway robbery just in a new way.

Knock gets 10euros per passenger directly, no matter who they fly with. Don't most airlines if not all also pay the airport a certain amount per passenger on top of that to use the airport?

So the airport gets its fees from the airlines AND 7m from the passengers on the day of travel. Maybe shannon should try double charging?

Shannon cost the taxpayer 8m per year.
Knock cost it's passengers (taxpayers) 7m per year.
Both airports get extra from the airlines,

What am I missing here?

lotusm

irishbloke77 wrote: »

Here we go again, poor little knock against the big angry giant shannon.........

Knock have learnt highway robbery just in a new way.

Knock gets 10euros per passenger directly, no matter who they fly with. Don't most airlines if not all also pay the airport a certain amount per passenger on top of that to use the airport?

So the airport gets its fees from the airlines AND 7m from the passengers on the day of travel. Maybe shannon should try double charging?

Shannon cost the taxpayer 8m per year.
Knock cost it's passengers (taxpayers) 7m per year.
Both airports get extra from the airlines,

What am I missing here?

Sounds like poor Taxpayer is bailing out and will continue to pump Millions into Shannon and thats the fact about it ... its not that hard to figure it out:rolleyes:

mayotom

Stovepipe wrote: »

Anyone who says that Knock is efficient is delusional. The ramp is far too small, the baggage hall is tiny and unable to handle more than one aircraft at a time and the service road is clutter with scrap cars and junked airport equipment. When I was there last year, in a light aircraft, the handler told me that they were short baggage trollies, access stands and the baggage hall was too small. Time they did an actual useful audit of what the airport actually has on hand, as opposed to what it dreams of.

regards
Stovepipe

Some good points, but I have seen 3 737/A320 aircraft been handled at the same time, with no problems

irishbloke77 wrote: »

Here we go again, poor little knock against the big angry giant shannon.........

Knock have learnt highway robbery just in a new way.

Knock gets 10euros per passenger directly, no matter who they fly with. Don't most airlines if not all also pay the airport a certain amount per passenger on top of that to use the airport?

So the airport gets its fees from the airlines AND 7m from the passengers on the day of travel. Maybe shannon should try double charging?

Shannon cost the taxpayer 8m per year.
Knock cost it's passengers (taxpayers) 7m per year.
Both airports get extra from the airlines,

What am I missing here?

yes you are missing the fact that your figures are way off the mark, clearly you have not used Knock. They Charge a €10 departure fee, arrivals do not pay, therefore your 7M figure is incorrect.
Also you can put Knock passengers down as Tax payers, however they are paying directly for a service to a private entity the same as you pay for various services every day, while they are also paying for Shannon through their taxes, therefore double paying their taxes in your theory.
so again in your theory both airports are double charging. both are paid by the airlines, Knock charge its users, while Shannon is paid by every taxpayer in the country

Are you still missing something??

Neworder79

Stovepipe wrote: »

Anyone who says that Knock is efficient is delusional.

Not sure what your axe is but you know well the efficiency discussion is with regard to financial efficiency.

The ramp is far too small, the baggage hall is tiny and unable to handle more than one aircraft at a time

As to operational efficiency they have a 99% on-time record, so no basis to what you say other than your distaste for the look of the place.

They have 2 baggage belts, and manage 3 rotations together all the time. Sure it's not enough, nor is the apron big enough for planned growth. Buts thats the point, they run a lean operation but just break even, self funded through the fees.

They can't afford the €30m needed to extend the apron and build taxiways etc without part funding. Had they run up huge debts doing so in the boom and gone crying to the taxpayer you'd be on here berating them for that too.

Henry Ford III

Neworder79 wrote: »

Not sure what your axe is but you know well the efficiency discussion is with regard to financial efficiency.

As to operational efficiency they have a 99% on-time record, so no basis to what you say other than your distaste for the look of the place.

They have 2 baggage belts, and manage 3 rotations together all the time. Sure it's not enough, nor is the apron big enough for planned growth. Buts thats the point, they run a lean operation but just break even, self funded through the fees.

