Shannon Airport Thread [Mod Warning in First Post]

Shannon Airport Authority seeks joint venture partner for travel retail business (The Moodie Report)

Shannon Airport Authority (SAA) is seeking a joint venture partner to manage its travel retail business under a ten-year contract.

The company is issuing the opportunity today via The Moodie Report, with a formal advertisement to appear online and in this week’s edition of The Moodie Report e-Zine (out on Thursday).

“SAA’s ambition, working with its new JV partner, is to use the JV’s skills and resources to bid for travel retail opportunities in other international airports and potentially provide consultancy services to developing airports.”

The new travel retail store will operate under the name Shannon Duty Free.

Absolutely amazing, SAA are throwing down the gauntlet at the DAA after they plundered ARI. :cool:

Here some previous posts regarding the Aer Rianta International (SAA / DAA) ownership saga (174, 314, 488).

Jamie2k9

Absolutely amazing, SAA are throwing down the gauntlet at the DAA after they plundered ARI.

I'm sure the DAA and ARI are quaking in their boots over these developments. :rolleyes: They are to busy getting ready to redevelop terminal 1.

Jaysus Jamie2k9, it was not meant to be an infantile jibe at Dublin.

Nevertheless, it gives me great satisfaction to see Shannon pursue again the very same business it once innovated in the form of ARI back in 1988.

The difference this time round is that any profits made will remain in the Shannon Group.

The DAA did very well from Shannon's (ARI) which helped them finance their Terminal 2.

Now with all of ARI's profit reserves gone, it would be very bitter in my eyes if the DAA started to sell off their assets like (20% stake in Düsseldorf Airport) to fund a redevelopment of Terminal 1.

Killing the goose (ARI) that laid the golden eggs would lay bare to everybody in Ireland that the DAA never identified with the Shannon based company, apart from its balance sheet of course.

Jamie2k9

Jaysus Jamie2k9, it was not meant to be an infantile jibe at Dublin.

It's coming across like it is, SNN has to take some responsibility as the remember FR wanted the daa to pay them to fly there not any commercial business wouldn't give into the blackmail. The problem was FR drove the few carriers in SNN before them away and created a monopoly and that was not the fault of the daa but the people who didn't support other carriers.

Nevertheless, it gives me great satisfaction to see Shannon pursue again the very same business it once innovated in the form of ARI back in 1988.

The difference this time round is that any profits made will remain in the Shannon Group.

The DAA did very well from Shannon's (ARI) which helped them finance their Terminal 2.

Now with all of ARI's profit reserves gone, it would be very bitter in my eyes if the DAA started to sell off their assets like (20% stake in Düsseldorf Airport) to fund a redevelopment of Terminal 1.

Killing the goose (ARI) that laid the golden eggs would lay bare to everybody in Ireland that the DAA never identified with the Shannon based company, apart from its balance sheet of course

I agree about SNN growing again but just hope all egg's won't be put in one basket over the next few years.

Just a little comment on the ARI before the Mod's starting posting.

ARI may of financed it but lets be honest here they didn't pay for it. Nothing will be sold off, remember DUB is making operational profits so ARI have nothing to worry about.

Brennans Row wrote: »

My brother use to give single day lectures in London some years back.

The present 08:50 departure time to Heathrow would have made those day lectures unworkable for him, unless of course he travelled the night before along with the additional hotel costs.

Driving to Dublin would have added another 4-5 hours to his working day.

Did you hear anything from the good people at Aer Lingus?

Anybody who works for a living and needs an earlier flight to Heathrow should lobby the Limerick, Shannon, Ennis and Galway Chambers of Commerce.

There is still the 6.30am Ryanair flight with departs 50 minutes earlier, it takes a bit longer on the Stansted express but should still get you into London around the same.

Brennans Row wrote: »

Killing the goose (ARI) that laid the golden eggs would lay bare to everybody in Ireland that the DAA never identified with the Shannon based company, apart from its balance sheet of course.

I don't think this catches the reality that ARI's growth was (as the name suggests) as part of the Aer Rianta group; the financial strength came from the fact of it being a part of a strong business. It didn't acquire all those assets organically. It's somewhat similar to the history of GPA, growing out of Aer Lingus.

However, going back to the main story, it certainly is interesting to see SAA taking this initiative. I'd take it there could be locally based ARI staff would would be interested in getting involved in a new venture. I think the focus on providing services to international markets is welcome. If ARI and this new Shannon venture are both looking for business abroad, the country as a whole certainly won't lose and can only gain.

