Skunnered Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 If it's costing about £12M to build, and if they want a simple return of say 5% per annum on their investment, then they need to make a clear profit of £600,000 every year. I very much doubt if they will achieve even that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njugle Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 That's an interesting take on it Skunnered. For comparison, the new museum cost £11.6million apparently. I wonder if anyone can confirm that they make £550,000 clear profit return per year on their investment? Or does it not work like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skunnered Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 ^^I think it depends on the objectives that are set when the funding decision is made. As I understand it, the funding for Mareel was made on the basis that it would be self-sufficient and not require to be subsidised. I'm not sure if that sort of commitment was made when the funding for the museum was released. Also, as the funding (£12M) would have earned about 8% pa (average, I believe) in the hands of the CT or SIC investment managers, this is income that is forfeited and therefore ought to be made up by the project if it is to "break even", so I'm really being rather lenient in my previous posting by using 5%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachy Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Also, as the funding (£12M) would have earned about 8% pa (average, I believe) in the hands of the CT or SIC investment managers, this is income that is forfeited and therefore ought to be made up by the project if it is to "break even", so I'm really being rather lenient in my previous posting by using 5%. Where did that 8% figure come from? The CT would need to divulge their secrets if they were getting that. Their investments have made some big losses in recent years, though I seem to recall them stabilising last year. They are at the mercy of the stock market, which always makes them vulnerable. Whereas investing in local infrastructure, as well as culture, is investing in Shetland's future. It is a real shame that Shetland Arts pushed this (or were forced to push this) as a project that must break even. If the arts can't be subsidised then we surely face a culturally impoverished future. Why must the arts always be seen as a business here? Perhaps it says a lot about Shetland that we happily subsidise the Clickimin Centre, but are not happy to subside an 'arty-farty' centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malachy Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Also, as the funding (£12M) would have earned about 8% pa (average, I believe) in the hands of the CT or SIC investment managers Also, Shetland Arts didn't get £12M from local funding. Half of it came from outside Shetland, so that's £6M (I can't remember the exact figures) being invested in Shetland from outside. How is that negative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skunnered Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 ^^I'm not suggesting that it's negative, just pointing out that there's a "commitment" to break even i.e. no subsidy. Nor am I suggesting that it should or shouldn't be subsidised, I'm just wondering whether they will be able to meet their break-even target given the huge capital investment. I note your point that half of the funding was provided from outside Shetland. Presumably they will have to pay interest or some sort of return on this part of the capital? I can't see anyone giving them that sort of money for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njugle Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Without looking inot the breakdown of the Mareel funding Skunnered, you may not have heard of the Lottery funds, the ERDF and the SRDP, all of which give capital funding to projects without expecting a return, for instance. There are others too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Njugle Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Some of it is mentioned here, as it turns out:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mareel The ERDF and Lottery funds did contribute, amongst others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 why should we fund the arts, maybe a tax on pop stars should be considered to fund all tghe arty farty stuff after all does bono really nead £100 million in the bank or any of the rest of them for that matter if the arts are so damned important let the artists that make such obscene amounts of money fund them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 I do hope it is a success but as you can tell i seriously doubt it will ever turn a profit. so if that is the case will all those that shout so loudly in its favour on here and elsewhere dig into their own pockets to subsidise it because I for one will certainly not it will likely end up being the council/councillers that decide how to spread the losses, and it will loose. Given that theres less noise about it, the working folk of this country will be in "dire financial straits" for quite some time to come , i.e. disposable income belongs to the govt. Hopefully in the event of it not doing so well ,part or parts of it could be leased or something to provide a fit n proper affordable weekend nightclub style venue for them that can afford it. Hopefully too there will be exhibitions and occaisions on during times when it coincides with trips to town , cos lets not forget its no everybody that can afford mulitiple trips to toon in a week, never mind shelling out plenty to get in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skunnered Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Some of it is mentioned here, as it turns out:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mareel The ERDF and Lottery funds did contribute, amongst others.I stand corrected! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 just wondering if anyone from SA can tell us how much it cost us for each dug that watched the movie at their recent film festival. or is that privilaged information. how can we take anything they say or do seriously when they squander money on sharn like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SJP17 Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 just wondering if anyone from SA can tell us how much it cost us for each dug that watched the movie at their recent film festival. or is that privilaged information. how can we take anything they say or do seriously when they squander money on sharn like that. Please tell me this is a wind up ? showing dogs films , you can not be serious ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 check the shetland news if you don't believe me http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2010/September/news/In%20brief%20for%209%20September%202010.htm http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2010/September/letters/Going%20to%20the%20dogs.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SJP17 Posted September 9, 2010 Report Share Posted September 9, 2010 Thats hilarious , movies for dogs what next ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now