Southend Airport install 496 solar panels as part of £10m extension

It's easy being green - Airport install 496 solar panels

It's easy being green - Airport install 496 solar panels

First published in Southend by

SOUTHEND Airport’s green credentials have been boosted with hundreds of new solar panels on its new terminal building.

The installation is part of the £10million terminal extension that opened to the public last month, providing more check-in desks, a larger departure lounge and a greater choice of shops for passengers.

The 496 solar panels will supply the airport with clean solar electricity for decades through its private electricity network.

David Lister, airport operations director, said: “We are delighted to add the provision of clean solar electricity to a range of ‘green’ initiatives we’ve introduced as the terminal has developed.

“Environmentally friendly initiatives are very important to us and the whole building has been designed to incorporate a number of them, including sustainable drainage, specialist coating to improve insulation, extensive glazing to enhance natural lighting and slow start escalators.”

The panels, supplied by Conergy and installed by Photon Energy on the terminal’s curved roofs, are expected to reduce the airport’s carbon dioxide emissions by around 1,000 tonnes over the next 20 years.

Jonathan Bates, Photon Energy managing director, said: “Solar is Britain’s favourite renewable energy and it’s great Southend Airport has shown its commitment to self-generation.

“You can’t necessarily see the panels from the ground, but millions of people will get a bird’s eye view of them as they take off or come in to land.

“Airport terminals are great places for solar panels as they have a lot of roof space and large daytime electricity consumption.”

The Stobart Group has ploughed more than £120million into the development of the airport since buying it in 2008.

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:40am Sun 30 Mar 14

Keptquiettillnow says...

A green airport?
A green airport? Keptquiettillnow
  • Score: 5

10:11am Sun 30 Mar 14

paintlad3 says...

thats good for the environment!
thats good for the environment! paintlad3
  • Score: 10

10:52am Sun 30 Mar 14

poortaxpayer says...

I wondered when we would have the pro airport story that mentions £120 million investment from Stobarts. I think this is a prerequisite of every airport story in the Echo.
I wondered when we would have the pro airport story that mentions £120 million investment from Stobarts. I think this is a prerequisite of every airport story in the Echo. poortaxpayer
  • Score: -11

10:52am Sun 30 Mar 14

maxell says...

southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s maxell
  • Score: -22

11:03am Sun 30 Mar 14

Nebs says...

maxell wrote:
southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.
[quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s[/p][/quote]Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game. Nebs
  • Score: 15

11:24am Sun 30 Mar 14

jayman says...

Just a quick editorial question. Why didn't the echo use a picture of a solar panel(s) for the article? Why doesn't the echo provide the reader with information on how much power could be harnessed from solar power (photovoltaic cell), how much a company could save with such panels or how much it is costing for there instillation.

solar panels are okay as a long term cost saving measure, but as for there ecological credentials, well, they require Li or Ni industrial batteries and the solar pannels themselves contain monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride or copper indium selenide/sulfide, or GaAs-based multijunction material systems.

Basically, the airport wants to save a bit of cash over the long term.
Just a quick editorial question. Why didn't the echo use a picture of a solar panel(s) for the article? Why doesn't the echo provide the reader with information on how much power could be harnessed from solar power (photovoltaic cell), how much a company could save with such panels or how much it is costing for there instillation. solar panels are okay as a long term cost saving measure, but as for there ecological credentials, well, they require Li or Ni industrial batteries and the solar pannels themselves contain monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride or copper indium selenide/sulfide, or GaAs-based multijunction material systems. Basically, the airport wants to save a bit of cash over the long term. jayman
  • Score: -20

5:11pm Sun 30 Mar 14

Joe Clark says...

jayman wrote:
Just a quick editorial question. Why didn't the echo use a picture of a solar panel(s) for the article? Why doesn't the echo provide the reader with information on how much power could be harnessed from solar power (photovoltaic cell), how much a company could save with such panels or how much it is costing for there instillation.

solar panels are okay as a long term cost saving measure, but as for there ecological credentials, well, they require Li or Ni industrial batteries and the solar pannels themselves contain monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride or copper indium selenide/sulfide, or GaAs-based multijunction material systems.

