Shannon Airport to be split from DAA

A320

A320 wrote: »

A base for Avionics?? what?

Updated:D

lufties

mayomaffia wrote: »

Updated:D

What is a base for avionics? In Shannon there is transaero and Shannon aerospace, anyone know if there is another maintenance business coming in or are they just expanding the existing ones? All a bit vague...

irishbloke77

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't anybody in the country has a problem with Shannon been a base for aviation and it should be encouraged if it creates jobs. But that is very different to the passenger sided of the business for which our taxes are heavily subsidising.

The passenger part is the only part of the industry that Knock is trying to compete with Shannon on. The 800 thousand Irish people in Knocks Catchment area are entitled so some services for their taxes. This airport provides tourist and essential business services to the whole region. Some of you appear to have pathetic distorted views that this region is not entitled to anything.

You have 700 thousand people willing to use Knock and pay a departure tax to use it. That shows just how needed the airport is for this region. Varadkar really needs to explain to taxpayers in the North west region why there taxes are been used to keep open an airport that cannot pay for itself i.e Shannon. He should also explain why the same generosity isn't shown to Knock.

Why was a departure tax not used in Shannon instead of taxpayers money ?? Is there something wrong with these people that they cannot pay for their own flights ???

Today's incredulous decision instead means that people who are willing to pay a departure tax in Knock will continue to be taxed/used to keep Shannon from closing at any cost, to the detriment of the only airport in the North west region, its crazy.:mad:

The departure tax is CRAZY. Where else in the world would you turn up at a major airport and be told you had to pay extra on the day or couldn't fly. The airlines should be collecting this and building it into the fares as its mandatory and not the same as comparing a flight from Dublin or shannon.


700,000 people are "WILLING" to pay this tax. That's not correct. 700,000 HAVE had to pay on the day or not fly. How many people turn up and don't know about the tax. The regulars will, but first time users, tourists etc might not.

BZ

lufties wrote: »

What is a base for avionics? In Shannon there is transaero and Shannon aerospace, anyone know if there is another maintenance business coming in or are they just expanding the existing ones? All a bit vague...

Transaero are taking over the Aer lingus hangar around the end of january and also have the possibilty of to expand their current faclility.There is plenty of land available on the airport to build further maintance facilties also,i have heard mentioned around the place there is an aircraft scrappage/parts company waiting to set up at the airport soon.

lufties

BZ wrote: »

Transaero are taking over the Aer lingus hangar around the end of january and also have the possibilty of to expand their current faclility.There is plenty of land available on the airport to build further maintance facilties also,i have heard mentioned around the place there is an aircraft scrappage/parts company waiting to set up at the airport soon.

Thats great news for the region, and also for aircraft maintenance personnel..hopefully flights from Shannon will increase, for example there are no flights currently from snn to anywhere in Germany..

Thanks for the info.

irishbloke77

irishbloke77 wrote: »

The airlines should be collecting this and building it into the fares as its mandatory and not the same as comparing a flight from Dublin or shannon.

I agree on adding the tax to the ticket, but Ryanair will not play ball. The development fee is used for Knock to pay for its running cost, it doesn't get 100 million write off's, or state assets to pay for its running costs as per shannon.

Henry Ford III

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree on adding the tax to the ticket, but Ryanair will not play ball. The development fee is used for Knock to pay for its running cost, it doesn't get 100 million write off's, or state assets to pay for its running costs as per shannon.

It's misnamed then. €7,000,000 p.a. is a sizeable discount on running costs, and nothing to do with development.

It's sneaky and underhanded.

imurdaddy

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It's misnamed then. €7,000,000 p.a. is a sizeable discount on running costs, and nothing to do with development.

It's sneaky and underhanded.

