Mareel - Cinema & Music Venue

[Guest Anonymous]

 

Drop the cinema bit, stick with the music, and it may,, just may succeed.

 

Careful "o grumpy one" you're starting to waver

 

I'm just trying very hard not to say what I'd really like to say, or my 'donkey' would be exiting stage right on hyperdrive.

[Guest Anonymous]

There are many ongoing issues to keep elected members busy, how can we ever hope for swift economical decision making when some of them cant grasp the simple notion of finishing one task and moving on.

 

If an old ass**le like me can deal with the fact that Mareel is happening, accept it, and move on, to the stage of supporting it. Then surely the councillors who were against it can have the same humility, and accept the inevitable.

It's happening.

We should all now support it.

It's a unique opportunity to promote the music of Shetland, provide facilities for the Shetland youth to express their creative nature, and for once a chance to prove that the SIC may have made a correct decision.

 

Mareel Is Happening, Support It !!

 

Is this the same Auld rasmie

 

One and the same.

I stood behind a democratic decision, as long as I could.

When I decided to support the decision the council wasn't in the financial sharn that it's in now, and the people pushing the venue forward were putting forward a very balanced and well articulated argument in its favour.

 

Things change.

[Guest Anonymous]

Getting back to the cinema argument:

Our local cinema has a potential audience of about 40,000 who live within 45 minutes traveling distance, with perhaps about a quarter of those within walking distance.

It is a modern cinema, with 3 screens, and it still had to be subsidized to the tune of about £300,000 last year.

 

So what makes the Shetland cinema goer likely to change figures like that?

I'd like an honest answer to that please. Not the figures from the original financial projections for the venue.

[peeriebryan]

But I'd prefer to see recordings which didn't use technology too much, and relied on the original quality of the artist

Fair enough, if the source is primarily acoustic....

 

KT Tunstall managed a number 1 with nothing but the internet,,, she needed no £12M investment by her local council.

Let's stick to the facts. As Bullet-in-the-mailman mentioned, KT Tunstall was brought to the public's attention in the UK after appearing on Jools Holland. The only Number 1 she has achieved was in the US Billboard Adult Top 40 with "Black Horse and the Cherry Tree". This chart position is largely attributed to a contestant on American Idol singing a cover version of the song.

 

I don't think that referring to a £12m council investment is a fair point as half of the funding for Mareel is external investment, it's a multi use building of which the studio is one aspect and Mareel will benefit a large number of musicians.

 

And KT Tunstall has received huge amounts of financial support from her record label....

 

I have never said a word against any of those artists. Indeed, I think those artists don't need a £12M white elephant, they have talent.

I don't understand this point. Are you saying only untalented musicians need good quality recording facilities?

 

Perhaps you could tell us how much the recording studio in Orkney cost to set up? I'll bet it wasn't £12M.

From my understanding of the equipment in two of the Orkney studios, the specs will be similar to Mareel's studio.

 

Again, £12m is for a multi use venue. Not just a studio.

 

well I can't finish that sentence without possibly inferring that education is, or has been, of little priority to those who,,,

oops, can't say that either,,,,

Maybe, you'll just miss that point.

Mareel is an educational space

 

And expenditure on an Orkney studio is really irrelevant to the cost of Mareel since that is a cinema and music venue which will benefit the people of Shetland. Not just musicians but cinema audiences and those who want somewhere pleasant to listen to music. Perhaps other uses yet to be considered will increase the value of Mareel to Shetland.

I agree. The value of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts due to the synergies between the complimentary uses and facilities.

 

The facilities maybe weren't modern, or top quality, even for the 70's, but they were purpose built, and did the job okay.