Trump International Golf Links Ireland (Irish Times)

“We’re bringing the Trump factor to Ireland” Donald Trump snr said last night, announcing his firm’s “major investment” in the golf resort at Doonbeg, Co Clare.

Like the guy or loathe the guy, with Donal Trumps high profile in the U.S. this should attract even more travelling golfers to Ireland, resulting in more American passengers and corporate jet traffic for Shannon too.

Emergency funding on table as local councils face €70m storm bill (Independent)

LOCAL authorities are facing a bill in excess of €70m to repair damage caused by the past six weeks of floods and storms.

Clare County Council is likely to have the biggest bill, with engineers yesterday estimating the damage at €37m – revised upwards from an original figure of €24m.

The council warns that more extensive coastal defences are needed in some areas.

It also says that thousands of acres of farmland are under threat in the Shannon Estuary, and that some €1.3m is needed to protect Shannon Airport and the town from inundation.

This link here from an image taken in 1977 gives one a fair idea of the height of the flood defences at the airport.

Today they are hidden away by trees along the main road leading up to the terminal.

Below is an image of their construction in the 1930s.

They seem to have served the airport well, as I cannot ever recall flooding issues there?

Shannon Group announces plans to develop new hangar after reaching capacity on existing space (Shannon Airport)

This follows the signing of a contract for an eight year lease by Air Contractors, a member of the ASL Aviation group, with the Shannon Group for the remaining hangar space at the airport. This will be used by Air Contractors for line maintenance on its fleet of Boeing and ATR aircraft, including its Boeing 757 aircrafts which will be flown by Aer Lingus on the new daily Shannon-Boston service launched last week and its six times weekly JFK New York service that commences in March.

The airport currently has 50,700sq meters of space in nine hangars, all of which will be fully occupied following the signing of contracts with Air Contractors. To meet a current request for near term additional hangar space, the board of the Shannon Group recently agreed to seek planning permission and to tender for the procurement and associated works of a fabric hangar of 4,300sq metres capable of accommodating wide-bodied aircraft.

Commenting following the signing of the contract for use of the vacant hangar, Air Contractors Director of Enginering Brendan Smyth said: “The hangar is an excellent facility that will support our new Boeing 757 services for Aer Lingus, and also our Boeing 737 and ATR services from Shannon for our customers including DHL and FedEx.

“We have had a permanent presence in Shannon since 2004 and this move to our new hangar coupled with the trans-Atlantic operation for Aer Lingus strengthens our ties with the airport considerably”, Mr. Smyth continued. “We have grown our presence and now have about 50 engineering and flight deck positions and we are also delighted to support other maintenance and engineering facilities in the airport.

“The East Apron Hangar will play a key role in the future success of the B757 operations from Shannon as well as our summer charter passenger operations and our freight flying which is very important to business in the region.”

So it looks like that Air Contractors (ASL) will service the Boeing aircraft for Aer Lingus in their former MRO hangar.

Maybe Clinton can confirm this?

Brennans Row wrote: »

This link here from an image taken in 1977 gives one a fair idea of the height of the flood defences at the airport.

Today they are hidden away by trees along the main road leading up to the terminal.

Below is an image of their construction in the 1930s.

They seem to have served the airport well, as I cannot ever recall flooding issues there?

Similar defences protect a lot of areas all the way up and through Limerick city, which saw its first breach ever this winter in the island field area.

The problem I see is these defences will need to be built higher and higher, and the same amount of water will always enter the estuary in a big storm and need to go somewhere.

If they add 2' in Limerick then Shannon becomes a low point, so they raise the banks in Shannon then it could be Bunratty, so eventually the water would push up further through Limerick, Clarecastle and Bunratty etc., flooding places like Sixmilebridge, up stream of Ennis, Adare, and out near UL etc.

Jamie2k9

SNN 2013 traffic figures included the Santa flights, domestic traffic added around 9,000 passengers whish are from Decembers flights. Clearly management trying to smokescreen the real facts.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

SNN 2013 traffic figures included the Santa flights, domestic traffic added around 9,000 passengers whish are from Decembers flights. Clearly management trying to smokescreen the real facts.

Indeed, if you take out the 9000 flights the numbers would be massively lower.:rolleyes:

Some clown was on here before with this waffle about the santa flights only being run to make the numbers look better, you are not even the first to try it.

Its getting boring now, old news. Everybody else has moved on.