I agree its a sneeky charge! judging by the hatered and bitterness shown by knock fan boys on this thread its plan to see the fear of shannon taking flights and pax from knock, but lets be realistic that will happen in the next 18 months, shannon is a full scale international airport with a huge land bank with room to grow and develop.

knock on the other hand is a small regional airport built in a bad location depending on ryanair and a sneeky "development charge" so your fears are based in fact that knock is in trouble without the "development charge" and by posting anti shannon waffel on here wont change that! :rolleyes:
Also knock claiming to stand alone but over its history has allways been taking taxpayers money, even though privately owned now they want state aid??? :cool:

imurdaddy

imurdaddy wrote: »

I agree its a sneeky charge! judging by the hatered and bitterness shown by knock fan boys on this thread its plan to see the fear of shannon taking flights and pax from knock, but lets be realistic that will happen in the next 18 months, shannon is a full scale international airport with a huge land bank with room to grow and develop.

knock on the other hand is a small regional airport built in a bad location depending on ryanair and a sneeky "development charge" so your fears are based in fact that knock is in trouble without the "development charge" and by posting anti shannon waffel on here wont change that! :rolleyes:
Also knock claiming to stand alone but over its history has allways been taking taxpayers money, even though privately owned now they want state aid??? :cool:

You are one very sad misinformed little boy not even worth engaging in topic with. You should really be in bed at this time with school in the morning . Your on the ignore list including your nonsense PM's.

imurdaddy

Deleted User wrote: »

You are one very sad misinformed little boy not even worth engaging in topic with. You should really be in bed at this time with school in the morning

You are the the misinformed one buddy! i know what im talkin about unlike you! also your attempt at patronising is pathetic and proves the point that you try insults when you have no idea! :rolleyes: But of course the truth hurts and insults are all you can resort to :rolleyes:

TPMP

This thread is getting very heated!

Just to add my 2 cents, I'm thrilled that Shannon has been separated from the DAA. It wasn't going anywhere under them and I now look forward to a bright future for the airport.

Some of the knock lads on here need to calm down.

Peregrine

Yeah calm down guys, this is Aviation and Aircraft, not AH

At the end of the day, I see it as Shannon doesn't want the DAA anymore and the DAA doesn't want Shannon anymore. So maybe it's best if they went their own ways

Lots and lots of Info in this business post Article on todays news for those that are interested.

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/ANALYSIS%3A+Shannon+plan+faces+major+hurdles/id/19410615-5218-50bc-dc8e-87bf90581519

andy_g

Guys and Girls play nice or there will be infractions and bans handed out.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

mayotom wrote: »

No. Most of the funding came from Private local sources. The State Provided funds to complete the construction of the Airport after over 80% of the work had been completed and paid for.

I don't think you are right. I know a lot of people think this is the case - but most of the funding was State, with only a small amount being privately raised.

http://www.oireachtas-debates.gov.ie/D/0345/D.0345.198311100005.html

10 November, 1983 <...> Total expenditure to date on the Connacht Regional Airport project amounts to £8.8 million, all of which has been provided by way of grants from the Exchequer. Additional Exchequer grants totalling £500,000 are committed in respect of expenditure on the project in the period up to 31 December next.

http://www.oireachtas-debates.gov.ie/D/0382/D.0382.198806300052.html

30 June, 1988 <....> The proposed grant of £1.3 million from the European Regional [2553] Development Fund to Connaught Regional Airport which was announced recently by the EC Commission is in respect of 50 per cent of the estimated cost of completion of the airport project. The balance of the funds for the completion of the airport are being provided by the Connaught Regional Airport Development Company Ltd. from its own resources.

http://www.oireachtas-debates.gov.ie/D/0462/D.0462.199603050016.html

05 March, 1996 <...> Exchequer grants totalling £9.858 million were granted to the Connaught Regional Airport Development Company in the early 1980s towards the cost of construction and maintenance of the airport. This grant was shown as a contingent liability on the company's balance sheet.

The airport company was restructured in 1991 and the then Government agreed, in the interests of safeguarding the future financial viability of the airport, to treat as non-repayable the Exchequer grants paid to the company. In addition, an amount of £155,000 owed to the Minister for the provision of air traffic control services by the Minister's Air Navigation Services Office, was also treated as nonreturnable.


The debt to the Exchequer was written off on condition that ownership of the airport company would be transferred to a trust <...>

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't anybody in the country has a problem with Shannon been a base for aviation and it should be encouraged if it creates jobs.

I've no problem with it being a base for avionics. I wouldn't see, though, why any tax breaks that might be given for such enterprises would be limited to Shannon.

That said, I think the proposals on the table are OK so far as they go. I do appreciate the point about the Shannon Development rent roll, though. Whatever about wiping the Shannon debt, and perhaps giving the Airport some initial boost, it seems too generous to give it a permanent additional income. I can understand Knock management feeling undermined by that - there's no reason, in principle, why Knock should not share in that income.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I don't think you are right. I know a lot of people think this is the case - but most of the funding was State, with only a small amount being privately raised.