The cost of the equipment is a key factor. Digital projectors are far less costly to buy, operate and maintain than the huge opto-mechanical devices of the past. Digital distribution methods have brought the price down too as physical film prints don't have to be manufactured and distributed. This also means that cinemas can show films on national release dates instead of waiting to license one of the limited number of physical prints which do the rounds. Furthermore, Mareel will be open for a variety of uses at all times of day so costs will be shared over a range of services

 

....and the people pushing the venue forward were putting forward a very balanced and well articulated argument in its favour.

 

Things change.

Such as?

[Ghostrider]

The facilities maybe weren't modern, or top quality, even for the 70's, but they were purpose built, and did the job okay.

The cost of the equipment is a key factor. Digital projectors are far less costly to buy, operate and maintain than the huge opto-mechanical devices of the past. Digital distribution methods have brought the price down too as physical film prints don't have to be manufactured and distributed. This also means that cinemas can show films on national release dates instead of waiting to license one of the limited number of physical prints which do the rounds. Furthermore, Mareel will be open for a variety of uses at all times of day so costs will be shared over a range of services.

 

Fair point. However don't forget the Star in its day as a Cinema held regular weekly bingo nights too (two days per week if memory serves??), so the running costs were also shared across more than one use, but it still couldn't pay well enough to be worth keeping.

 

Without poring of the Star's accounts from back in the day (if they still exist, and if they are obtainable) and comparing how they could not make it work against the projected figures for a Cinema as part of Mareel is supposed to be going to work, its impossible to make an accurate judgement.

 

The costs involved to show a film in the 21st Century may be cheaper than in Nineteen Seventywhatever, relatively speaking, but potential audiences have to be smaller as well, the range of options available to your average viewer concerning where, when and how they watch a film of their choice are increasing all the time, and logic dictates that has to dilute viewing numbers via any one given medium.

 

Certainly the Mareel cinema is much smaller than the Star cinema was, and also being part of a larger building rather a stand alone one, many costs are reduced. I hope it works, a cinema would be fine to have the once in a blue moon a film comes around I might want to see, but when the Star didn't work, when it had two income streams, and existed in an enviornment where it had the monopoly on all film viewing, I'm unconvinced that even the savings across the board of running a cinema today in Mareel as opposed to the likes of the Star can still be enough to make it pay its way with what I preceive as its level of potential paying customers.

 

Put another way, if savings had to be made concerning Mareel, I'd lose no sleep over it if the main cinema got the chop from the plan completely, but I'd not like to see the live music venue facilities reduced much if any. Perhaps I'm biased though, I like me music, but films I can take or leave, mostly leave.

[peeriebryan]

All fair points GR

 

And I agree that there are too many variables to compare Mareel and the North Star on a simple like for like basis

[ChristopherWilliamThomson]

I'm interested as to whether the few pillars of the Mareel faith envision an anti-climax of sorts if their baby is ever finished?

[JohanofNess]

Something I would be concerned about if revising the financial projections for the next 5 years is that the building is costing substantially more than budgeted at less than a year ago and we're now entering a global recession. I imagine any such projections for subsidy purposes will have to be looked at again especially in light of the fact the cinema can't expect attendances to remain the same when entertainment is the first thing people cut back on when money is a concern. Me and the missus went to the cinema last week and between two tickets and one drink to share it cost £18, the dvd in a few months time will cost me £10 to buy and I can watch it as many times as I want. Either the cinema section has to compete in terms of cost of viewing or revise its estimates on attendance, either way for the next while it won't be earning what was projected. Or as others have suggested bin the cinema as it was the least commercially viable of all the parts of the complex and hammer on with the concert part.

[JAStewart]

Me and the missus went to the cinema last week and between two tickets and one drink to share it cost £18

 

Where??

[Guest Anonymous]

I really should shut up about this subject, and I would if the believers weren't like religious fanatics who keep pushing their faith down other peoples throats.

But, how's this for an idea:

If so many people are absolutely convinced that Mareel will be a success, then let them put their money where their mouth is.

Public shares should be offered in Mareel, nothing expensive, say perhaps £100. This money would be held in trust to secure against possible losses in running costs. Investment of this money helping towards the financial security of the venture.

