Mareel - Cinema & Music Venue

[Guest Anonymous]

i think if you have a grip about letters in the paper i think you best answer them back in the paper, not in here. not everyone has the internet so not everyone reads in here.

 

i would ask as an idea if we could all keep posts shorter and not a full novel, this bores lots of people included myself, i have given up by half of it - that i think thats a shame as you now post so much and it not to be read

 

we also have to watch this page does not turn into 'ask the arts trust fourm' i persume do you ask your employer its ok to write what you write, before doing so. or you may be classed as a loose cannon.

this speek would be a sackable afence in many companies - including the council, hence why so many people cant use their real name in here

[McFly]

we also have to watch this page does not turn into 'ask the arts trust fourm' i persume do you ask your employer its ok to write what you write, before doing so. or you may be classed as a loose cannon.

this speek would be a sackable afence in many companies - including the council, hence why so many people cant use their real name in here

 

I don't understand what you mean at the end there Bobbie.

 

What would be a sackable offence?

[Muppet]

I have to say I think Davie should be thanked for putting so much time into this forum. His input has cleared up a lot of points giving rise to reasoned debate on both sides as well as keeping it on track.

 

His employer should be well pleased with his effort. Much of his input was in his own time anyhow.

 

Hope you'll still keep an eye on the forum Davie and pop back again at some point.

[Guest Anonymous]

when you have an employer who payes your wages, he has the right to know what you are saying int he public domain. to use the council and its trusts an employee is not permited to give public anouncments whthought the clearence of the head of department.

 

for example if i worked for the council and i went to the paper or the radio without the knowelge of my department head - i would be disaplined and possibly loss my job.

 

this is regardless of the time of day or night. although most of his posts seem to be during the day.

 

it has been good to hear from davie - i read all his postes with interest - well apart from the long winded eens. i have noticed with the people who have read 'the report' they are finding masive holes in the money side of the project - whether thats with the projected daily income what a place in a big city sould be happy with - to the totaly wrong figure they will have to pay for public liability they say it will gost 10k a year when it should be in a building like this about 40 - 50k.

 

it clearly stated dream ideas that will never work out in the real life.

 

After reading the letters in the paper they seem to be a lot of people agenst the project now, like me not bothered about the pubs profits but the costs that are well over the top for us.

[Guest Anonymous]

What any deficit will come out of, if necessary, are the returns on our external investments which are currently showing a healthy and better than estimated return - even creating surpluses

 

Davie G quotes an earlier post by Marvin which states that any deficit on this project will have zero effect on Council Tax as it will be covered by other funds.

 

IMHO, these statements are correct but slightly misleading (though not intentionally so I'm sure).

I guess that any deficits are intended to be funded from the SIC's Reserve Fund, which gets its money from profits on the Sullom Voe harbour operation and from money market investments, so it's true that they would have no effect on Council tax.

 

However, the Reserve Fund also funds other expenditure and it is also being used to prop up the Council's General Fund which is (partly) funded by Council Tax. You may have heard of the Council being in deficit by a number of millions this year (somewhere between £7 to 11 million has been quoted) and this deficit has to be covered by the Reserve Fund. So, any extra cost on the Reserve Fund such as a Cinema/Music venue deficit will have an indirect effect on the Council's ability to fund its 'core' services such as Education, Social Work and Transport.

Mind you, £80,000 or whatever is pretty small beer and the salvation for the General Fund lies in creating financially sustainable core services, not in blocking other projects.

 

Another poster in this thread mentioned that his council tax had gone up by £200. I think he/she needs to peruse his Council tax bill more closely. The band D increase from 05/06 to 06/07 was £36 and the increase for those living in Shetland's most expensive mansions was £72, according to my council tax bill.

On a very rough calculation, covering the deficit from Council tax would mean an increase of 10p a year for band D.

 

[dB]

 

You're almost right Davie G.

 

Except for the simple fact that the Garrison tuck shop IS reality.

 

The projected income for the proposed venue isn't.

 

At best it's a guess.

 

IMHO it's a wild guess.

[Guest Anonymous]

On a very rough calculation, covering the deficit from Council tax would mean an increase of 10p a year for band D.