That turned out to be one great investment by the government, pity they could not turn 10 million investment into 100's of millions of tax revenue a bit more often.:D we could do with some of it now.

This is for 2006 before the airport really took off
For instance, in 2006 IW A Knock contributed c. £63m of total spending by inbound tourists and supported 800,000 bednights in the region. In addition, the airport is a significant employer in its own right providing 180 full time jobs on site and supporting a total 786 jobs in the wider region.!

http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/9793-0.pdf

http://www.bmwassembly.ie/policy/Research%20&%20Policy%20docs/bmw_airports_23_09_09.pdf

http://www.mayococo.ie/en/Planning/DevelopmentPlansLocalAreaPlansandStrategies/LocalAreaPlans/IrelandWestAirportKnock/Archieve/Document1,18166,en.pdf

GCU Flexible Demeanour

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

That said, I think the proposals on the table are OK so far as they go. I do appreciate the point about the Shannon Development rent roll, though. Whatever about wiping the Shannon debt, and perhaps giving the Airport some initial boost, it seems too generous to give it a permanent additional income. I can understand Knock management feeling undermined by that - there's no reason, in principle, why Knock should not share in that income.

It working out at more than 12 million in additional rental income for Shannon, thats 12 million less in the taxpayers pocket every year. Seems a very generous reward for such incompetence.

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/ANALYSIS%3A+Shannon+plan+faces+major+hurdles/id/19410615-5218-50bc-dc8e-87bf90581519

Henry Ford III

Deleted User wrote: »

It working out at more than 12 million in additional rental income for Shannon, thats 12 million less in the taxpayers pocket every year. Seems a very generous reward for such incompetence.

http://www.businesspost.ie/#!story/Home/News/ANALYSIS%3A+Shannon+plan+faces+major+hurdles/id/19410615-5218-50bc-dc8e-87bf90581519

Shannon has been run by the DAA for some time as you'll know. The D is significant in that. They had little or no concern for the airport, and didn't act in it's best interests, preferring to develop their own Dublin Airport instead.

That's was a political decision, and was certainly a detriment to Shannon's operations and actively curtailed any potential growth.

The incompetance you've mentioned above is little to do with Shannon itself, although I'm sure costs need to be trimmed significantly.

Yes Shannon is being freed from €100m of debt, and is getting a rentroll too.

What you've ignored totally is what Shannon is giving up - the highly profitable business of Aer Rianta International. Excluding this merely highlights the bias in your comments.

Limerick Leader.

By Mike Dwane
Published on Monday 3 December 2012 07:29

A PROPOSED trade-off that will see Shannon Airport begin its independent era free of debt in return for the DAA keeping Aer Rianta International is nothing less than Dublin asset-stripping of Shannon, according to the aviation pioneers who, from Shannon, developed ARI into a hugely successful international business.

A final decision on autonomy for Shannon is expected to be announced by Government this week - and could come as soon as today - but Transport Minister Leo Varadkar has already signalled that Shannon was never going to have both a €100 million debt writedown and keep ARI.

That the DAA will keep the lucrative airport retail company is all but confirmed but former ARI executives who charted its international expansion have described this as “a total sham and an outrage”.

A statement has been signed by former ARI executives Liam Skelly, Michael Guerin, Michael Hanrahan and David Hope in which they describe how the Shannon team had expanded the business first into Russia and then into the Middle East during the 80s and 90s - and also acquired lucrative stakes in airports overseas which were later sold to benefit the parent Aer Rianta/DAA.

“This hugely innovative and profitable business was set up by a Shannon team who intended it to be for Shannon’s benefit only. This position would have been recognised and understood by all three airports - Dublin, Cork and Shannon,” the retired executives state.

That began to unravel with Seamus Brennan’s State Airports Act 2004, when Dublin politicians made claims on ARI, they add.

“All in, the DAA emerged with €720 million - monies from the sale of Aer Rianta assets (including stakes in overseas airports), ARI assets, ARI profits and the sale of the Great Southern Hotel Group. The DAA has made another €160m in profit from ARI since 2004.”