Kess73

relaxed wrote: »

Indeed, if you take out the 9000 flights the numbers would be massively lower.:rolleyes:

Some clown was on here before with this waffle about the santa flights only being run to make the numbers look better, you are not even the first to try it.

Its getting boring now, old news. Everybody else has moved on.

Mod Post: Attack the post and not the poster. Seeing as you have not named a poster with your clown comment, you are avoiding a card, but I will be taking a look back through the old thread to see which posters were involved in the conversation you mentioned and I will expect no personal attacks or derogatory references towards them going forward.

Same thing goes for everyone else that uses this thread. Debate a point, argue your point, be passionate about it if it means something to you, but do not let this thread slip into a series of back and forth backbiting and sniping.

Cosmo Kramer

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

SNN 2013 traffic figures included the Santa flights, domestic traffic added around 9,000 passengers whish are from Decembers flights. Clearly management trying to smokescreen the real facts.

Well, now we know. 9,000 'passengers' who flew nowhere other than in and out of Shannon Airport free of charge at the airport's expense had to be counted twice to artificailly manipulate the annual passenger statistics to make it appear as though more passengers used the airport in year one under the new management than under the DAA the year previously. In fact we now know that 2013 was, in fact, the seventh successive year of passenger decline at Shannon Airport.

These flights were an incredible waste of public money given the extent of the bailout provided to Shannon just one year ago - make no mistake, the Irish taxpayer paid for this through the airport bailout. I know that the Shannon propaganda machine on here will do all they can to sweep this under the carpet but there should be no denying that this would be an incredibly embarrasing news story for the airport were it to be picked up by the wider media. That Leo Varadkar lauded the 2013 passenger 'increase' through social media also raises real concerns over his ability to manage and understand the workings of his government department.

"If we all know" where are the figures? All you are doing is speculating! Worthless.

Here is the link to the traffic figures (note the increase in the domestic figures for 2013).

Ok I see the jump in domestic allright, but lets say they are the santa flights, they did use the airport so its not wrong to include them! The point been ignored is the Ryanair and Shannon put on the flights as a joint venture Snn faclity & Ryanair aircraft. There is no smoking gun as to shannon paying Ryanair to cook the books! Its also been widely reported it was to launch the new routes to europe.

Snn is not the only airport to have santa flights this year as several in the uk had Ryanair santa flights! Pax numbers cooking there also? Doubt it.

The facts are no matter what shannon management do will be under a close eye, and to detractors of shannon a chance to get excited and ignore the facts.

Anyway this years numbers will be interesting, with lots of predicted growth and new routes, hopefully good times ahead for snn.

Cosmo Kramer wrote: »

Well, now we know. 9,000 'passengers' who flew nowhere other than in and out of Shannon Airport free of charge at the airport's expense had to be counted twice to artificailly manipulate the annual passenger statistics to make it appear as though more passengers used the airport in year one under the new management than under the DAA the year previously. In fact we now know that 2013 was, in fact, the seventh successive year of passenger decline at Shannon Airport.

These flights were an incredible waste of public money given the extent of the bailout provided to Shannon just one year ago - make no mistake, the Irish taxpayer paid for this through the airport bailout. I know that the Shannon propaganda machine on here will do all they can to sweep this under the carpet but there should be no denying that this would be an incredibly embarrasing news story for the airport were it to be picked up by the wider media. That Leo Varadkar lauded the 2013 passenger 'increase' through social media also raises real concerns over his ability to manage and understand the workings of his government department.

I would appreciate it if you would stop labelling my opinions / posts here to be emanating from some sort of a “Shannon propaganda machine”.

You may be technically correct in that Shannon Airport would have had a marginal -00.29% decrease in passenger numbers instead of a marginal +00.38% increase were it not for the Santa-Kids promotion.

The overall numbers for 2012 and 2013 roughly hit the same 1.4 million mark which objectively means a stabilisation of the numbers has been achieved.

Shannon’s CEO Neil Pakey has a free hand to use his marketing budget as he sees fit for the overall good of the airport.

The positive PR received in the national press for the Santa-Kids promotion will pay dividends and baring another world banking crisis we will see a two digit growth in passenger numbers at Shannon this year.

Passengers per year.

2007 (3.6 million)
2008 (3.2 million)
2009 (2.8 million)
2010 (1.8 million)
2011 (1.6 million)
2012 (1.4 million)
2013 (1.4 million)

imurdaddy wrote: »

Ok I see the jump in domestic allright, but lets say they are the santa flights, they did use the airport so its not wrong to include them!