 

Even if you are doing a rough calculation, it stills helps if you push the right buttons on your calculator.

 

The revised rough figure is £11 per year or 21p per week.

[Guest Anonymous]

OK, finally finished reading the thread. Some interesting views. Overall I find myself siding with the pro camp. I can see how the sheer amount of money spent is a worry to many, however since the initial outlay won’t be coming directly out of folks pockets then this becomes less of a problem.

 

With regards to the operational loss of £80000, surely that’s easily dwarfed by that of the leisure centres? I'm aware of the “if a cinema was commercially viable there would already be one†argument, but why must Shetlanders always have to wait until some company south decides it can make a few quid of us before it provides a service?

 

Look at broadband, Digital Television, Mobile Phone coverage, the transport links south to name but a few. We’re always last to get any new service and it’s only when profit margins are deemed acceptable that we eventually get a cut-down version, years later. That’s not to say that we don’t want these services and there isn’t a demand – quite the opposite. The same applies to a cinema, so why not provide it ourselves?

 

It’s been a gripe of young folk for as long as I can remember that there’s nothing to do at nights. I would have loved to have been able to go see a flick and maybe hang around the café/bar area afterwards, instead of driving aimlessly around the cross in my youth.

 

Finally, I have to agree with the point that was made about the publicans. I can see how any publicly funded competitor to the trade would be seen as a threat and can, to an extent, sympathise with their concerns.

 

However, there are several pubs in Lerwick that are, quite frankly, abysmal. The owner of these pubs does the very least he can to keep them ticking over as money making machines with an apparent disregard for customer service, atmosphere, décor, facilities and appearance. Competition could be just what is needed to force much needed change.

 

So, basically I’m in favour, although I can certainly appreciate the financial and planning concerns of many, especially given the council’s history of near criminal mismanagement and overspend on large projects in the past.

Ally stay in edinburgh!

Try living i a council house with 3 bairns

council tax up rent up electric up WAGES down

We cant afford this If you are so concerned come back and live here on crap pay and no prospects. Its Ok for you lot to blab on buts its us lot that has to pay for it!!!!!

[Guest Anonymous]

Perhaps you should re-read my earlier post. Last night WASN'T a film, it was probably the most popular concert of the year at the Garrison. Last year it sold out two nights, this year it's on three nights and HASN'T sold out.

 

How about the new Jim Carey film that was on at the Garrison last Thursday? Attendance 8.

 

Do you see where I'm coming from regarding these figures. Don't take my word for it - ask Islesburgh.

 

Granted, but it does illustrate that people are willing to go out through the week if there is something on (film, drama etc) where booze plays no part.

Hey marvin any chance o a weel paid job we da cooncil lik dee sittin Aa day postin stuff on dis site

[Roxy71]

Way to go Mr G!

[Guest Anonymous]

Do you honestly feel it is in the interests of the people of Shetland to go ahead and build this venue when we are faced with the economic crisis that we are facing.I have a family and I dont work for the council(one of the remaining few) my wages have actually decreased as overtime has been cut and I know a lot of my mates are in the same boat. Council tax has gone up, my rent has gone up ,my electricity has gone up, and on and on it goes. For hundreds and hundreds of families in Shetland disposable income is dropping fast so to say we will spend this amount is totally ridiculous I can tell you know you people who are determined to build this are in for a big shock. I would plead with you to look very hard and long what you are getting us in to. The bottom line is that we cannot possibly afford to take the chance on this (only) losing £80000.

 

Although I have said I will not answer anonymous posts you can't help but have sympathy with such a opinion very well put.

 

And please accept that all the comments I am about to make are most certainly not aimed at this 'correspondant' far from it. He / she has stated their concerns fairly and well and not resorted to personal slates and attacks as some have chosen to do, both on this site and in the local press and, as such, I respect them for it.

 

In fact they have simply provided me with the opportunity to point our a number of other considerations.

 

This is simply a more general observation.

