VOTE: Is council right to scrap Southend Airshow? (From Echo)

Max Impact wrote:
Scrapping the airshow will please few but the nimbys and down sayers. But why a photo of Clacton!

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Scrapping the airshow will please few but the nimbys and down sayers. But why a photo of Clacton!

Seems the Echo has taken your point on board and changed the picture.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

jolllyboy wrote:
Wrong priorities, to build a museum and a library which cost way too much when they knew we were in a recession and now to cut off the hand that feeds them by cutting back on the things some people (I dont know why) come to see. Also spending money on a stupid little so called 'culture' thing on the pier which is too small for purpose and is out of keeping with a pier of its era.
No Airshow - is this a broken promise by Easyjet - get what they want (as they were in it from the planning stage) and then let the town down.

Max Impact wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

Money from building the Library comes from the capital funds and can NOT be spent on services.

How many times do people need telling.

Seasider90 wrote:
We're told there is no money - yet the government gives millions away in foreign aid. No money yet we give billions to the EU. No money yet we're allowing millions of immigrants to exert extra pressure and costs on hospitals, schools and our world famous benefits system. No money yet half the new social housing is needed for immigrants. See the bigger picture? We need to get out of the EU NOW!

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

Broadwaywatch wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

and it would seem the loss of an ancient footpath, footpath 36 from Eastwood to Rochford. A footpath which has been there long before the airport built a taxiway across it back in the early sixties. However, the airport back then also painted a zebra crossing on the tarmac so that the footpath could continue un-obstructed and un-obstructed it has remained until now. Now the owners of the airport are intent in closing this most often quiet rural walk and diverting it onto a busy main road. The reason they say is because of security . It seems strange that it's taken them all this time to come to this conclusion. However, if this is truly the reason then I propose that such a problem could easily be solved with an electronic gate with a camera either side of the taxiway where it crosses the footpath. I believe it to be a logical, and community minded solution to such a said problem.

Nebs wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

and it would seem the loss of an ancient footpath, footpath 36 from Eastwood to Rochford. A footpath which has been there long before the airport built a taxiway across it back in the early sixties. However, the airport back then also painted a zebra crossing on the tarmac so that the footpath could continue un-obstructed and un-obstructed it has remained until now. Now the owners of the airport are intent in closing this most often quiet rural walk and diverting it onto a busy main road. The reason they say is because of security . It seems strange that it's taken them all this time to come to this conclusion. However, if this is truly the reason then I propose that such a problem could easily be solved with an electronic gate with a camera either side of the taxiway where it crosses the footpath. I believe it to be a logical, and community minded solution to such a said problem.

If you buy a house under a flightpath, you can't complain when planes fly overhead. If you buy an airport with a footpath going through the middle, you can't complain if people want to walk along it.

Max Impact wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge.

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

So you moan not enough is done in Southend then are happy when the town biggest even of the year is scrapped...

Move to margate they like your type down there.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

So you moan not enough is done in Southend then are happy when the town biggest even of the year is scrapped...

Move to margate they like your type down there.

Aw diddums, didda big an nasty council-wouncil take poor Maxy-waxy's ickle airshow away?

Hahaha!

Max Impact wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

Money from building the Library comes from the capital funds and can NOT be spent on services.

How many times do people need telling.

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

So you moan not enough is done in Southend then are happy when the town biggest even of the year is scrapped...

Move to margate they like your type down there.

Aw diddums, didda big an nasty council-wouncil take poor Maxy-waxy's ickle airshow away?

Hahaha!

At least I OWN my own house.

Renting is for the poor.

emcee wrote:
£130,000 seems a drop in the ocean comapred to what they need to save and so seems a bit silly to headline the fact that they are only going to be saving such a small amount by scrapping the airshow. Don't get me wrong, I am not bothered the airshow has been scrapped. After all, I gave up on it when it ceased being a decent airshow eons ago. What I do get angry about, though, is that the council make all these silly little savings here and there when there are easily larger savings to be made elsewhere. However,the council seem reluctant to do so. Call me cynical but I cannot help thinking that this is because the people who make these decisions and manage our services have their own self interests to think about. Big savings can be made by not spending six figure sums (or more) yearly on overly expensive temp staff. Also, by not paying council management such obscene salaries. This council would have more credibility if they started saving from the top down rather than the bottom up. Try sacking a few higher managers that surplus to requirements, rather than move them sideways into other "created job titles". Giving the other high paid staff a pay cut. If they do not like it perhaps they could always try and find a job elsewhere. I bet they will soon find out which side their bread is buttered if forced into that position. Many of the towns multi million pound building projects could, also, be put on hold. After all, the council allow other developers to put their projects on hold, don't they? Southend council can quite easily save millions at the drop of a hat but by doing so the decision makers need to put the people of the town first and not themselves.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

So you moan not enough is done in Southend then are happy when the town biggest even of the year is scrapped...

Move to margate they like your type down there.

Aw diddums, didda big an nasty council-wouncil take poor Maxy-waxy's ickle airshow away?

Hahaha!

maxell wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Max Impact wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
The airshow stopped being an airshow years ago. These days it's a double-glazing sales convention with a couple of Southend bound flights diverted along the seafront.

So you moan not enough is done in Southend then are happy when the town biggest even of the year is scrapped...

Move to margate they like your type down there.

Aw diddums, didda big an nasty council-wouncil take poor Maxy-waxy's ickle airshow away?

Hahaha!

I used to fire profesional fireworks and the going rate about 8 years ago was an estimated £1000 per minuite

maxell wrote:
How can the council state that the airport is needed for tourism and that is what is needed, southend & rochford council are resposible for deverting millions of out of the economy, southend = everything bad for the shoppers, parking lack of outlets, airport retail park looks set to close as well , "the airport want the land", airport boasting x amout of flights out, all taking money from the economy, the latest money looser will be flights to manchester from southend, for £20 or near as, a direct bus route to the chaford center on the No 8 bus, thats as cheap as going to blue water or lakeside , when you consider traffic hold up caused by abismal saddlers farm road works, tail backs on the M25 and increasing toll fees and your fuel, it will be cheaper to go to one of the biggest cenetrs in the UK, I think the councils are now realising that they are responsible for the bigget blunder in their political carees, as I said earlier they have sold you all down the line and have become sacrificial lambs to the stobart gods, I am ashamed of you all.

maxell wrote:
How can the council state that the airport is needed for tourism and that is what is needed, southend & rochford council are resposible for deverting millions of out of the economy, southend = everything bad for the shoppers, parking lack of outlets, airport retail park looks set to close as well , "the airport want the land", airport boasting x amout of flights out, all taking money from the economy, the latest money looser will be flights to manchester from southend, for £20 or near as, a direct bus route to the chaford center on the No 8 bus, thats as cheap as going to blue water or lakeside , when you consider traffic hold up caused by abismal saddlers farm road works, tail backs on the M25 and increasing toll fees and your fuel, it will be cheaper to go to one of the biggest cenetrs in the UK, I think the councils are now realising that they are responsible for the bigget blunder in their political carees, as I said earlier they have sold you all down the line and have become sacrificial lambs to the stobart gods, I am ashamed of you all.

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge.............. .......this is so true

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge..............

.......this is so true

J_blond wrote:

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge.............. .......this is so true

When the Tories came in, there were two options - turn a blind eye to the mess the country was in, which would cause the UK to be bankrupt, or make cuts here, there and everywhere to try and move us back to a stable footing financially.

Both were no-win situations in terms of public thinking, but in order to save the country, sacrifices need to be made. If Labour had been responsible, we wouldn't need the cuts.

Put it this way, it's either a few businesses going under, a few (thousand I admit) jobs, or a lot of businesses going under with the loss of millions of jobs.

Max Impact wrote:
Scrapping the airshow will please few but the nimbys and down sayers. But why a photo of Clacton!

sjwilson wrote:
Sign My Petition to Save Southend Airshow.

https://www.change.o

rg/petitions/southen

d-council-don-t-canc

el-the-airshow

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge..............


.......this is so true

No, that's a tory lie. When the crisis hit the UK had the second lowest debt in the G7.

http://johannhari.co

m/2011/03/29/the-big

gest-lie-in-british-

politics/

Saying the crash was down to Labour is also a tory lie:

http://www.huffingto

npost.co.uk/ramesh-p

atel/growth-cameron-

austerity_b_2007552.

html

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge..............



.......this is so true

No, that's a tory lie. When the crisis hit the UK had the second lowest debt in the G7.

http://johannhari.co


m/2011/03/29/the-big


gest-lie-in-british-


politics/

Saying the crash was down to Labour is also a tory lie:

http://www.huffingto


npost.co.uk/ramesh-p


atel/growth-cameron-


austerity_b_2007552.


html

you joker. we already discredited this article on another story where you confessed your mistrust of blogs by nobodies. so what is it you post...a blog by a nobody.
wonder why our crisis was worse than the rest of the g7...gordon bust giving the green light to the casino banks to stick it all on red. our plight is entirely labour's fault.

J_blond wrote:
Ok fair enough, so can you tell me what the best measure is to get the country back on its feet after the global economic crisis of 2008 / 2009?

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

pullhispantsoff wrote:
Labour bankrupted the country with their spend now tax later policy, now the full extent of the mess the reds left is coming out and deeds are being done to try and get the country back on a soundish footing people blame those in charge..............




.......this is so true

No, that's a tory lie. When the crisis hit the UK had the second lowest debt in the G7.

http://johannhari.co



m/2011/03/29/the-big



gest-lie-in-british-



politics/

Saying the crash was down to Labour is also a tory lie:

http://www.huffingto



npost.co.uk/ramesh-p



atel/growth-cameron-



austerity_b_2007552.



html

you joker. we already discredited this article on another story where you confessed your mistrust of blogs by nobodies. so what is it you post...a blog by a nobody.
wonder why our crisis was worse than the rest of the g7...gordon bust giving the green light to the casino banks to stick it all on red. our plight is entirely labour's fault.

Cobblers. You discredited nothing, just refused to acknowledge the truth that the tories are lying through their teeth. And ignorant mugs like you are lapping it up.

NatalieSayer wrote:
It was actually Stobart that leaned on the council to stop the airshow. Continuing with the airshow was against Stowbart's best business interests.

Stobart didn't want the airshow this year as it would be extremely difficult to accomodate with their new increased number of major flights coming in and out of the airport.

They also don't need the airshow's 'happy airport' PR anymore. They won. The airport was expanded. Done. No more need for hearts and minds.

Without Stobart allowing airport access and promotion, there can't be an airshow. But as Stobart pretty much own the council, the story is spun as "let's blame a budget cut!". No-one gets hurt and the buck gets passed

Alice in Her Own Land :P wrote:

Max Impact wrote:
Scrapping the airshow will please few but the nimbys and down sayers. But why a photo of Clacton!

The photo of Clacton is obviously used to make Southend Air-Show better than it actually Is! It's well past it's sell by date, so time for new attractions for the Sea Front. It has become nothing more than a few kites in the sky, and a load of tat on the ground.

shoeburyden wrote:
some other wasted projects, the culture centre at the end of the pier, best part of a million wasted, a cafe that seats 20 inside, a room with very expensive photos, the council want to change its name because nobody goes there, i can think of a few.
jand everytime a loaded JKS lorry leaves the cliffs site thats £140
INNER LONDON we should reclaim all of there sites as they are playing the property market and leaving ugly sites, i am sure with the £35ml saving from the museum, the council could get a developer to build some affordable houses

thamesboy wrote:
What a disgrace !!!! This ridiculous council really needs to look inwards at its own house rather than cutting 2 days of huge revenue generation for the towns seafront traders, not to mention the RNLI shop at the end of the pier which will lose 52 days trading,revenue which is vital to them!!! The folly of repainting and revising the layout of seafront parking !!! The SPY car, the library on the cliffs and these are just the ones we know of !!!!! Wake up council, these 2 institutions are great adverts Southend !!! Get rid of Holdcroft next time Leigh residents !!!!

shoeburyden wrote:
so lets find some cutbacks. museum not viable, why should people come to southend to see a white elephant, although it will be free entry. thats £35ml library we have a perfecly good one it just needs to be modernised. thats another £20ml the sea defence at shoebury common, not needed for another 30 years, by then there will be better ways to defend aginst the sea, the cash for this is coming from the enviroment aency, i can see this being misused for other projects,

sensiblelos wrote:
the residents of Southend have an easyjet airshow everyday, southend airport/easyjet now dominates the sky, is it any surprise now that all permissions have been granted by Southend Council that the proper airshow has stopped. Of course Southend Council now make money out of the Airport so they do exactly what they are told , when the Airport state that the airspace is restricted everything stops..the residents have exactly what they wished for an airshow everyday....

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Nebs wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

and it would seem the loss of an ancient footpath, footpath 36 from Eastwood to Rochford. A footpath which has been there long before the airport built a taxiway across it back in the early sixties. However, the airport back then also painted a zebra crossing on the tarmac so that the footpath could continue un-obstructed and un-obstructed it has remained until now. Now the owners of the airport are intent in closing this most often quiet rural walk and diverting it onto a busy main road. The reason they say is because of security . It seems strange that it's taken them all this time to come to this conclusion. However, if this is truly the reason then I propose that such a problem could easily be solved with an electronic gate with a camera either side of the taxiway where it crosses the footpath. I believe it to be a logical, and community minded solution to such a said problem.

If you buy a house under a flightpath, you can't complain when planes fly overhead. If you buy an airport with a footpath going through the middle, you can't complain if people want to walk along it.

Well said Nebs. Thank you

spencer123 wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

Nebs wrote:

Broadwaywatch wrote:

maxell wrote:
you cant speculate when you are dominated by the airport, this council now has to ask the airport if any event will affect them, you cant even run a ballonn race now with out consultation , and they are also moaning about the paper floating lanterns, they rule the roost, the council have sold you all doen the line , yes there maybe jobs and yes it might be conveinent , but look at the cost, loss of the air show , closing of the peir, and the incease in taxes to make up the loss that would have come from the air display revenue, whilst the airport makes profit ,so you are effectivly paying for the airport once again. what has the councils done ? no way back you have sold your souls.

and it would seem the loss of an ancient footpath, footpath 36 from Eastwood to Rochford. A footpath which has been there long before the airport built a taxiway across it back in the early sixties. However, the airport back then also painted a zebra crossing on the tarmac so that the footpath could continue un-obstructed and un-obstructed it has remained until now. Now the owners of the airport are intent in closing this most often quiet rural walk and diverting it onto a busy main road. The reason they say is because of security . It seems strange that it's taken them all this time to come to this conclusion. However, if this is truly the reason then I propose that such a problem could easily be solved with an electronic gate with a camera either side of the taxiway where it crosses the footpath. I believe it to be a logical, and community minded solution to such a said problem.

If you buy a house under a flightpath, you can't complain when planes fly overhead. If you buy an airport with a footpath going through the middle, you can't complain if people want to walk along it.

Well said Nebs. Thank you

i did buy a house under the flight path and yes i can complain, as when i brought my house 20 years ago, there was nothing in my deeds or searches to say that the airport could or would be extended and i did not realise also that my taxes would pay for the new road to make the runway possible or the JAAP which was not worth the paper it was written on. If the council do not have the money, they cannot wave a magic wand and produce it, the whole country has to make cut backs, its not going to suit everyone, but apparently now the runway has been extended, this is going to bring business to southend, i wont hold my breath. Perhaps the council should start looking at what will bring people to southend all year round and not just two days of the year

shoeburyden wrote:
we are all to blame, it seems we have voted in a dictatorship

NatalieSayer wrote:
It was actually Stobart that leaned on the council to stop the airshow. Continuing with the airshow was against Stowbart's best business interests.

Stobart didn't want the airshow this year as it would be extremely difficult to accomodate with their new increased number of major flights coming in and out of the airport.

They also don't need the airshow's 'happy airport' PR anymore. They won. The airport was expanded. Done. No more need for hearts and minds.

Without Stobart allowing airport access and promotion, there can't be an airshow. But as Stobart pretty much own the council, the story is spun as "let's blame a budget cut!". No-one gets hurt and the buck gets passed

WhateverS wrote:
Good ridence tatty old planes tatty old people
If you want it pay for it your self put up or shut up
Nobody want to put their hand in their pocket
No thought not

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

dr de ath wrote:
The air show...or as my daughter so succinctly put it 'the **** in the sky'. The annual feast of clapped out useless relics, watched by sad deluded spotters and wasters.
It amazes me this drivel has lasted so long...what's the attraction of these flying killing machines?
Even the red arrows cant be bothered.

r6keith wrote:

thamesboy wrote:
What a disgrace !!!! This ridiculous council really needs to look inwards at its own house rather than cutting 2 days of huge revenue generation for the towns seafront traders, not to mention the RNLI shop at the end of the pier which will lose 52 days trading,revenue which is vital to them!!! The folly of repainting and revising the layout of seafront parking !!! The SPY car, the library on the cliffs and these are just the ones we know of !!!!! Wake up council, these 2 institutions are great adverts Southend !!! Get rid of Holdcroft next time Leigh residents !!!!

I do not like the choices made but be realistic how much revenue will really be lost on a Monday and Tuesday during those cold wet winter months ?

Major Incident wrote:
Has anyone worked out how much Southend's carbon footprint will be reduced each year by cancelling the airshow?

Essex Medja wrote:
I agree with sensiblelos, if this event is such a money making scheme then let those businesses who benefit pay. Southend is neither a tourist mecca nor is it the main industry and hasn't been for decades. It is a dormitory town and the majority commute and work in other sectors. We have to get away from pandering to the golden mile "kiss me quick" influence and move into the real world. As to attracting visditors to spend money in local shops, the internet will completely kill of the high street in about 10 years, if not sooner. What will SBC startegy be for the next decade?

jayman wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:
I agree with sensiblelos, if this event is such a money making scheme then let those businesses who benefit pay. Southend is neither a tourist mecca nor is it the main industry and hasn't been for decades. It is a dormitory town and the majority commute and work in other sectors. We have to get away from pandering to the golden mile "kiss me quick" influence and move into the real world. As to attracting visditors to spend money in local shops, the internet will completely kill of the high street in about 10 years, if not sooner. What will SBC startegy be for the next decade?

sounds like a comment from the bowels of a person who works in PR.

firedog wrote:

WhateverS wrote:
Good ridence tatty old planes tatty old people
If you want it pay for it your self put up or shut up
Nobody want to put their hand in their pocket
No thought not

At last someone with a sensible comment,Who is going to pay a pound,when you can see it for free anywhere in the town?

dr de ath wrote:
The air show...or as my daughter so succinctly put it 'the **** in the sky'. The annual feast of clapped out useless relics, watched by sad deluded spotters and wasters.
It amazes me this drivel has lasted so long...what's the attraction of these flying killing machines?
Even the red arrows cant be bothered.

sjwilson wrote:
Are they Crazy? Out of touch council, why not sack a few councillors instead of denying people the joy of the airshow?

Piersight wrote:

sjwilson wrote:
Are they Crazy? Out of touch council, why not sack a few councillors instead of denying people the joy of the airshow?

Looks like they’re cutting a few jobs, but the chief exec still gets more for trying to run Southend than the Prime Minister gets for trying to run the country.

Nebs wrote:

firedog wrote:

WhateverS wrote: Good ridence tatty old planes tatty old people If you want it pay for it your self put up or shut up Nobody want to put their hand in their pocket No thought not

At last someone with a sensible comment,Who is going to pay a pound,when you can see it for free anywhere in the town?

I'd pay £1. I'd even pay £2.

Test Tickle wrote:
R.I.P Southend, you got your Airport which makes a few people a lot of money and lost your airshow that generated cash for many, can any of you put your hand on your heart and say Southend council are working for the good of the residents of the town and are fit for purpose?

NatalieSayer wrote:
It was actually Stobart that leaned on the council to stop the airshow. Continuing with the airshow was against Stowbart's best business interests.

Stobart didn't want the airshow this year as it would be extremely difficult to accomodate with their new increased number of major flights coming in and out of the airport.

They also don't need the airshow's 'happy airport' PR anymore. They won. The airport was expanded. Done. No more need for hearts and minds.

Without Stobart allowing airport access and promotion, there can't be an airshow. But as Stobart pretty much own the council, the story is spun as "let's blame a budget cut!". No-one gets hurt and the buck gets passed

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

Hannah Foster wrote:

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

Well said!

Nebs wrote:

firedog wrote:

WhateverS wrote:
Good ridence tatty old planes tatty old people
If you want it pay for it your self put up or shut up
Nobody want to put their hand in their pocket
No thought not

At last someone with a sensible comment,Who is going to pay a pound,when you can see it for free anywhere in the town?

I'd pay £1. I'd even pay £2.

spencer123 wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

Well said!

even if they did, what about next years, do u really think that the country and councils will sort themselves out by then!! this is an on going problem that will take years to rectify

Hannah Foster wrote:

spencer123 wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

I love Essex wrote:
Just question. If easy jet did sponsor last year, for whatever reason, if they know there is a lot of discomfort amongst community re airport, why not sponsor again? Given airport is doing so well? Don't bite the hand that supports you? Unless you had other intentions and don't give a monky's?

Well said!

even if they did, what about next years, do u really think that the country and councils will sort themselves out by then!! this is an on going problem that will take years to rectify

It will take years to rectify if the powers that be continue on their current arse about face trajectory. If however they engage their brains we could see a much more satisfactory outcome. It seems that the actual citizens take second place to just about every hairbrained vanity project that the council and government can come up with. Most people using the airport drive or take the train to the airport, fly off and then come back, jump into their car/train and clear off. When the airshow is on people come for the day, eat, drink, shop and make use of the various leisure activities. It puts the town no the map. We need more of this type of thing. I have noticed that most of the tempting bargain air fares that were about in the early days of the airport expansion have dried up. Why? Well because the bosses have got what they wanted so to he'll with the locals.

Baker-Boy wrote:

Nebs wrote:

firedog wrote:

WhateverS wrote: Good ridence tatty old planes tatty old people If you want it pay for it your self put up or shut up Nobody want to put their hand in their pocket No thought not

At last someone with a sensible comment,Who is going to pay a pound,when you can see it for free anywhere in the town?

I'd pay £1. I'd even pay £2.

im sorry but how do you pay for an event in the sky? you could watch from most places in southend

Loopeyprincess wrote:
I think it's stupid, it brings lots of new people to Southend, it's good trade for other shops and it is a free family day out. Why build a 10 screen cinema that we don't need and scrap something everyone enjoys? They certainly aren't going to win council of the year this year that's for sure

Jamama wrote:
All these comments are so dumb...

it was Stobart who isn't allowing the air show to go ahead.