Basically, the airport wants to save a bit of cash over the long term.
This is currently the largest PV system at any UK airport, strange even the airport nimbys are moaning about it!
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: Just a quick editorial question. Why didn't the echo use a picture of a solar panel(s) for the article? Why doesn't the echo provide the reader with information on how much power could be harnessed from solar power (photovoltaic cell), how much a company could save with such panels or how much it is costing for there instillation. solar panels are okay as a long term cost saving measure, but as for there ecological credentials, well, they require Li or Ni industrial batteries and the solar pannels themselves contain monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride or copper indium selenide/sulfide, or GaAs-based multijunction material systems. Basically, the airport wants to save a bit of cash over the long term.[/p][/quote]This is currently the largest PV system at any UK airport, strange even the airport nimbys are moaning about it! Joe Clark
  • Score: 11

9:47am Mon 31 Mar 14

Eric the Red says...

Green airport expansion? What about all the extra polution, greenhouse gasses and fosil fuel burning?
Green airport expansion? What about all the extra polution, greenhouse gasses and fosil fuel burning? Eric the Red
  • Score: -5

10:08am Mon 31 Mar 14

maxell says...

Nebs wrote:
maxell wrote:
southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.
just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport.
my opinion as usaual.
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s[/p][/quote]Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.[/p][/quote]just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport. my opinion as usaual. maxell
  • Score: -5

11:44am Mon 31 Mar 14

Nebs says...

maxell wrote:
Nebs wrote:
maxell wrote:
southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.
just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport.
my opinion as usaual.
A year ago the shares were 80p. Now they are 130p.
3 years ago they were 140p
5 years ago they were 90p
10 years ago they were 100p
Doesn't look like the freefall you seem to be describing.

Will the lease revert to the council if they default, and who would get all the buildings they have put up, in the unlikely event (given the share price) of that happening?
[quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s[/p][/quote]Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.[/p][/quote]just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport. my opinion as usaual.[/p][/quote]A year ago the shares were 80p. Now they are 130p. 3 years ago they were 140p 5 years ago they were 90p 10 years ago they were 100p Doesn't look like the freefall you seem to be describing. Will the lease revert to the council if they default, and who would get all the buildings they have put up, in the unlikely event (given the share price) of that happening? Nebs
  • Score: 3

1:14pm Mon 31 Mar 14

w-jback says...

maxell wrote:
Nebs wrote:
maxell wrote:
southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.
just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport.
my opinion as usaual.
where to begin with this twaddle?

1 million passengers in a year with the record number carried in a year as well as the new record last week (after 40 years) for the most passengers departing on one aircraft (177). Easyjet are utilising the bigger A320 a lot more on some routes at the moment as there is the demand to, yes some routes are not full but you get that everywhere and those routes will be replaced..

Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5)
No evidence for this apart from some more twaddle on an anti stobart website registered by a disgruntled ex employee. You would think that 5 directors from one of the best known brands in the country might have made it to Sky News or BBC News. Except its a private prosecution not a criminal one so I don't know how they can be charged with anything??? Maybe accused.

based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day.
based on what figures? ones you made up in your head?

Go back through your posts over the last few years, have any come true yet?
[quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s[/p][/quote]Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.[/p][/quote]just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport. my opinion as usaual.[/p][/quote]where to begin with this twaddle? 1 million passengers in a year with the record number carried in a year as well as the new record last week (after 40 years) for the most passengers departing on one aircraft (177). Easyjet are utilising the bigger A320 a lot more on some routes at the moment as there is the demand to, yes some routes are not full but you get that everywhere and those routes will be replaced.. [quote]Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5)[/quote] No evidence for this apart from some more twaddle on an anti stobart website registered by a disgruntled ex employee. You would think that 5 directors from one of the best known brands in the country might have made it to Sky News or BBC News. Except its a private prosecution not a criminal one so I don't know how they can be charged with anything??? Maybe accused. [quote]based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day.[/quote] based on what figures? ones you made up in your head? Go back through your posts over the last few years, have any come true yet? w-jback
  • Score: 2

12:46am Tue 1 Apr 14

disenfranchisedpast says...

maxell wrote:
Nebs wrote:
maxell wrote:
southend airport install solar panels
1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid
2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full.

echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year.

dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s
Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.
just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport.
my opinion as usaual.
Hmm I might just have to go with bull cr@p on a lot of this.

You mean after investing 120 odd million pounds in developing an airport they didn't turn an instant profit?

