New Terminal at Dublin airport

Mal-Adjusted

what!? if business is down 13%, why, oh, why build a new terminal for 609 million euro.

are these people crazy or is this the first sneaky move in closing down Shannon?

gandalf

Because when they started to build it things were going well. (well they had the appearance to be going well!)

dsmythy

Won't be down forever. When numbers increase again then we have some infrastructure already in place.

Dr Galen

forward planning really, though as Gandalf says, at the time when it was all started, things appeared to be going great.

Podge_irl

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

what!? if business is down 13%, why, oh, why build a new terminal for 609 million euro.

are these people crazy or is this the first sneaky move in closing down Shannon?

What do you want them to do? Just stop working on it when its half finished? Business is down 13% this year, the work on the terminal started a long, long time ago.

nesf

It's lunacy, though by this stage the majority of the money has already been spent so they might as well see if they can make some use out of the building. Seemed a bit crazy to build such a big extension though, even back in the boom times people were complaining about it.

Mal-Adjusted

Podge_irl wrote: »

What do you want them to do? Just stop working on it when its half finished?

why not, that's whats happened to most construction sites. might as well save what money they have left for something the actually need

starbelgrade

nesf wrote: »

It's lunacy, though by this stage the majority of the money has already been spent so they might as well see if they can make some use out of the building. Seemed a bit crazy to build such a big extension though, even back in the boom times people were complaining about it.

Eh? I think more people were complaining about the existing terminal being over-crowded. Even if business is down by 13%, at peak times, the airport as it stands is still at least 15% over-crowded.

starbelgrade

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

why not, that's whats happened to most construction sites. might as well save what money they have left for something the actually need

There's a difference between not completing houses that nobody wants to by & building something that there is actually needed & is long over-due.

nesf

starbelgrade wrote: »

Eh? I think more people were complaining about the existing terminal being over-crowded. Even if business is down by 13%, at peak times, the airport as it stands is still at least 15% over-crowded.

People were complaining about the size of the new terminal building at the time I think rather than the need for more capacity.

starbelgrade

nesf wrote: »

People were complaining about the size of the new terminal building at the time I think rather than the need for more capacity.

In terms of being too big or too small?

nesf

starbelgrade wrote: »

In terms of being too big or too small?

That the planned expansion was far too large and that it wasn't justified on economic grounds I think. That said, standard late asset boom stuff really.

Dannyboy83

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

what!? if business is down 13%, why, oh, why build a new terminal for 609 million euro.

are these people crazy or is this the first sneaky move in closing down Shannon?

I just wanted to add some of my own frustration in accordance with yours:

On the DAA project:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63347897&postcount=12

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1203/tourism.html
Strategy to boost tourism

Thursday, 3 December 2009 14:52
Tourism Ireland is to spend millions of euro next year to encourage visitors to come to Ireland.
The agency is launching its strategy for 2010 today, with the hope of increasing the number of tourists visiting this country next year by 3%.
In 2009, there was a 12% drop in visitors.



Tourism Ireland Chief Executive Niall Gibbons says thousands of jobs are dependent on the success of the strategy.
In October, Central Statistics Office figures showed the number of trips made to Ireland was down by almost 600,000 compared with the same period last year.
The CSO said there were just under 4.9 million trips to Ireland by overseas visitors in the first eight months of 2009, down 10.9% or more than 596,000 from August last year.
There was a drop of 25% in visitors coming from Britain.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1109/1224258393354.html
Charges at Dublin airport may rise sharply




CIARÁN HANCOCK Business Affairs CorrespondentPASSENGER CHARGES at Dublin airport could rise sharply over the next five years after Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey issued a “direction” to aviation regulator Cathal Guiomard to set the fee in a way that would allow the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) recoup the cost of building Terminal 2 (T2) and other facilities.
The authority’s net debt is set to balloon to about €1 billion over the next couple of years as it meets the costs of a major revamp of facilities at the airport. This includes spending about €600 million on T2.

The charge stands at €7.39. In an interim decision issued in June, Mr Guiomard proposed to increase it to €8.35 in 2010 with further rises allowed when the costs of T2 were established.
The authority had sought a minimum increase of €3 a head.
The Minister’s direction could force Mr Guiomard to increase the passenger charge by a higher amount than he had planned.
Such a decision would prove controversial with airlines at a time when passenger traffic in Dublin is set to decline by 15 per cent this year to 20 million and the Government has already introduced a €10 travel tax.
Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary has said its passengers will not use T2 or pay for its costs. He has threatened legal action if the regulator seeks to make the passengers using the existing terminal pay for T2. Ryanair is Dublin airport’s biggest customer and will continue to use the existing terminal there.
Mr Guiomard will today publish the findings of a consultants report into the likely operating costs of T2. The report by Booz Company, seen by The Irish Times, forecasts that it will cost €42 million to run T2 in 2011, its first full year of operation. This will rise to €46 million by 2014.
With DAA forecasting that 20 million people will use Dublin Airport in 2011, this would equate to passengers being charged an extra €2 a head to pay for T2.
Aer Lingus and long-haul carriers will operate from T2, which will handle about 40 per cent of Dublin airport’s traffic.

http://www.ryanair.com/en/news/gen-en-261109
A report published today (26th Nov) by aviation experts, Amsterdam Aviation Economics, confirmed that the Irish government’s €10 travel tax will result in revenue losses of €482 million, up to 3,000 lost jobs and 1.2 million less departing passengers, yet will generate just €116 million in tax revenues in the first year following its introduction.*

The report, which was commissioned by Aer Lingus, Cityjet and Ryanair, who between them account for 83% of air travel passengers to and from Ireland, also warned of further losses to the Government as a result of its travel tax when reduced income tax, increased unemployment benefits, reduced VAT receipts and declining corporate tax are taken into account.

The chief executives of Aer Lingus, Cityjet and Ryanair again called on the Irish Government to axe the €10 travel tax which has had a devastating impact on airport traffic and visitor numbers since it was introduced on 30th March last.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1030/ryanair.html


Ryanair is to cut the number of its flights out of Shannon Airport by 75% from next April, with the loss of 150 jobs.

The airline plans to cut the number of aircraft based at Shannon from four to one.

The airline's current contract with the airport runs out in April 2010.
Advertisement

Shannon Airport has confirmed that it is not entering a new five year agreement with Ryanair, blaming the airline's 'unreasonable demands'.

http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/1202/aerlingus.html
proposals which envisage immediate cuts of €97m to stem significant ongoing losses.

Last night Aer Lingus chief executive Christoph Mueller said the decision was necessary to stabilise the business, but would likely lead to more job losses than the 676 voluntary redundancies originally envisaged.

I've been shaking my head in disbelief at this for a while now.
It gets more incredulous by the day.
Its like 2 men inside in a grave digging it, and a guy in a JCB on top filling it back in.
I'm just waiting to hear the DAA have appointed Osama Bin Laden as head of flight controls to boost tourism.

I've tried to rationalise it as the DAA locking Ryanair out of the market so Aer Lingus can survive, but even that doesn't make sense.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63314350&postcount=34