 

We all live in this community and have to face the same levels of local 'tax' whatever services we actually use or dont use. And no I dont earn an astronomical wage as was suggested in the paper - yes a good one by some standards - I have nothing to hide its £23,000 and no overtime or other perks for out of hours work. Not looking for sympathy I can assure you - it is a good wage I'm not denying - not to mention a very enjoyable job, most of the time. Its not all fun and games whatver anyone likes to think I can assure you. i.e. budgets, funding applications, business meetings, reports etc. The hours are sometimes long but on the whole more than worth it to work with some of the best and most talented musicians and people anywhere in the world, both in Shetland and beyond. So as I say please spare me the clever comments.

 

As to economic crises? - maybe too strong a phrase according to many in the know - and not just the council.

 

The fact, as Marvin has pointed out, is that any deficit (remember the business plan, love it or hate it, also shows a potential profit) will not be added to core council spending so will have absolutely no impact on your council tax. Nor can it come out of education (even legally) as one councillor has apparently wrongly suggested.

 

Oh and by the way Mr Neil Anderson asked in the Shetland Times yesterday if the Lottery would have been so happy to give up the money (£2.2m you will remember) if they had known about the new business plan. Well Neil the answer is a very resounding yes. In fact it was they who asked for the new business plan to reflect a more 'conservative' approach and they have been involved and informed of the process all along. So in fact the external funding is potentially even more safe than before.

 

What any deficit will come out of, if necessary, are the returns on our external investments which are currently showing a healthy and better than estimated return - even creating surpluses.Now I may be wrong but this is 'interest' and like us all if we try to save it all for a rainy day then along will come someone and.....yes tax us on it and we will probably lose out anyway

 

Sure we should look at building up our reserves but also investing in our community too. Some are saying "save it for a rainy day" while others are insisting that day is here - so what's the argument? We cant have it both ways. Well we can I suppose - some savings / some investment. And I've not heard anyone come up with alternative suggestion as to possible investments and no it cannot be used to keep schools open or any other such 'core' services.

 

Ok yes "fix up what we have" you cry - "make do and mend" in other words. Everyone seems to think this will be cheaper and best option although I've not seen a figure put forward as yet, let alone how a number of seperate facilities would work together effectively, either economically or strategically. What I can assure you this has been looked at and discounted as the best and most cost effective way forward for now, not to mention in the long run. And yes its all in the original feasibility study.

 

Up until now I've only heard tourism bandied about as a potential growth industry. Well perhaps re-newables too - but that would appear to be a fair bit away yet. Now I'm not for one minute suggesting that this facility will change the face of tourism overnight, although I do believe it will have a very positive impact, but if we invest in a modern infrastructure for Shetland i.e. the new museum etc this, as a whole, will surely have some positive effect for sure - hopefully eventually more than the £80,000 per annum (how many tourists already come here each year?) and then there are the local users of course.

 

One economist, (who like consultants you will no doubt also ridicule - but we have to get information from somewhere over and above "the man in the street") is quoted as saying that one of the most positive things you can do for any community is create a positive 'buzz' about it and then just maybe some of the rest of the world out there with money to spend might at least turn its head toward you. Stand still and you will stagnate and die.

 

See what happened when they opened Fusion in Kirkwall - the music industry, not to mention audiences from all over Orkney, Shetland, Caithness etc., immediately got involved there like never before - and that was a pure performance venue that had no inbuilt development initiatives such as our's does - an aspect already hailed by the lottery among others as 'innovative, imaginative and unique" - but then some will probably suggest "what do they know" of course?

 

Sure Orkney is easier to get to from the Scottish mainland (but the same from / to Shetland of course - could we occasionally attract trade from there?) but surely there are some lessons to be learned from this? And did pubs, chip shops, clubs, restaurants, cafe's etc close down when Fusion opened? Only one to the best of my knowledge and its now open again, funnily enough promoting an alternative and complimentary programme to Fusion at least once a week to the best of my knowledge. The rest howeve either felt no economical impact or even thought trade had actually improved. And the rural areas felt very little negative impact either - still plenty of events in public halls all over the county too - as I say one venue can only offer so much on one particular evening.

 

Other experts (the Irish tourist board for one) claim that effective 'word of mouth marketing' - going away and telling others positive things about a place, or whatever - is the strongest weapon in their armoury rather than 'blind' advertising. Think on - we've all done it - books, CD's, restaurants etc. If someone tells you something is great or somewhere is terrific you will probably take serious notice and want to check it out. If however you tell a friend something is no good - well we all know the effect that has - we simply take their word for it and will rarely, if ever, bother with it.

 

Imagine if everyone went away from Shetland raving about it, and many already do I accept. What is the worth of that in monetary or marketing terms? We might never know but its bound to be worth something significant and should we not seek to increase this even more.

 

This has worked fantastically for SAT with Fiddle Frenzy where we now have friends and families of earlier participants coming back in bigger numbers each year - not to mention the original attendees themselves, again and again. The same goes for all the other festivals as well, especially the Folk Festival and A & F Festival. Mind you we have all had to work hard to achieve this and ensure everything is off the highest quality possible to give value for money but still we get the odd complaint whatever happens. Sure we have good facilites but everyone seems to accept that good as they may be they are a bit dated. So what of the future then? Can we afford to rest on our laurels though when there is so much competition out there?

 

Should Shetland take the risk of "make do and mend" in this instance. It certainly was not the SIC who coined the phrase "speculate to accumulate" I believe - save the clever comments again please.

 

Then there's the much maligned Shetland Brand which everybody, even the most sceptical, believes is a good idea anyway - if delivered correctly. But everyone equally agrees that you cant just stick a logo on any old thing and hope that will fool or satisfy visitors or locals alike. "We can safely brand music, thats good quality" they tell me. "How" I ask? Are you going to line up every band and musician and get them to audition against some hellish set of unfathomable criteria, then stick an arbitary label on them, or not, as the case may be? I for one wouldn't know where to start and who would be brave enough to say "good" / "no good" - "sorry folks not good enough come back next year".

 

But think on- could we not perhaps brand events that music was just part of rather than just the music itself - Folk Festival, Accordion and Fiddle Festivals, Blues Festivals, Fiddle Frenzy, most gigs in public hall etc etc. All already hopefully quality 'products', as they say in the corporate world, in their own right. A much better idea I suspect. But that would mean a quality package to include not only music, but the building and associated facilities, their 'inclusive nature, sound and production provision etc etc Now we could do this within much of our existing infrastrure I agree but, if indeed affordable, how much further would a new facility raise the quality level still further, complementing other facilities and ensuring even higher quality provision, not to mention delivering a development programme to help feed ALL venues in Shetland, in turn supporting an effective brand image.

 

Sure Cheltenham is a bigger city, but the principals are the same - but think of the competition they will face from other venues in the city not to mention the surrounding area. Doesn't seem to have put them off - quite the contrary they see the need to compete to survive. This kind of situation never seems to curtail developements of this kind in other communties. And think on does Bradford enjoy being laughed at for what it has, or doesn't have to offer? I wouldn't think so. Sure maybe all unfounded jokes, but does it make you want to go there for a holiday? Pass through out of sheer interest perhaps but not to book a two week, high cost holiday there.

 

And we've covered population retention and attraction before. How can we put a price on that, although I'm sure somebody could, even for one person to stay and spend their money here as |I have said before.

 

And anway is "make do and mend" really the best way to treat something you seem to value as much as music and culture? What sort of message does this send out to our invaluable musicians, especially the younger ones. If we dont offer them a good infrastructure to work within someone else will - probably outside of Shetland. Like it or lump it things and times move on and if we dont then our young folk will - musician or not. Lets try to think years ahead not just for today.

 

Sure we've had great musicians over the years who never needed such 'extravagence'. Tom Anderson, Willie Hunter, Ronnie Cooper, Peerie Willie, Frank Jamieson, Aly Bain, Violet Tulloch etc etc. Equally none of them developed their talents through the school system - but special people never the less

 

But that didn't stop no less an authority than Dr Tom Anderson demanding that our traditional music be further developed through education - a free service to the pupils but not to the community - we all pay for it - happily I hope. Think of how many more young musicians (especially those who could not have gone it or got there alone - financially or personally) have subsequently benefitted from this since then, not to mention us in the community, and how many more musicians in sheer numbers, again not to mention quality, there now are. if we were to cry for that public investment to now be saved there would, quite rightly, be a national outcry.

 

By enlarge what we are seeking to do here is take that investment forward with , I hasten to add, a large majority of approval from our musicians, other local culture related people and our existing education service, many of whom are involved with in proposed project with us.

 

Rightly or wrongly it seems to me a pity that almost everyone who successfully comes through our music education system has to move away from the islands to develop their skills further. Should we not try and benefit further from our initial investment by seeking to encourage at least a few of them to remain here for a while longer if nothing else. And before you say otherwise, yes the potential has been measured. Around 20% would consider staying if there were a suitable local alternative. More young people in the community - more good music? Not a bad investment I think either socially or economically.

 

It has also been suggested that all our musicians are good enough ("already the best") simply because a few are lucky enough to attract interest outside Shetland. Why should others need assistance? Again I feel this is a extremely odd and narrow assumption. Those who did so did not get there by accident, although a number did through their own commitment, but also with various aspects and levels of public support it must be said.

 

Take the sporting success of the Shetland Recreational Trust once again, thanks heavens this view were not applied to them. International athletes no less - who would have though it of Shetland - again no accident or coincidence I can assure you. With the greatest respect, I suspect this could not have been achieved if sport in Shetland had remained simply in public halls (great job though they do) or through swimming in the sea.

 

Surely everyone has the capacity to develop still further? Whenever was there a 'ceiling' on personal development or achievement? And surely this cannot be said of younger age groups? And unlike the suggestion in yesterdays paper I am most certainly not having to force anyone to do this, the suggestion is laughable in fact and nothing short of an insult to the musicians concerned.

 

Sure we have fantastic musicians, probably more per square mile than anywhere else in Scotland, many of them of the very highest quality and its a personal priviledge to work with them, but they are far from totally unique I can assure you, especially if you are looking at the global marketplace as we are tasked to do.

 

Why should we not seek to develop opportunities for them and the community still further and make sure Shetland remains ahead of the game? If we choose to stand still others will inevitably catch up and eventually overtake us - this is just a simple and irrefutable fact of life. It would be complacent, dangerous and possibly even arrogant to believe otherwise.

 

A number of you have also highlighted ongoing council cutbacks - nothing seems to be sacred or indeed guaranteed anymore. Lets hope I am wrong, but ask yourselves is instrumental tuition in schools safe? Can it be guaranteed to remain 'as is' forever? No I dont have any inside information to this effect thank God, but can we be so sure that everything will remain as is forever in the 'core' public sector - driven as it is by so many outside and competing forces? Or should we perhaps seek at least some level of autonomy through more local means in this particular sector and, at very least, try to protect what we currently have and appreciate just in case? I leave the question and the thought with you.

 

Nor, as has been suggested more than once, is this my pet project or indeed the councils. The demand for it is coming from the music and cultural sector, especially younger age groups. So although I, or the council, may be an easy target for some of you, there are equally many others working behind the scenes on this project with us in a voluntary capacity (mostly musicians - young and old(er) and the demand and much of the enthusiasm is, I can assure you, largely driven by them. Not to put too fine a point on it - seek to personally insult us (SAT and the Council) and you equally insult them - something I personally will not stand by and watch happen - so please consider that fact when inapporpriate and petty comments are directed at us.

 

When you work in the public sector you expect to be sniped at - it goes with the territory - but just consider others when you seek to lower the tone of the debate (and let me remind you I dont mean the correspondant who posted this note that's for sure - I refer to other posts on this site and some of the comments in the Shetland Times letters page - although by no means all I hasten to add)

 

PS I can take it I can assure you.

 

As I say I really sympathise with your views but there are two sides to every story.

 

Over the past few days I have been highly active on this site but I feel I have now said just about everything there is to say, on music anyway, (I will leave the cinema debate to those who know the correct titles of films) and although this may not be my final post on the subject I will now be giving priorities to other matters - mainly the musicians etc of this community who I am paid to assist and represent - although this is a crucial issue for them as I hope I have made abundantly clear.