What the figures actually show is that the deficit, or loss they accrue each year is decreasing (5 odd million down to 4 million in the last year i think)

I would assume that they will try to pay down any debt accumulated from the expansion before actual profits start rolling in.

Given the increase in routes, passengers and new carriers, I would assume that deficit should quickly be paid down and profits should start to mount

Manston is thinking of closing as it has a tiny catchment, no real links, poor infrastructure, no investment and its main carrier is operating on about 40% loads, it is a very different kettle of fish from southend, last I heard Easyjet were operating about 85%-90% on the sun routes.

Also Cash cow? is this another echo commenter who fails to understand what a cash cow actually is, no company drops 120 million on a venture expecting it to be a "cash cow"

And no company with stobarts track record is going to go into the airport game and expect to turn an instant profit within two years of investing said capital. Airport management is a mid to long term return.

I dont think there are any fraud charges against the airport directors, I think there are some civil charges attempting to be placed by a disgruntled ex employee against stobart board members, but I'm not sure just how successful they will be...
[quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]maxell[/bold] wrote: southend airport install solar panels 1st they are not self instalable as they conect to the grid 2nd companies give them away as an energy trade off so Ivery much doubt if it cost them a singlr penny yet as normal claim qudos, as things are at present they probably could not afford a solar panel let alone a roof full. echo why wont you report huge news on the huge finacial losses at the airport of 5.5 and 4.3 million per year. dont waste time on twaddle man up and write proper articles on real news issues, I thought the new editor would have more b.a.l.l.s[/p][/quote]Many businesses lose money when starting up. It's a long term game.[/p][/quote]just a quick reply to nebs comment , Yes I agree but if you think of the math they were boasting just about 1 million passengers last year, and taking the highest fig of 5.5 mil that would mean that the airport paid £5 (est) to every passenger , there was no profit all losses , manston is thinking or closing as it it losing about 10 grand a day , based on the figs it looks like southend is loosing 130 (est) grand a day. this is not sustainable , It looks and sounds good to have flybe on board but the realality is due to the lack of flights or take up of flights, the majority of aircraft are departing only partialy full. Its got to a stage where stobart have had to use their own aircraft flown under a more well know livery, in an attempt to stave of the daily crippleing debts,this is not an airport that is growing it is one that is surviving (only just), two 75 seat crop sprayers is not going to save a cash cow. Throw in to the mix that fraud charges have been filed against airport directors (5), shares droping, need I say more. Ok I accept that people may want to look to the bright side, taken in by the excelent pr that paints a glowing picture (just shows the power of PR) , but based on the deluge of problems within the company (not just airports),it really is getting to the point of defeat, and evidence is building that the toxic debts are likly to be placed at the door of southend airport. my opinion as usaual.[/p][/quote]Hmm I might just have to go with bull cr@p on a lot of this. You mean after investing 120 odd million pounds in developing an airport they didn't turn an instant profit? What the figures actually show is that the deficit, or loss they accrue each year is decreasing (5 odd million down to 4 million in the last year i think) I would assume that they will try to pay down any debt accumulated from the expansion before actual profits start rolling in. Given the increase in routes, passengers and new carriers, I would assume that deficit should quickly be paid down and profits should start to mount Manston is thinking of closing as it has a tiny catchment, no real links, poor infrastructure, no investment and its main carrier is operating on about 40% loads, it is a very different kettle of fish from southend, last I heard Easyjet were operating about 85%-90% on the sun routes. Also Cash cow? is this another echo commenter who fails to understand what a cash cow actually is, no company drops 120 million on a venture expecting it to be a "cash cow" And no company with stobarts track record is going to go into the airport game and expect to turn an instant profit within two years of investing said capital. Airport management is a mid to long term return. I dont think there are any fraud charges against the airport directors, I think there are some civil charges attempting to be placed by a disgruntled ex employee against stobart board members, but I'm not sure just how successful they will be... disenfranchisedpast
  • Score: 2

10:27am Tue 1 Apr 14

Kim Gandy says...

Eric the Red wrote:
Green airport expansion? What about all the extra polution, greenhouse gasses and fosil fuel burning?
All the leftie buzzwords.

Read the Great Global Warming Swindle
[quote][p][bold]Eric the Red[/bold] wrote: Green airport expansion? What about all the extra polution, greenhouse gasses and fosil fuel burning?[/p][/quote]All the leftie buzzwords. Read the Great Global Warming Swindle Kim Gandy
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree