1,000 new jobs hope at Bournemouth Airport (From Bournemouth Echo)

Crap. Ask the employees of Cobham PLC that are getting made redundant.

The Jobs wont be 'New', just locals business's that move to the better facility's.

'hope' 'could' 'would come' - all sounds a bit hypothetical...

Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?

Will the £1.1m be used to provide a direct airport link from the A31? It's desperately needed if the airport is going to grow!

The Renegade Master wrote:
Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?

Much as I don't like the drop off charge (and in any case, I avoid it by turning round before I get to the terminal and getting my picture taken), the reason is not due to greed.

It is there because it is the only way for the airport to get extra cash without upsetting Ryanair. Ryanair can, and do stop operations at airports when 'departure taxes' are applied or their landing fees are increased. The problem is that the airport has dropped landing fees low enough to attract Ryanair, but now cannot make a profit without raising them. But doing so would cause Ryanair to cease operations. Ryanair don't seem to mind the drop off charge.

The area needs proper road infrastructure NOT the current country lane in and out.
The £1.1m road improvements will no doubt be polishing a t***.

bmthtony wrote:
Will the £1.1m be used to provide a direct airport link from the A31? It's desperately needed if the airport is going to grow!

Hardly the cost of a mile of single carriageway road is £8 million plus the junction.
-
Reading the airport master plan who quickly see why they have introduced the drop off charge, the link to the A338 is expensive and unlikely in the short term, many of the passengers are dropped off by friends or in taxis. Generating as many as 4 trips per passenger. This puts pressure on the existing road structure, so rather than improve public transport or build the proper link, just charge for dropping off.
-
Sadly MAG probably see the charge as a Win Win.

Do none of you read the article? This is not jobs at the airport ,its jobs on the industrial estate. Where does the drop off charge come into it ? In any case ,if any of you use airports regularly you will know that few airports dont have a drop off charge now but what has it to do with this proposal anyway?
1000 jobs ,over ten years thats 100 a year and you can bet that 75% of those will go to eastern europeans and asian engineers because its those people who are trained in the aircraft industry .there will be very little local benefit.

Victor_Meldrew_Lives
! wrote:
The area needs proper road infrastructure NOT the current country lane in and out.
The £1.1m road improvements will no doubt be polishing a t***.

More twaddle from someone who hasnt got a clue. I go to the airport everyday,rarely if ever have i seen traffic congestion .the road is perfectly adequate

Adrian XX wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:
Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?

Much as I don't like the drop off charge (and in any case, I avoid it by turning round before I get to the terminal and getting my picture taken), the reason is not due to greed.

It is there because it is the only way for the airport to get extra cash without upsetting Ryanair. Ryanair can, and do stop operations at airports when 'departure taxes' are applied or their landing fees are increased. The problem is that the airport has dropped landing fees low enough to attract Ryanair, but now cannot make a profit without raising them. But doing so would cause Ryanair to cease operations. Ryanair don't seem to mind the drop off charge.

Ryanair didn't force the MAG to implement the drop off charge, they did so to maximise their profits from the airport. It's rightly perceived as a petty rip off and as such will only serve to alienate many of the customers the airport needs to thrive.
If Ryanair, Thomson etc added £2 to the cost of a ticket to cover an equivalent increase in departure tax or landing fees it would make no difference to them whatsoever as their flights are nearly always a sell out. MAG could then remove the drop off charge and put an end to their PR disaster.

"a ten-year vision for a £60million business park was unveiled"...... THIS is what the article is about it has NOTHING to do with the airport itself...as 'wallydown' has said.

There is no problem with the road. And this story is good news in my humble opinion, it can help local business if local business want it and shows economic progress!

The Renegade Master wrote:

Adrian XX wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:
Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?

Much as I don't like the drop off charge (and in any case, I avoid it by turning round before I get to the terminal and getting my picture taken), the reason is not due to greed.

It is there because it is the only way for the airport to get extra cash without upsetting Ryanair. Ryanair can, and do stop operations at airports when 'departure taxes' are applied or their landing fees are increased. The problem is that the airport has dropped landing fees low enough to attract Ryanair, but now cannot make a profit without raising them. But doing so would cause Ryanair to cease operations. Ryanair don't seem to mind the drop off charge.

Ryanair didn't force the MAG to implement the drop off charge, they did so to maximise their profits from the airport. It's rightly perceived as a petty rip off and as such will only serve to alienate many of the customers the airport needs to thrive.
If Ryanair, Thomson etc added £2 to the cost of a ticket to cover an equivalent increase in departure tax or landing fees it would make no difference to them whatsoever as their flights are nearly always a sell out. MAG could then remove the drop off charge and put an end to their PR disaster.

I saw a cyclist not having to pay the charge last week! Why don't we divert the thread away from the article a little more?

The Renegade Master wrote:
Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?

Do what I saw today. Cars parked on the main road with passengers wheeling their luggage to the terminal. There's going to be an accident if this continues.

It appears that the average IQ on this forum is about 10, listen up. .... This article has nothing, THATS NOTHING to do with the airport,drop off charges or airport staffing . It is about developments on the industrial estate at chapel gate and nothing else , UNBELIEVEABLE that it has turned into discussion about drop off charges because a few thickos havent read the article ,i despair

As prevoius comments have stated this news is about the industrial site which is run on a completely seperate budget to the airport and is successful,the airport is still on a downer deserted in the winter with a few flights daily in the summer although cannot complain as a lot easier than going to gatwick etc even if there is a small charge for dropping off !