They can't afford the €30m needed to extend the apron and build taxiways etc without part funding. Had they run up huge debts doing so in the boom and gone crying to the taxpayer you'd be on here berating them for that too.

Isn't that more to do with the planes arriving on time or even early?

Stovepipe

@neworder, airlines use plus 15 minutes as an "on-time" marker. The reality is more like 60 to 70 %. Anyone claiming better than that is bluffing. When I called in, they could only handle one aircraft at a time ie, one in and one out was okay but two in clogged it up, because of the confines of the conveyer belt area. The general aviation ramp could be used for turboprop and small jet traffic to increase throughput. As for the shoddiness, well, when I see such basic stuff being neglected, I wonder what else is ropey. There's no point in touting the place as a gateway to the beautiful West if the first thing the punters see is scrap. All these basics could be sorted for small money and a bit of elbow grease, to genuinely justify the tenner. This is not peculiar to Knock, by the way. Some of the smaller UK regionals are awful dumps. Southend had practically to be rebuilt from the ground up.

regards
Stovepipe

Cessna_Pilot

To put a slightly different perspective on things and not really thread relevent but I'll mention it anyway, from a Pilot's POV. I fly into NOC very regularly, and in the three years I have gone in there I don't think I have never had a delay going in or going out due to anything but weather. And no bluffing of paperwork etc as someone above mentioned.
The ramp some times has 4 commerical aircraft on stands, and everything seems to work like clockwork.
ATC are fantastic up there, and well able to handle the inbounds and outbounds. Granted the ramp is very small, but the whole team up there, from the ground lads to the boys in the tower are A1.

Great place for max crosswind landings too

Neworder79

If you dislike the place Stovepipe fair enough, but what your saying just isn't true. Perhaps they had reduced Winter staffing shifts when you visited.

I use the airport regularly, all Summer there were 3 aircraft on the ramp concurrently, 190 heading to Canaries, another full 737 coming back with lots of baggage and still all Ryanair flights do their usual 25 min turnaround, never once had a delay more than 10 mins using Knock in 15 years. Why should there be, not that difficult to unload 3 staggered arrivals in a short space of time, and hardly any baggage on UK flights. Often watch while 2 Ryanair flights turn around and depart in the same time EI Gatwick aircraft is on the ground.

Agree on the aesthetics, it really is many peoples first and last impression and badly needs landscaping. New terminal is fine inside but looks ugly from the ramp with all the exposed plant, portacabins and "value engineering". They had extensive plans for landside redesign, but funding was cut before it started.

irishbloke77

irishbloke77 wrote: »

Here we go again, poor little knock against the big angry giant shannon.........

Knock have learnt highway robbery just in a new way.

Knock gets 10euros per passenger directly, no matter who they fly with. Don't most airlines if not all also pay the airport a certain amount per passenger on top of that to use the airport?

So the airport gets its fees from the airlines AND 7m from the passengers on the day of travel. Maybe shannon should try double charging?

Shannon cost the taxpayer 8m per year.
Knock cost it's passengers (taxpayers) 7m per year.
Both airports get extra from the airlines,

What am I missing here?

You'd have to be fairly daft or purposefully ignorant to not to see the difference. You can chose to fly or not fly from knock and hence pay nothing to Knock. We, all the taxpayers have no choice about the multiple bailouts to Shannon, and have to continue to contribute to the Shannon waste.


Nobody would mind so much if the passengers paid for there own airport service in Shannon, but they don't the taxpayer does. If they weren't getting 100's of millions from taxpayers they would and should introduce a charge as per Knock. That way the user pays and not taxpayers, especially when some taxpayers could only dream of been able to pay for a flight.

Is that simple enough for you ??

Neworder79

Neworder79 wrote: »

Had they run up huge debts doing so in the boom and gone crying to the taxpayer you'd be on here berating them for that too.

