Mareel - Cinema & Music Venue

[Infiltrator]

It was put there with the blessing of enough of the populous for it to go ahead.

 

I'd hardly call the casting vote of convener Sandy Cluness 'enough of the populous'

[Ghostrider]

He he, same old stuff.

 

The education side not important to you. That could be seen as quite sad, folk should have every opportunity to learn, otherwise, how could they make such witty and enlightened comments.

 

If my memory serves me correctly, most opposition came while it was being built, until then, folk, as ever are not really interested. It was put there with the blessing of enough of the populous for it to go ahead.

 

The isles do well at the moment, compared to other areas. Alas, you are just a single voice.

 

Taxes do not work like that but I am happy to spend some of yours here as I do.

 

Point, completely missed, as usual.

 

Mareel was "sold" to the public as a once only fixed price deal, they've spent that fixed price, any bills Mareel still have to pay is their problem, not ours, the Shetland public.

[Colin]

The education side not important to you.

 

Ignoring the personal remarks in your comment. Education is important. Just not the kind of 'education' on offer at Mareel.. Just how many sound engineers etc. do you think we need, particularly as Mareel seems to be positioning itself as the only place on Shetland to hold any kind of entertainment?

 

If my memory serves me correctly, most opposition came while it was being built, until then, folk, as ever are not really interested. It was put there with the blessing of enough of the populous for it to go ahead.

 

Your memory is wrong. Opposition to Mareel began well before a single brick was laid and, it did not (in my experience or opinion) have the 'blessing of the populous'. You have made the mistake of confusing 'people power' with 'power people'

 

Alas, you are just a single voice.

 

Your contempt for general opinion is matched by your ignorance of the facts.

[ll]

If Mareel is doing as well as it seems to be trumpeting, surely a loan from a bank would be given with usual security etc.

 

Given the continued and consistent record in blue chip (white elephant) investments, the SIC should not even be contemplating any further gambling of Shetland's remaining money when essential services are being cut.

 

If Shetland Arts are desperate for money, maybe they should then try and sell off some of their other assets to raise cash, such as Kergord Mill or the Garrison Theatre. They could even lease them back from purchaser?

 

It is under two years since they paid the ridiculously high sum of £125,000 for a redundant hatchery across the road from Kergord as can be seen on 'Our Property':

 

Application Number : 10OAZ02144

General

Price £125,000

Applicant/s J. Johnston, J. Sinclair, J. Goodlad, M. Burgess, R. Barton, J. Davies, J. Dally, L. Lowes, Shetland Arts Development Agency

Granter/s P. Featherstone

Property

Title No. Parent Property

OAZ7958 - Kergord Hatchery, Weisdale, Shetland, ZE2 9LW

Registry Title Description

Sale Date 6th December, 2010

Land Class Commercial

Application Type First Registration (FR)

Deed Type/s Disposition

Other Sales of these Titles

Application No. Date Title Number Price

No other sales have been found for these titles.

[ Close Window ]

[Urabug]

They could try WONGA !!!!

[JustMe]

They could try accepting money when it is offered. Last night I decided to book a cinema ticket. Found I had to register which I did not mind but I was miffed to get a rude message telling me I must accept cookies. What they meant was not that I had to accept cookies which I do but that I had to accept third party cookies which I do not since I have been told that is some sort of security risk. Would be nice if they made that clear.

 

Then it came to paying so I keyed in my details and their card accepting people said no. Thought I might have made a mistake so tried again and the same thing happened. I have one of those authorisation things with the account I use for on-line payments and that never showed up so I guess they never got as far as contacting my bank. Should add that I regularly shop on-line so I certainly know how to do it.

 

Result of this is that I have not bought my cinema ticket and, in view of a weather forecast seen since I tried to book, I have decided not to bother. Meaning that Mareel has lost this ticket sale, any refreshment sales and, since this would have been my first visit, a chance to get me as a repeat customer. Well done Mareel/Shetland Box Office.

[shetlandpeat]

 

Mareel was "sold" to the public as a once only fixed price deal, they've spent that fixed price, any bills Mareel still have to pay is their problem, not ours, the Shetland public.

 

Are you saying you were hoodwinked, as I mentioned? Shocking!

 

Sometimes Colin, it is hard to ignore "personal" remarks you make to others. Sadly, seems to be the name of the game on here at times. The funny thing is, they were not intended as those sorts of remarks, though it will make your post appear more pertinent if you declare an insult.

 

If you were to go by the level of objections on here, sadly, a poor show.

 

The situation is now that because of the lack of administration skills of an external contractor, costs were incurred that were unforeseen, it would please many to see the building fail it seems. As said before, with all the other gaffs and costs that have been incurred by Shetlands elected representatives that are brought up here quite often it is just a small price for keeping an education facility built and equipped to these high standards. I cannot see the benefit of using arguments that have little thought or process to them.

[Ghostrider]

 

Mareel was "sold" to the public as a once only fixed price deal, they've spent that fixed price, any bills Mareel still have to pay is their problem, not ours, the Shetland public.

 

Are you saying you were hoodwinked, as I mentioned? Shocking!

 

Nope, not in the slightest. I'm saying that if the SIC pays out any more than the originally agreed sum we will be being hoodwinked.

[owre-weel]

The problem the council has is it is dammed if if does and dammed if it doesn't.

 

As I have said in this forum, I am a supporter of Mareel, but have always been concerned about the finances.

 

The best option in my opinion would be for the council to offer an interest free loan to be repaid over a reasonable time. This would:

 

Ensure they are not seen to give another handout to Mareel after refusing the village halls.

Ensure the offers of external funding were achieved.

Ensure that the Arts Trust had to treat Mareel as a business and do all they can to meet future running costs and repay the loan.

 

What is the alternative?

[shetlandpeat]

Who else would be able to guarantee the investment already made?

Councils tend to do this, generally it is not good to see all that money go to waste. You can do the blame thing at anytime, if it gets you somewhere, then fine. I doubt however it it will create more than a wee ripple.

If the funds come from the capital budget via reserves, then it becomes an asset the council could eventually be happy with. The interest that is lost is really quite small in comparison. With many savings invested in "on Call" accounts and the rest to 3 or at a push 6 months, very little is lost.

What always gets me is the people seem to want others to sort it out for them. Again we hear calls of cutting staff pay, yet, the argument there is what sort of people would you then attract to run this large investment at such a low salary or poor term and conditions, putting in £500,000 will not hit the local economy as much as removing the same sum from incomes.

 

Is there a clause that may have been overlooked that could let this happen? Perhaps there is, it is not like building bridges now, is it. This has already been built. It seems to be finding its feet, perhaps now the time is there to let the £6.5 million work.

[ariel]

Mareel is a major asset we've invested a lot in, so it's not 'their' problem only, and we need to find a responsible solution, given the value it can bring to our community. A few people might be glad to see it go bust, but that attitude doesn't demand much respect.

 

I do hope our decision-makers don't think the sneering on here, or the spitting rants of Ian Tinkler are representative of 'general opinion'.

 

Neither is this a toon v country issue (that attitude is just pure bigotry anyway) - we subsidise lightly-used leisure centres in rural areas, we can also support a massively popular family culture hub sited in the most accessible area of Shetland.

[owre-weel]

Who else would be able to guarantee the investment already made?

Councils tend to do this, generally it is not good to see all that money go to waste. You can do the blame thing at anytime, if it gets you somewhere, then fine. I doubt however it it will create more than a wee ripple.

If the funds come from the capital budget via reserves, then it becomes an asset the council could eventually be happy with. The interest that is lost is really quite small in comparison. With many savings invested in "on Call" accounts and the rest to 3 or at a push 6 months, very little is lost.

What always gets me is the people seem to want others to sort it out for them. Again we hear calls of cutting staff pay, yet, the argument there is what sort of people would you then attract to run this large investment at such a low salary or poor term and conditions, putting in £500,000 will not hit the local economy as much as removing the same sum from incomes.