“The treatment meted out to Shannon through the State Airports’ Act was nothing short of appalling. The act should have been more correctly called the Dublin Airport Benefit Act. It was a total sham and an outrage to Shannon and how anybody would believe that giving Shannon a debt free status would compensate for this abominable treatment.

“There will, no doubt, be efforts made over the coming weeks to make the Shannon Region feel grateful for the proposed debt write-off of €100m. Instead, it is time we realised that the benefit is going entirely the other way – to Dublin.”

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Henry Ford III wrote: »

This hugely innovative and profitable business was set up by a Shannon team who intended it to be for Shannon’s benefit only.

? ARI is not the personal property of a group of former State employees in Shannon.

Henry Ford III

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

? ARI is not the personal property of a group of former State employees in Shannon.

Nope. It belongs to the state and will be part of the DAA shortly.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Nope. It belongs to the state and will be part of the DAA shortly.

Well, I take it that it's part of the DAA already - the DAA being, itself, an entity responsible for a number of State assets.

Henry Ford III

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Well, I take it that it's part of the DAA already - the DAA being, itself, an entity responsible for a number of State assets.

That too

Jhcx

Listening to Timmy there the other day on RTE,

Is there any hope of Shannon Getting back ARI, After all its Creation is from SNN, Can they fight for it back or is all lost to the bullies?

donvito99

Why can't the entity assuming 100 million euro worth of debt take "Shannon's" ARI?

urajoke

Well this can only be a good thing, for the time being anyway till they come cap in hand for a dig out in a few years.

I have never read such a load of ____ in all my years, asset stripping, for Shannon's benefit only etc etc. Get real for DECADES Shannon held the entire country to ransom to keep themselves going via the Shannon stopover now after another bailout €100,000,000 worth of a bailout they are finally free of "Their" oppressors chains at least that's the way Shannon biased people see it.

Now Shannon can stand on it's own two feet free of debt and try and make its own way in the modern aviation environment, how long before the first massive number of redundancies are announced ? Now they have to try and balance their own books on 50 daily movements (one departure and landing per hour).

To those who think ARI is the property of Shannon airport I suggest you also take your €100,000,000 of debt as well seen as you OWN that too, personally I think what Shannon airport got is a great deal and they should be happy with it.

steve-o

urajoke wrote: »

To those who think ARI is the property of Shannon airport I suggest you also take your €100,000,000 of debt as well seen as you OWN that too, personally I think what Shannon airport got is a great deal and they should be happy with it.

It seems to me that some are implicitly saying that, even after having its vast debts forgiven, they want Shannon to be subsidised indefinitely (using the profits of another company) instead of sorting out its seemingly bloated cost base.

donvito99

Hangars for SNN, more funding for aviation industry, including other airports mentioned in budget?

GCU Flexible Demeanour

donvito99 wrote: »

Hangars for SNN, more funding for aviation industry, including other airports mentioned in budget?

http://www.budget.gov.ie/Budgets/2013/FinancialStatement.aspx#section7

International Aviation Services
The Task Forces established to consider what was needed to effect independence for Shannon Airport concluded that there is potential for significant job creation in the aviation sector in Ireland. To facilitate the sector, I will be putting in place measures to facilitate the construction of hangers and ancillary facilities that will be key to attracting additional aviation sector organisations to the country.

My Department will also examine, together with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, the feasibility of new funding sources for airlines and aircraft financing and leasing companies. Further details should become available shortly.

While these measures were proposed by the Task Forces for the new International Services Centre in Shannon, I am making the measures available to all other airports who wish also to avail of these measures.

I think we're finally seeing the end of special treatment for Shannon. The debt write-off is their last chance; no more monopoly deals.

questionmark?

highlydebased wrote: »

And say good luck to any other airline operating a european service for many years, after which time Ryanair will up sticks in a huff and there will be nothing left.

Good luck to them indeed. With European competition rules I'm sure other airlines that are competitive would be just fine.

kub wrote: »

And that is the way they do it, am i correct in thinking that they already shafted Shannon a few years ago and transferred some flights to Kerry?

Ryanair left because the charges were simply to high for the airport that Shannon is. I doubt they would just up sticks if they owned an airport. It would be in their interest to ensure the airport is as efficient and profitable as possible. They would tell the unions to go take a run and jump and staff to the levels that are actually required.


I could also see transatlantic flights increasing dramatically as Ryanair would market it as a transit airport. The DAA would not be impressed.