It looks to be the way forward in this country, run the company into the ground and then go crying to Leo/government for another massive bailout. Let the good viable businesses go jump.

intellectual dosser

Deleted User wrote: »

It looks to be the way forward in this country, run the company into the ground and then go crying to Leo/government for another massive bailout. Let the good viable businesses go jump.

So many threads on yesterday's budget but on this one people are supporting throwing good money after bad, and lots of it!

I dont think people are right to bash Knock for having poor facilities - if they arent getting the govt subsidies then what do you expect? Its tidy and it works - is that not enough?

Neworder79

Sadly I agree, seems you get no respect hard work or showing initiative in this country.

Stovepipe

How do you make the rational that the best way to reward initiative is to throw taxpayers' money at a resolutely private enterprise? Quite simply it's hypocrisy, because they want to have it both ways. Like I already said, Knock has no surrounding industrial base, no aviation sub-industries on hand, no useful transatlantic ability, no aircraft overhaul and no State strategic value, unlike Shannon. If this debate here points out anything, Knock and Shannon are radically different. Honestly, would you really invest taxpayers' money in Knock? If the Knockites think they're that good and have potential for growth, let them go out and seek private investment. Maybe they already have and found the market unwilling to cough up, so they want the State to take the hit, instead? How is that supposed to work?

regards
Stovepipe

irishbloke77

mayotom wrote: »

Some good points, but I have seen 3 737/A320 aircraft been handled at the same time, with no problems



yes you are missing the fact that your figures are way off the mark, clearly you have not used Knock. They Charge a €10 departure fee, arrivals do not pay, therefore your 7M figure is incorrect.
Also you can put Knock passengers down as Tax payers, however they are paying directly for a service to a private entity the same as you pay for various services every day, while they are also paying for Shannon through their taxes, therefore double paying their taxes in your theory.
so again in your theory both airports are double charging. both are paid by the airlines, Knock charge its users, while Shannon is paid by every taxpayer in the country

Are you still missing something??

According to the chairman of IWAK, knock is worth 100m+ euros to the economy in tourism and 17m euros in tax to the economy. Does it not make sense that since shannon handles over twice the passengers as knock, that shannon is worth just over twice that to the economy. Does this not mean shannon is worth more to the country even with a loss of 8m paid from the taxpayer.

If shannon is worth 35m in taxes to the economy, costing 8m in loses, it's worth 27m net in taxes to the country and over 200m in tourism. Fair enough, as an airport, Shannon's business plan needs to be adjusted A LOT. But on a wider note, shannon is worth more to the country.

Quite simple really. To the country and the economy, shannon is more important. To the people of knock and the surrounding areas, knock is worth more locally.

Savage93

Stovepipe wrote: »

How do you make the rational that the best way to reward initiative is to throw taxpayers' money at a resolutely private enterprise? Quite simply it's hypocrisy, because they want to have it both ways. Like I already said, Knock has no surrounding industrial base, no aviation sub-industries on hand, no useful transatlantic ability, no aircraft overhaul and no State strategic value, unlike Shannon. If this debate here points out anything, Knock and Shannon are radically different. Honestly, would you really invest taxpayers' money in Knock? If the Knockites think they're that good and have potential for growth, let them go out and seek private investment. Maybe they already have and found the market unwilling to cough up, so they want the State to take the hit, instead? How is that supposed to work?

regards
Stovepipe

Simple facts are Knock should NEVER have been built, Shannon is the western airport, a mad monsignor, a bunch of misguided emigrants with nothing better to do with their money, close it now and bring the activity there to racing down the runway again

irishbloke77

Deleted User wrote: »

You'd have to be fairly daft or purposefully ignorant to not to see the difference. You can chose to fly or not fly from knock and hence pay nothing to Knock. We, all the taxpayers have no choice about the multiple bailouts to Shannon, and have to continue to contribute to the Shannon waste.


Nobody would mind so much if the passengers paid for there own airport service in Shannon, but they don't the taxpayer does. If they weren't getting 100's of millions from taxpayers they would and should introduce a charge as per Knock. That way the user pays and not taxpayers, especially when some taxpayers could only dream of been able to pay for a flight.