 

I hope I (and others - thank you for that) have at least helped clear up some of the many misconceptions regarding this project and fully accept that perhaps not eveything has been communicated as well as could have been. You can never hope to cover or please everybody. I will still say we tried though.

 

I've enjoyed the debate and many of your comments and probing questions. I am certain there will be a more formal process of communication as the weeks go on, and no you have not forced us into this, it was planned, indeed demanded, anyway as part of continuing project development process and National Lotery requirements - if approved to proceed at full council next week of course.

 

 

 

Finally I have been accused of being a "talkalot" so-called music man, even a "pumped up" one (not sure of the meaning of that but I intend to lose weight if thats what was implied) Can I thank the correspondant(s) to the Shetland Times letters page this week for their observations which believe it or did make me smile - though not everyone took the same viewpoint I might add and I thank them for that too.

 

Well no doubt this post has proved that for sure. However if my "talkalot" approach is in support of the fantastic music and musicians of Shetland not to mention our islands then I make no apologies for that whatsoever.

 

Cheers for now

I agree with Davie Gardner that personal attacks on individuals are unjustified and I would go as far as saying that whatever point of view they are ignorant and unhelpfull. Everybody is entitled to thier views and they should all be taken into consideration.

I am one of the biggest opponents to this venue because I feel that due to the economic climate we are facing we simply cannot afford to either build or maintain this project. However please stop slandering people for thier points of view if you have something to say be constructive.

But to be honest I do get fed up reading Daveis war and peace!

I can assure everyone on this site that I will try my upmost to get this project stopped And I Will not go away! Our protest might not have the polished approach of the pro venue BUT WE ARE HEAR TO STAY!!!

[Marvin]

 

IMHO, these statements are correct but slightly misleading (though not intentionally so I'm sure).

I guess that any deficits are intended to be funded from the SIC's Reserve Fund, which gets its money from profits on the Sullom Voe harbour operation and from money market investments, so it's true that they would have no effect on Council tax.

 

However, the Reserve Fund also funds other expenditure and it is also being used to prop up the Council's General Fund which is (partly) funded by Council Tax. You may have heard of the Council being in deficit by a number of millions this year (somewhere between £7 to 11 million has been quoted) and this deficit has to be covered by the Reserve Fund. So, any extra cost on the Reserve Fund such as a Cinema/Music venue deficit will have an indirect effect on the Council's ability to fund its 'core' services such as Education, Social Work and Transport.

Mind you, £80,000 or whatever is pretty small beer and the salvation for the General Fund lies in creating financially sustainable core services, not in blocking other projects.

 

 

 

Of course, good points, well made. If the Council intends on using the Reserve Fund to fund core Council fuctions then at some point the extra expense could have some indirect influence on the Council Tax but it is unlikely.

[Marvin]

Hey marvin any chance o a weel paid job we da cooncil lik dee sittin Aa day postin stuff on dis site

 

I'm not going to take the bait. Grow up or go away.......or at least have the courage to put your name to your post.

 

Just for the record - my 'well paid Council job' as you put it, is in the Economic Development Department. Music is part of portfolio and funding for the Arts Trust is one of my current projects. This forum (up until now anyway) has been an excellent source of information on how Shetland views the new venue. The funding (or at least part of it) of the new venue will undoubtedly be coming across my desk sometime in the not too distant future.

 

Well all I can say is that this has been an interesting debate but the thread is now so bogged down in mindless posts that I intend on having nothing more to do with it until it is locked for registered users only.

[trout]

As recent postings containing derogatory elements slanted towards an individual posting within this thread, it has been decided to close this particular forum - "Shetland News" - to only those users that have registered with Shetlink.

 

This particular action has been taken, as the mission of Shetlink: to be an easily accessible tool to connect people and garner open debate on issues concerning Shetland, can be attained to a higher level if the issue with "Guests" postings with absolute anonimity is removed.

 

[Plain English: If you have something you want to say - Register!]

[dB]

Does anyone know the annual food/drink income figures for the Clickimin Centre?

 

I think that would give a pretty good indication of what the new CMV could expect.