Jump to content

Recommended Posts

For clarity you wanted a response and here it is.


Just because I own the greenhouses doesn't mean it has ANYTHING to do with my shop business which BTW has supported this community for over 40 years and pumped back into the local economy many millions in salaries and services as well as assisting many local charities with both funds and raffle prizes. Threats of disrupting the business due to a separate personal issue can only lead to a domino effect.


Islesat (as owners of a local business) should realise that I wouldn't stop using their business if he asked more for his house than I felt it was worth because I wanted to use it for a "community project". Have some sense people - this letter just reeks of cutting off your noses to spite your face.


I originally purchased the greenhouse which had not been used for many years due to lack of commercial viabilty with the hope of building eco-friendly housing or even having the option of rebuilding a commercial building to house my furniture and floorcoverings departments if I wanted. David Adamsons have clearly stated that they had no other property to compare the value to and have come back with a figure a third of what I believe I can achieve if I continue down one of my original desired routes in the future. However as I was approached with a community project I was more than willing to just take what it has almost cost me taking into account interest, original price and other costs over the last 5 years. This is not as one commentator states "twice the asking price" and trust him to make it clear that despite having made this my home for over 45 years I'm "an incomer" so that's another reason for my "apparent greed".


As Kavi says the figures of the project without even the purchase price were mind blowing and unfortunately I fear there could have been a swimming pools/mareel saga had it gone ahead anyway. Having said all this I can say that I am saddened that we could not reach a satisfactory resolution.


Hope that some of you can now see things from both sides of the fence...

Well said and for what its worth its nobody's business but yours and you should not have to come on here to defend yourself

Edited by brian.smith
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghufar, thank you for giving us your views which certainly clarify things a bit.  Sounds to me that although you were in favour of the community project but quite naturally did not want to take a large loss on what the place has cost you so far.  Seems reasonable to me.  And though of course the price you put on the property is a matter for you and you alone I think in view of mutters about boycotting your shops it is sensible to put your views on this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ghufar, it's sad that you should have felt you had to come on here and defend your position. The glass houses belong to you and it is your business what you ask for or sell them to.


However, the points you have made may help ease the pain of some who make comments prior to knowing the full story.


As for the Bargain Centre, you, your father and your grandfather before him, have provided a great service over many years to us customers in Shetland. I have bought lots of small item and most of my furniture from you over the years and will continue to do so.


I worked with your Grandfather Wally Mohamad when he first arrived in Shetland and bought lot of clothes from him when he first opened his shop in Hancie Smiths old place. From that small beginnings your family, through hard work, have built up a good business, providing a great service to us all. Many thanks for that.


As for being a Shetlander, I always thought you were born here, but even if you weren't I think you have earned the title by now :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been absent for some years from Shetlink, but I have dusted off my old account to post in my capacity as a committee member of Transition Shetland.



We have been in contact with Ghufar throughout the process, he has been nothing but supportive of our plans for the glasshouse - what he said regarding this in the above post is fully in line with our understanding of the situation.


The discrepancy between the valuation conducted on our behalf and what Ghufar is willing to accept for the property is only one aspect of our decision to stop pushing forward with the project.


The valuation, because of a lack of comparable sites, was conducted using a reductive method, the low valuation was due to the apparent non-profitability of the site if used in it's current state. When proposing alternative development plans, the valuation would be different. This is a lesson for future projects when attempting to balance funding and costs, especially when the benefit will be overwhelmingly social.


In our research we received a strong public support for the glassshouse project, but this failed to materialise into active support when we needed people to come on board. We are a small group and saw our role as initiators, testing the project's feasibility and providing ongoing support to a new group of people which would have taken on it's practical development.


If this group had come forward we would have persevered in our efforts to find a way to purchase the building. This would be a challenge, but we are confident this would be possible, and we would have loved to continue this project.



As to the proposal to boycott a local business, we would seriously ask that this idea be dropped. At Transition we wholeheartedly support local merchants, producers and businesses, because it is our belief that building a resilient local economy a key in tackling the challenges we all currently face. We are completely against the use of the unfortunate state of this project to advocate a behaviour that is not in line with this aim.



We had always known this was an ambitious project, and we always understood that it may not have the outcomes that we desired. But it has resulted in a feasibility study and business plan containing research that can be used for future projects, and was a good learning process.


At the very least, we tried, and hopefully generated greater awareness in the local community of the massive challenges facing all of us in the form of climate change and peak oil, as well as some idea as to what we may be able to do about them.



We have placed all our results on our website http://transitionshetland.org.uk.

Edited by DeMascus
Link to post
Share on other sites

How will this affect the Transition Group with future bids? I know that in some cases you only get one shot at Lottery Funding.

The EU are always up for these sorts of projects, as you have the part funding already in place, it may help. They have already spent money in Shetland, via the North Islands New Energy Systems with the Power Station in Lerwick, Sheap and the Quantum heating system. It may be worth getting to look at this as it will be the first.

We have similar problems here with attendance, plenty of willing though.



Edited by shetlandpeat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...