Is that simple enough for you ??

Shannon makes more for the country in tourism and taxes for it to more than cover the 8m loss per year and still be worth more to the economy than knock. Business wise, the airport may not be as sound as knock right now, and that does need to be addressed. HOWEVER, as a source of income for the country, it handles more than twice the passengers, worth more than twice in tourism to the economy in income and taxes.

That's simple to me and anyone who can see beyond their airport fence.

Savage93

As to operational efficiency they have a 99% on-time record, so no basis to what you say other than your distaste for the look of the place.


Ha!! easy when you have 3 flights a week , don't make me laugh

Savage93

Savage93 wrote: »

Ha!! easy when you have 3 flights a week , don't make me laugh

Your credibility was already shot by stating Shannon was the airport for the west of Ireland when Most of Knocks customers are quicker getting to Dublin or Belfast than Shannon

But then your next ridiculous statement really takes the biscuit :rolleyes: You hardly expect anybody to take what you say seriously after posting such nonsense.

irishbloke77

Deleted User wrote: »

Your credibility was already shot by stating Shannon was the airport for the west of Ireland when Most of Knocks customers are quicker getting to Dublin or Belfast than Shannon

But then your next ridiculous statement really takes the biscuit :rolleyes: You hardly expect anybody to take what you say seriously after posting such nonsense.

How can we be discussing on time records when the airport only has about 6-8 arrivals a day and none of these are to airports which regularly have slots etc.. such as LHR and CDG. It's a bit like saying I was 100% on time for work this morning.

pclancy

mayomaffia please tone down your posts and try be more civil here. This should just be a straightforward discussion, not something worth getting heated about.

irishbloke77

irishbloke77 wrote: »

How can we be discussing on time records when the airport only has about 6-8 arrivals a day and none of these are to airports which regularly have slots etc.. such as LHR and CDG. It's a bit like saying I was 100% on time for work this morning.

You'll see from his post that he said Knock has 3 flights a week!!(they must be some very full planes to carry 700K in a year). Regarding on time, There is no airport in Ireland that is busy except maybe Dublin.

irishbloke77

Deleted User wrote: »

You'll see from his post that he said Knock has 3 flights a week!!(they must be some very full planes to carry 700K in a year). Regarding on time, There is no airport in Ireland that is busy except maybe Dublin.

Agreed

mayotom

irishbloke77 wrote: »

According to the chairman of IWAK, knock is worth 100m+ euros to the economy in tourism and 17m euros in tax to the economy. Does it not make sense that since shannon handles over twice the passengers as knock, that shannon is worth just over twice that to the economy. Does this not mean shannon is worth more to the country even with a loss of 8m paid from the taxpayer.

If shannon is worth 35m in taxes to the economy, costing 8m in loses, it's worth 27m net in taxes to the country and over 200m in tourism. Fair enough, as an airport, Shannon's business plan needs to be adjusted A LOT. But on a wider note, shannon is worth more to the country.

Quite simple really. To the country and the economy, shannon is more important. To the people of knock and the surrounding areas, knock is worth more locally.

You need to take out the military and transit passengers. apart from duty free they add very little to the local economy

Savage93 wrote: »

Simple facts are Knock should NEVER have been built, Shannon is the western airport, a mad monsignor, a bunch of misguided emigrants with nothing better to do with their money, close it now and bring the activity there to racing down the runway again

Savage93 wrote: »

As to operational efficiency they have a 99% on-time record, so no basis to what you say other than your distaste for the look of the place.