Ah, come on. Flying 4,500 people around in a circle so you can say you'd 9.000 passengers is a joke. It actually undermines a reasonably good 2013 performance. Other airports might have had a few Santa flights. But they weren't material to their numbers.

As to who paid for the flights, we simply don't know. SNN and Ryanair acknowledge each other in the PR. That doesn't tell us whether the costs were shared, or whether one paid the other.

And we'll probably never know, as there isn't a journalist in the country with the will to follow up on an interesting little story. So, forever, we'll be told that SNN's passenger numbers increased the moment the daa left. But it won't actually be the true story.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Ah, come on. Flying 4,500 people around in a circle so you can say you'd 9.000 passengers is a joke.

What makes you think that's the sole reason they did it? Whether there were santa flights or not the statistic that intelligent people see is that the new authority have stabilised the passenger numbers in year 1 and arrested an annual decline of over 200000 per year while the DAA were running the place into the ground for the last few years.

This years numbers will show whether there is sustained growth in passengers or not.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

as there isn't a journalist in the country with the will to follow up on an interesting little story

You are correct in that, it is just a little story, that only seems to bother yourself and a few others. If you take away the 9000 flights the media would have reported it much the same, that the numbers have stabilised, being only a few thousand different to last year, and that the rot has been stopped.

relaxed wrote: »

What makes you think that's the sole reason they did it?

Because I suspect it was hugely important to them to have some basis for saying passenger numbers increased.

relaxed wrote: »

If you take away the 9000 flights the media would have reported it much the same, that the numbers have stabilised, being only a few thousand different to last year

The substantial position would have been the same. I'm not sure the media coverage would have been quite the same.

Bear in mind, much is being made in the PR about passenger numbers increasing in 2013.

Now, they could still report the real figures as very positive. They've gained more US passengers than they've lost UK passengers, and while transit passengers have dropped again you'd expect, if they are only passing through, that's no big deal for local tourism. The small increase in European traffic is more of a deal for that.

However, you clearly can't have State companies using scarce public money (in the sense that State companies, and all they own, belong to all of us) to fly people round in a circle so they can double-count them and inflate their performance.

It's just not on.

Well, sorry, it is on because they'll be let get away with it.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

However, you clearly can't have State companies using scarce public money (in the sense that State companies, and all they own, belong to all of us) to fly people round in a circle so they can double-count them and inflate their performance.

That's obviously false GCU, as you know yourself it was Ryanair that flew the kids to Santa and as one poster previously stated Ryanair staff got time off in lieu for doing it.

From a PR / Marketing point of view it was a success, the interest can be measured by the fact that 15,000 applied for the 4,500 Santa seats within three hours.

Also, the positive free publicity by the national press of those smiling kids on their way to Santa from Shannon plus the national surprise of the goodwill shown by Michael O'Leary for co-sponsoring it.

Getting such marketing value from a classical paid advertisement in a newspaper is so much more difficult to attain.

Outspoken Ryanair chief Michael O'Leary dishes out free seats for Santa (Irish Mirror)

A spokesman for Ryanair said: “Christmas cheer will be at its loudest and most excited over the next two Saturdays and Sundays.

“More than 3,000 children will be on board free Ryanair flights in a magical gift from the airline and airport.”

The initiative was devised to mark the airline’s eight new routes – to Berlin, Paris, Fuerteventura, Warsaw, Faro, Munich, Nice and Krakow.

It’s all part of the new leaf Michael O’Leary has turned over in a bid to become a more cuddly, consumer-loving brand.

The CEO has adopted a new customer friendly approach, or in his own inimitable words, he wants to “stop unnecessarily pissing people off.”

Its amazing the anti shannon posters will find any angle right or wrong, fact or fiction to harp on about how they are been tricked and made bigger idiots by Snn & Ryanair. Whatever reason that is given is a lie and the poster works for snn and is involved in a big cover up! It seems to me sad in a time when something good that would benafit the whole country is been nit picked by facless "experts" who scann to net daily to raise the oul blood pressure at the mention of shannon! Sad indeed.

I have bad news your blood pressure is only going to keep going up, shannon is only on the first step of expansion plans avation services, pax, cargo etc. Lots of extra seats this year kur numbers will be just great.

Sad to see the oul irish thing of "if we cant have it nether will they" shannon has a great past and a greater future, if the naysayers looked at why there airports are not on par, instead of posting boil on every thread on shannon they'd be better served, but I suppose nobody wants to listen to the waffel which flows from your mouth.

Brennans Row wrote: »

That's obviously false GCU, as you know yourself it was Ryanair that flew the kids to Santa and as one poster previously stated Ryanair staff got time off in lieu for doing it.

Well, no, it's not obviously false. We don't definitively know who carried the cost of the flights, or in what proportion.

imurdaddy wrote: »

Its amazing the anti shannon posters will find any angle right or wrong, fact or fiction to harp on about how they are been tricked and made bigger idiots by Snn & Ryanair..

The situation is much simpler than that. When we pointed out initially that SNN's small increase in passenger numbers was down to the Santa flights, posters rejected this saying that these passengers would not have been included.

Now that we've evidence that they were included, and even counted twice as both arrivals and departures, we're being told that we're "anti-Shannon". We're anti-Shannon just for pointing out a fact.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Well, no, it's not obviously false. We don't definitively know who carried the cost of the flights, or in what proportion.The situation is much simpler than that. When we pointed out initially that SNN's small increase in passenger numbers was down to the Santa flights, posters rejected this saying that these passengers would not have been included.

Now that we've evidence that they were included, and even counted twice as both arrivals and departures, we're being told that we're "anti-Shannon". We're anti-Shannon just for pointing out a fact.

When you say "we" who are you referring to? The only person still troubled by this minor and irrelevant subject matter seems to be yourself.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Well, no, it's not obviously false. We don't definitively know who carried the cost of the flights, or in what proportion.

If you don’t know who carried the cost of the flights yourself then in fairness you should refrain from slating Shannon Airport for wasting state resources.

The Irish Mail article clearly tributes Michael O’Leary for the free Santa flights and credits the Airport for the musical entertainment festivities on the ground.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Now that we've evidence that they were included, and even counted twice as both arrivals and departures, we're being told that we're "anti-Shannon".

By using the word “evidence” here, you would swear that Shannon Airport was on trial in some court room.

In essence, the passenger numbers in 2013 have been stabilised to the 2012 level.

That is the real positive achievement for the airport management in 2013.

Secondly, from a marketing point of view, if the management decided to marginally nudge these stabilised figures into a marginal +00.38% increase as against -00.29% decrease with the help of a PR marketing promotion, then so be it, as it is a normal, real world, acceptable commercial practice within a reasonable frame of course.

The contracts signed for the new Aer Lingus / Ryanair routes near the end of 2013 will kick in 2014 and this will see Shannon numbers growing from a stabilised situation.

Personally, I find the criticism of the Santa-Kids promotion here, a bit over the top and somewhat petty.

Brennans Row wrote: »

By using the word “evidence” here, you would swear that Shannon Airport was on trial in some court room.

If you think evidence is something that people should only use in courtrooms, then I think we may have identified a more fundamental point at issue.

Brennans Row wrote: »

Personally, I find the criticism of the Santa-Kids promotion here, a bit over the top and somewhat petty.

It would be, if it wasn't being used by SNN as a basis for saying their passenger numbers increased. Can I remind you that the initial reaction was denial that this was the case.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88477594&postcount=626

Afaik the Santa flights cannot be included in passenger numbers as the passengers did not pay landing fees (and I doubt Ryanair paid them on their behalf)

Will look for a source on this but it was definitely asked last month and that's what the airport said!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88519537&postcount=648

I was speaking with someone that works in the airport during the week and mentioned the increase in passengers and how it was handy that the Santa flights bumped up the numbers, I was told that only passengers from other airports and that disembark their flights count, so the Santa flights and private jets where the people don't get off don't count. The numbers for airport footfall is different though, that includes staff, airline crews, people dropping off, etc. etc. These numbers can have a massive effect on rent costs for businesses in the airport.

bannerlady20

It would be, if it wasn't being used by SNN as a basis for saying their passenger numbers increased. Can I remind you that the initial reaction was denial that this was the case.

How do you know SNN only did these flights to increase there passenger numbers?

I think that's just your opinion and you haven't got proof to back it up.

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

If you think evidence is something that people should only use in courtrooms, then I think we may have identified a more fundamental point at issue.

In the interest of clarity, would you please elaborate on what you mean by that?

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Can I remind you that the initial reaction was denial that this was the case.

Where is the problem here?

Angelfire9 and Clareman genuinely tried to get to information at source.