Let's face it. The sad people on here aren't interested whether more jobs are being created. There's no reason not to think that new businesses may move to the area an employ locals, which can only be a good thing.

People are more interested in moaning about a £2.50 charge at an airport we are lucky enough to have only a few miles away where you fly to Palma to get away from this crap weather for £140. People do my head in.

I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

The Renegade Master wrote:
I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

The two things are totally unrelated its you that needs to get a grip of yourself
that charge has not affected the use of the airport and will never be removed ,it pays the wage bill without having to earn it - - - - - can you see it going ?

wallydown wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:
I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

The two things are totally unrelated its you that needs to get a grip of yourself
that charge has not affected the use of the airport and will never be removed ,it pays the wage bill without having to earn it - - - - - can you see it going ?

They quite clearly are related as I explained.
Jog on troll.

The Renegade Master wrote:

wallydown wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:
I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

The two things are totally unrelated its you that needs to get a grip of yourself
that charge has not affected the use of the airport and will never be removed ,it pays the wage bill without having to earn it - - - - - can you see it going ?

They quite clearly are related as I explained.
Jog on troll.

You need to change your name to the retard master ba*er. You simply do not understand the article. But to be fair the Echo have worded the headline wrong leading people to think its jobs for the airport and it isnt nor is it imediate .its a ten year programme which no one in this town will see the benefit of ,wind your neck in and read the article ,slowly if you have to

wallydown wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:

wallydown wrote:

The Renegade Master wrote:
I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

The two things are totally unrelated its you that needs to get a grip of yourself
that charge has not affected the use of the airport and will never be removed ,it pays the wage bill without having to earn it - - - - - can you see it going ?

They quite clearly are related as I explained.
Jog on troll.

You need to change your name to the retard master ba*er. You simply do not understand the article. But to be fair the Echo have worded the headline wrong leading people to think its jobs for the airport and it isnt nor is it imediate .its a ten year programme which no one in this town will see the benefit of ,wind your neck in and read the article ,slowly if you have to

If you insult me again I will have you removed from the site for insulting and abusive behaviour.

wallydown wrote:
Do none of you read the article? This is not jobs at the airport ,its jobs on the industrial estate. Where does the drop off charge come into it ? In any case ,if any of you use airports regularly you will know that few airports dont have a drop off charge now but what has it to do with this proposal anyway?
1000 jobs ,over ten years thats 100 a year and you can bet that 75% of those will go to eastern europeans and asian engineers because its those people who are trained in the aircraft industry .there will be very little local benefit.

If you check the Airport master plan published in 2007 you will find that the development of the industrial estate was originally linked with the provision of a new link road from the A338 but that was shelved because it was not commercially viable.
-
Therefore it stands to reason it is in the airport operators interest to dissuade passengers from being dropped off at the airport since if they can get away with developing the land without paying for the road link they win. The two issues are linked.
-
I'm not against the development and I can see that MAG need to get cash in however they can, but allowing development and growth of the airport and industrial estate without provision for improving the A338 link eventually, is shortsighted and means we will be stuck with inadequate road links for many years.
-
The drop off charge is a symptom of the desire to cash in and not address that real issue.

Sorry but there is no substance to your argument ,its pure assumption.
MAG rebuilt the terminal and i guess they want to recoup some of the outlay, £2.50 isnt going to break the bank and frankly youve got no choice just as youve got no choice over surcharges by budget airlines on card payments ,pay it or you dont go !! MAG have gotten away with it so you can be sure that all their airports will levy that charge and every other airport operator will be looking at it - after all how many people pass through gatwick and heathrow? If they apply it you have to pay it.
where any this applies to the development out at chapel gate i just dont know and i again make the point that the Echo are wrong to use the airport as a reference point because it misleads the reader,the industrial estate does not serve the airport

The Renegade Master wrote:
I think the arrogant people above who choose to insult and abuse other posters here should have their accounts suspended by the Echo. This story is about the MAG being set to make money from a new industrial development at the airport, so it's obvious that the removal of the drop off charge would be mentioned in lieu of the profits this new venture should bring in. So kindly get over yourselves, get a life and jog on.

"get a life"? Who's the one moaning about paying £2.50. If you don't like it why don't you "jog on" and go to another airport.

More pies in the skies above the airport than aeroplanes!!
As Wallydown says the most important question is 'Will this new development see the greedy bosses at the MAG remove the disgusting drop off charge?'

The Renegade Master - maximising profits? What?Bournemouth Airport currently makes a sizeable loss. For some people who work at the airport, the £2.50 parking charge is the only thing that stands between them and redundancy. The charge was introduced for the reasons described by Adrian XX. Until the airport has more routes, it has to try to cover its costs somehow. Most people don't realise that Ryanair pay little or nothing to the airport, so they have to cover their costs somehow - in the end, the £2.50 is only a fair contribution towards the use of a smart, modern airport facility staffed by dedicated professionals. If you can't get £2.50 out of your mind, please see a doctor.

Personally i would like to see the back of Ryanair he does very little for the local economy and because he is so horrible and ruthless no other operators will try and compete with him. so the Airport can not expand.