Ha!! easy when you have 3 flights a week , don't make me laugh

you clearly have nothing constructive to add to the debate.... so why bother posting:p

intellectual dosser

Stovepipe wrote: »

How do you make the rational that the best way to reward initiative is to throw taxpayers' money at a resolutely private enterprise? Quite simply it's hypocrisy, because they want to have it both ways. Like I already said, Knock has no surrounding industrial base, no aviation sub-industries on hand, no useful transatlantic ability, no aircraft overhaul and no State strategic value, unlike Shannon. If this debate here points out anything, Knock and Shannon are radically different. Honestly, would you really invest taxpayers' money in Knock? If the Knockites think they're that good and have potential for growth, let them go out and seek private investment. Maybe they already have and found the market unwilling to cough up, so they want the State to take the hit, instead? How is that supposed to work?

regards
Stovepipe

In bold you've highlighted everything Shannon has that would have been provided by or funded by Government incentives whether direct or indirect. With all this Shannon is losing a lot of money so I re-iterate my point of throwing good money after bad.

I live in Galway and I can honestly say that Dublin is first choice with Shannon/Knock being an after thought. This is mainly due to the infrastructure serving the airport as opposed to the routes available.

Given the amount of taxpayers money we are wasting in general I for one wouldn't object to investing in Knock and spurring on some competition as opposed to encouraging Shannon to continue losing money year over year.

For those of you talking about investing money in Shannon and removing Knock, I think the same argument can be made for investing in Dublin over Shannon. We are a small island and and are making vast improvements in infrastructure (mainly motorways). With the public costs involved I'm using your argument to suggest that we don't need two transatlantic hubs. What would be your take on that?

yew_tree

A few insulting comments there from Savage93 about Monsignor Horan and those who had the vision to build an airport in the biggest employment and emigration blackspot in the country. We could do with more people like that in these hard times rather than the keyboard warrior culture which seems to have sprung up in this country.

There is no reason why both airports can not compete on a level playing field together.

andy_g

pclancy wrote: »

mayomaffia please tone down your posts and try be more civil here. This should just be a straightforward discussion, not something worth getting heated about.

Going to quote Pclancy here and remind people to attack the post not the poster.

I am following these threads and the next attack on a person will be a straight infraction followed by a ban in accordance to the charter's, terms of conditions you have signed up to boards.ie for.

Now back to a decent discussion.

lotusm

yew_tree wrote: »

A few insulting comments there from Savage93 about Monsignor Horan and those who had the vision to build an airport in the biggest employment and emigration blackspot in the country. We could do with more people like that in these hard times rather than the keyboard warrior culture which seems to have sprung up in this country.

There is no reason why both airports can not compete on a level playing field together.

Well said... the Airport was built in worst times than now and a big part of it was with donations through fundraising from the general public. Hopefully it will continue to operate into the future

GCU Flexible Demeanour

lotusm wrote: »

a big part of it was with donations through fundraising from the general public.

Not that big - overwhelmingly, the source of funding was Government. (I think I already posted some details on this thread.)

lotusm

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Not that big - overwhelmingly, the source of funding was Government. (I think I already posted some details on this thread.)

Thats the same with any airport, Govt Funding ... my point was this public donations occured with Knock not for state airports...:rolleyes:

GCU Flexible Demeanour

lotusm wrote: »

Thats the same with any airport, Govt Funding ... my point was this public donations occured with Knock not for state airports...:rolleyes:

That's grand - and valid. I'm just mindful that there are some who think the place was built with private money.

mayotom

Well it looks like Ryanair are still on board, Knock to Malaga is to be announced today, It's only once a week from April, but that may change like the Original Faro Route, which was once a week and was upped to 3 times a week due to demand

17/12/2012 - Ryanair announces new scheduled service to Malaga in the Costa Del Sol from Ireland West

Neworder79

Well it looks like Ryanair are still on board, Knock to Malaga is to be announced today

14 Ryanair routes bookable for 2013 so far:
Tenerife
Alicante
Bristol
East Midlands
Faro
Girona Barcelona
Gran Canaria
Lanzarote
Liverpool
London Luton
London Stansted
Malaga
Milan Bergamo
Tenerife Sth

Aer Lingus:
London Gatwick
Birmingham (EIR)

FlyBe:
Manchester
Edinburgh

Lufthansa:
Dusseldorf

Sunway:
Palma-Majorca
Lanzarote
Izmir-Turkey

Neworder79

Neworder79 wrote: »