 

Is there a clause that may have been overlooked that could let this happen? Perhaps there is, it is not like building bridges now, is it. This has already been built. It seems to be finding its feet, perhaps now the time is there to let the £6.5 million work.

Pete I'm not doing the " blame thing" I'm trying to find an acceptable solution which causes the least concern to doubters and could ensure a successful future for the facility.

 

I'm sorry, but I just can't understand the content of your last post. Is it just me?

[shetlandpeat]

The blame can already be identified, folk seem still to want "blood" still, alas, it sounds more like revenge. Using the cost of investing a further sum to the project is a bit tentative. The money would have to come from reserves (that is one of the may reasons it is there), the overall loss to the reserves is small, as the reserves are used to themselves create an income, the income on say 0.5% with an investment that is on call (that is, the council can demand it back within hours and is not set to a fixed term) and others on short term investment realise a tiny bit more in interest, there is no great loss to the community if you balance the equation. So, stating that it is a waste of money and Shetland will be at a loss is not quite true, there will still be a working building which many have taken time to invest in. The community, in reality will not feel any loss, except for those who choose to do so.

Too many calls have been made about this and other salaries and that they should be cut. This will only harm the community further by not having as much cash floating around. There is a ground swell of opinion that reasonable wages attract good folk, will keep good folk and encourage productivity. There will be exceptions, but, who allows those exceptions to manifest.

If folk do not want to see the building fail, and be another public failure in the eyes of the world in Shetland (it could be seen that it may be a dodgy place to invest), then it may be best to make use of it and not wait for freebies as some think is right to do. If it is not your thing, fine.

[owre-weel]

The blame can already be identified, folk seem still to want "blood" still, alas, it sounds more like revenge. Using the cost of investing a further sum to the project is a bit tentative. The money would have to come from reserves (that is one of the may reasons it is there), the overall loss to the reserves is small, as the reserves are used to themselves create an income, the income on say 0.5% with an investment that is on call (that is, the council can demand it back within hours and is not set to a fixed term) and others on short term investment realise a tiny bit more in interest, there is no great loss to the community if you balance the equation. So, stating that it is a waste of money and Shetland will be at a loss is not quite true, there will still be a working building which many have taken time to invest in. The community, in reality will not feel any loss, except for those who choose to do so.

Too many calls have been made about this and other salaries and that they should be cut. This will only harm the community further by not having as much cash floating around. There is a ground swell of opinion that reasonable wages attract good folk, will keep good folk and encourage productivity. There will be exceptions, but, who allows those exceptions to manifest.

If folk do not want to see the building fail, and be another public failure in the eyes of the world in Shetland (it could be seen that it may be a dodgy place to invest), then it may be best to make use of it and not wait for freebies as some think is right to do. If it is not your thing, fine.

 

As usual Pete you have not read the content of my post clearly and gone off in a tangent.

 

What I was suggesting is finding some middle ground, a compromise, a possible solution! And I clearly said I was a supporter.

 

A bit less waffle may make your posts a bit easier to understand

[shetlandpeat]

There is middle ground already, also, I was not saying that you were not a supporter. If there is a panic to pay the funds, then the council will have to step in, after then, finer details on returns can be discussed. To get the point across, the community would need to hold this to account, get involved in the process. Living Lerwick shows that there can be strength in numbers. Things could get done.

You can call it waffle, but, there are those who have said the community would suffer if the money was handed over. I understand too about the halls and their function throughout rural Shetland, we have similar places here, sadly, suffering. Many are owned by the public.

I would guess that the Arts could make a difference here too. With an ever dwindling money stream, it now takes more work. There are other ways too, precepts may be a way. The Government has issued a consultation document about this sort of thing. In reality, it can be applied anywhere, there is no need to discriminate.

Perhaps shares could be issued, it may guarantee more attendance at the stakeholders meetings and more community involvement.