Because so many people are so vocal with their support of the project, raising security funds like this should be no problem. So say perhaps 5000 people were issued share certificates at £100 each, that would give the project a public confidence, and financial backing, against possible losses, which would be impossible to argue with.

The share holders, because of their confidence in the venue would obviously get their money back in a very short time as the profits they projected were realised.

And the rest of us will of course be left wishing we had invested in such a brilliant opportunity....

Of course, my idea is stupid because, I don't think there is a single Mareel supporter who would risk even a penny of their own money in the venture... Or am I wrong???? NOT!!!

[JohanofNess]

Me and the missus went to the cinema last week and between two tickets and one drink to share it cost £18

 

Where??

 

Vue Cinema in Aberdeen, the Belmont is over £7 a ticket now as well and I think Cineworld is £7 each for an adult too. You'd be mental to take a family to the cinema now, especially when you can rent the same film in 6 months for £3.75 at blockbuster.

 

I don't get spongers discount at the cinema though.

[Muppet]

I really should shut up about this subject, and I would if the believers weren't like religious fanatics who keep pushing their faith down other peoples throats.

But, how's this for an idea:

If so many people are absolutely convinced that Mareel will be a success, then let them put their money where their mouth is.

Public shares should be offered in Mareel, nothing expensive, say perhaps £100. This money would be held in trust to secure against possible losses in running costs. Investment of this money helping towards the financial security of the venture.

Because so many people are so vocal with their support of the project, raising security funds like this should be no problem. So say perhaps 5000 people were issued share certificates at £100 each, that would give the project a public confidence, and financial backing, against possible losses, which would be impossible to argue with.

The share holders, because of their confidence in the venue would obviously get their money back in a very short time as the profits they projected were realised.

And the rest of us will of course be left wishing we had invested in such a brilliant opportunity....

Of course, my idea is stupid because, I don't think there is a single Mareel supporter who would risk even a penny of their own money in the venture... Or am I wrong???? NOT!!!

 

Can i be the first to say yes, you are wrong.

 

I'm not particularly musical (although I love listening to folk who are), and i'm not particularly a cinema goer, but I know a whole lot of people who spend a large proportion of their lives trying not to drown in the plethora of swimming pools we have all over Shetland. (I'm recalling a post on Shetlink where the poster was complaining that whenever she visited a sports centre to meet people, she was the only one there!)

 

Mareel is something different and much needed. It might even bring folk out at night get them spending in the pubs and clubs around the town. Let's be honest, the pub and club owners ain't doing much them selves to encourage folk to get out of their houses.

 

I'd gladly put some of my own money towards Mareel if that's what it took to get it off the ground.

 

I'm quite sure that if I even went there only a couple of times a year, I'd get better value for money than i do for all the sports centres and swimming pools i'm already paying through the teeth for.

[Caeser]

I notice that despite his many attempts, councillor Gary Robinson has not actually been able to find out how much Mareel is currently going to cost?

 

Surely, our councillors who are getting harranged for spending money, must know how much something they are buying, actually costs?

 

Maybe it costs £50.36 + Vat and the other £14million is for the Shetland Arts Christmas party and someone is just too embarrassed to admit it.

[Medziotojas]

I'd gladly put some of my own money towards Mareel if that's what it took to get it off the ground.

 

Ditto. And I don't even live in Shetland anymore. But I used to do some PA work in Shetland and I remember the idea of a new music venue first being spoken about a long time ago. I'm glad to see it finally coming to fruition.

[Frankie]

Me and the missus went to the cinema last week and between two tickets and one drink to share it cost £18, the dvd in a few months time will cost me £10 to buy and I can watch it as many times as I want.

 

How much would it have cost you and the missus to go to an Aberdeen football match ? £50 But suppose you could always record match of the day for nothing and watch it as many times as you want.