14 Ryanair routes bookable for 2013 so far:
Tenerife
Alicante
Bristol
East Midlands
Faro
Girona Barcelona
Gran Canaria
Lanzarote
Liverpool
London Luton
London Stansted
Malaga
Milan Bergamo
Tenerife Sth

Aer Lingus:
London Gatwick
Birmingham (EIR)

FlyBe:
Manchester
Edinburgh

Lufthansa:
Dusseldorf

Sunway:
Palma-Majorca
Lanzarote
Izmir-Turkey

Leo must be wondering what is he going to have to do next to shut down this pesky expanding airport....:D It is after all as discussed at the dail transport committee last week now disturbingly government/Leo Varadkar policy to try and strip routes from Knock airport so that Shannon can survive at the expense of those living in the West/North West.

As a follow on
http://www.sligotoday.ie/details.php?id=23472
Senator MacSharry will now "formally complain to the Directorate General for Competition of the European Commission". Varadkar the idiot might just have to change his government policy.

It also appears Leo took this shocking bailout of Shannon decision despite been advised against by his advisers and consultants, you have to wonder what or who changed his mind...Michael Noonan or WOD ? It appears lots of our legislators are now questioning his strange unfair decision.
http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/latest-news/3485-taoiseach-and-ministers-to-meet-airport-directors-fine-gael-moves-to-allay-concerns-for-future-of-facility
http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/editorial/3479-anger-as-government-favour-shannon-over-knock-equal-treatment-sought-for-regional-airports
http://galwayindependent.com/stories/item/5199/2012-51/Government-warned-against-prompting-airport-battle

finchkerry

Neworder79 wrote: »

14 Ryanair routes bookable for 2013 so far:
Tenerife
Alicante
Bristol
East Midlands
Faro
Girona Barcelona
Gran Canaria
Lanzarote
Liverpool
London Luton
London Stansted
Malaga
Milan Bergamo
Tenerife Sth

Aer Lingus:
London Gatwick
Birmingham (EIR)

FlyBe:
Manchester
Edinburgh

Lufthansa:
Dusseldorf

Sunway:
Palma-Majorca
Lanzarote
Izmir-Turkey

Fair dues for the 'small' airport thats quite a few destinations. Delighted with the progress the airport has made in these tough economic times. Surely they can expand the London routes further.

Hope the begrudgers are pleased!

RonanM123

14 Ryanair routes bookable for 2013 so far:
Tenerife
Alicante
Bristol
East Midlands
Faro
Girona Barcelona
Gran Canaria
Lanzarote
Liverpool
London Luton
London Stansted
Malaga
Milan Bergamo
Tenerife Sth

Aer Lingus:
London Gatwick
Birmingham (EIR)

FlyBe:
Manchester
Edinburgh

Lufthansa:
Dusseldorf

Sunway:
Palma-Majorca
Lanzarote
Izmir-Turkey

Can you tell me where Izmir-Turkey is bookable as its not on sunway website. PMI and ACE are.

Flybe service to Manchester reduced from 7 to 4 weekly and Leeds dropped.

highlydebased

finchkerry wrote: »

Fair dues for the 'small' airport thats quite a few destinations. Delighted with the progress the airport has made in these tough economic times. Surely they can expand the London routes further.

Hope the begrudgers are pleased!

They would really do well for themselves if there were flights early enough for a day trip to London. However the general feeling seems to be this would affect general financial viability if the airport were to open any earlier.

intellectual dosser

highlydebased wrote: »

They would really do well for themselves if there were flights early enough for a day trip to London. However the general feeling seems to be this would affect general financial viability if the airport were to open any earlier.

I would have thought the holy grail at this point would be for Lufthansa to switch their destination to somewhere like Munich where you could make avail of connections.

Even if it was just weekly but at the right timeslot it would open things up for the region given the eastbound connectivity. Yes I know Lufthansa have more lucrative operations in Munich but by making the right soundbites anything is possible.