DavieG

More actual details of these will become publicly avialable as time goes on, along with other specific details of the project as a whole, if it goes through council this week that is With the actual project completion date being at least 3 - 4 years away, you will appreciate there is of course only an outline programme available to form part of the business plan. This has been built up by identifying different audience profiles etc and looking at existing and projected figures (whether you agree with this or not) and is only there to form the business plan element of the project at the moment. Obviously the actual programmes will be refined over the period and much nearer the time. It will of course be done with public input very much in mind and will certainly not be a closed shop to whoever operates the facility. However re cinema there will be regular films shown on two screens (one fixed in the cinema and most likely another available either in the main auditorium (which can be sectioned off to take account of varying audience sizes) or another suitable 'room'. This will hopefully offer the widest viewing alternatives for audiences while still staying realistic i.e. if a 'blockbuster' is showing for a week or whatever, this will still offer an alternative choice for those who have already been to that one. So if a blockbuster is say a 15 or an 18 you could still show films for young pepole or families on the 2nd screen Over an above this there will be a cinema 'outreach' programme for outlying areas of Shetland (as presently provided by the Film Club - with their full support I may add) and also a range of digital media courses linked to film making etc. Again this still has to be fully refined depending on what's logical / required at the time and taking into account technology advances that will inevitably happen in the interim. Theatre will also form part of the equation - again to be fully defined. Obviously this will have to complement what the Garrison offers at the moment but could offer all sorts of alternatives such as those bigger productions or similar that cannot fit into the Garrison at the moment, theatre 'in the round' or whatever. Then there are of course some productions that simply do not fit into the environment of a 'straight theatre and a flexible space could possibly suit the delivery of such productions much better. Then there's contemporary dance of course - a blossoming and highly popular genre is Shetland at present, that could well benefit to a greater extent with a larger and more flexible structure. Again this means that drama and dance could continue in a theatre type environment when the Garrison is tied up during time such as the Drama Festival or the Pantomime or whatever. Hope this anwers some of your questions, but it will be a case of watch this space in the lead up if the project goes ahead.

[ Not totally accurate I'm afraid. The proposed new facility can, and almost certainly will, suitably cater for all kinds of creative performance and related development initiatives (drama, comtemporary dance whatever), including ones that cant happen at present due to either financial or production restrictions The Garrison will still have a vital role to play (remember any venue can only offer so much at one time and there will always be a range of demands and audiences at one time) As a public building it may well be managed and staffed from the same source as the proposed new facility so not really adding to the cost as you allude. Also the Garrison is tied up for extensive periods each year i.e. drama festival and pantomime (both during these extended events and in the lead up to them) when, if we relied on that facility totally, nothing else could be promoted. It may sound like overprovision to some but not really the case. It will again be a case of complementary programming.

I'll not presume to answer on anyone's behalf here, but this is indeed a good question. For myself, its not simply a subjective issue. My personal feeling - for what its worth - is that comparing luxuries like this to essential spending on transport infrastructure is unreasonable. All that they have in common is that they appear on the same capital programme but it's like saying that penicillin and ice cream are equally important because they appear on the same shopping list. The importance of the quality and quantity of transport links to peripheral areas is well established nationally - I'd refer you to the Scottish Executive's Rural Poverty and Inclusion Working Group report "Poverty and Social Inclusion in Rural scotland" (2001) which identifies several issues hindering rural development. The principle issue is Access, in the sense of transport and transport infrastructure. Shetland's own structure plan and Local transport strategy recognises transport provision as one of the most crucial factors affecting development within and throughout the isles. It's not a kneejerk reaction to say that Access issues (roads, ferries, fixed links, subsidised transport, etc) and development projects should be sorted out before embarking on projects like the CMV for which there is no national or local priority framework or even an adequately researched business case or consultation/engagement robust enough to bear examination. Furthermore, its still unacceptable to say that its not preventing anything else on the capital programme from going forward. You know perfectly well that capital projects can only be addressed consecutively because of budgetary restraints and building capacity within the islands. Also, its perhaps, more important to look at whats being kept off the capital programme because of the CMV's inclusion. North Isles fixed links for example. The case for this is weak - and that's not merely a personal observation, there is no basis in policy for building the CMV while projects which have the backing of national strategic imperatives languish on the back burner. Not disagreeing at all and I obviously have no idea, more than anyone else in the public what, if anything, is being kept of the capital programme by this or any other project currently on there. Just interested to know - are plans for fixed links to the N Isles as far developed as being ready to go on there yet? All I would add is that to have a successful community (especially a smalll and fragile one) there needs to be a suitable and appropriate range and balance of provisions and services. Although individual projects such as this may not have priority focus in a national sense, social provsion, inclusion and economic diversity do and it could equally be argued that this would have impact in that area. Nothing is simply black and white All we (the music and cultural sector in Shetland - which is closely allied to tourism of course) can do is represent and make our case in the bigger scheme of things and then let our elected representatives, or whoever, make those decisions on our behalf. As has been said before money comes from different quarters for different purposes and cant always be crossed over. Had this initiative been purely my, SAT's or the Council's 'pet project' as some seem to think, I suspect it would not have got as far as it has.

Pretty much spot on. And thanks for all this. I may well ask Bryan to post our music develoment plans for this year (and beyond hopefully) so anyone interested can see what else I / we actually do.

As for the venue I do wish we could hear more about the positive aspects of the project including cinema and theatrical plans. Thanks for this and much appreciated. And you are right I am but one fairly small cog in a very large wheel. Without existing, and hopefully increasing, excellent local ingredients (including musicians etc) I would not have a job helping complete the dish so to speak. I am more than happy to stay involved as time allows - believe it or not no day is a quiet day here - hence me using a fair bit of my spare time too. The project is a wide, time consuming and demanding one and so I must look to that too. I just feel that we are now going round in circles to some extent and dealing with relatively small, if still important details, which are still three to four years away in reality and will inevitably change to some extent in that time. This will be especially true if they are further 'informed during the lead in time, by whoever has somethng relevant to add, and as local circumstances change, which they inevitably will in that time. You are right I see this as part of my duties in public life And as I have said the ongoing process will again take a more 'formal' public communication direction in the very near future as things once more develop and if it goes through council this week. Keep the debate going though and I will still join in where necessary.[/i]

Michael - This is just an observation and question from a personal interest point of view, while still sympathising with your, and others, concerns in this specific context. Can you tell me / us why your group have singled out this particular project to object to, "from a ratepayers point of view", as you have put it, while not at any time mentioning others on the SIC's current capital programme? I select just one instance - The Bressay Bridge (and no I am not trying to start a new argument here) is set to cost around £19m and many have also claimed it is likely to go over budget - hence the fact a ceiling has apparently been placed on the cost. Also I am sure that someone would be able to highlight instances of similar projects that have indeed gone over budget, as you chose to do with just one arts centre in the Western Isles. Equally many have branded that particular project "a 'luxury' that we cannot afford" (their words not mine) i.e. apparently only serving 300+ people, doing people out of work (ferrymen - plus potentially hitting their families hard), threatning existing businesses in the immediate area, the cost of maintaining it in future, additional expenditure on a supporting infrastructure in Bressay (and on the Lerwick side too) as well as other claims of potentially harming harbour operations etc etc. The list of potential expenditures and risks highlighted in this context goes on and on and could be construed as having even wider impact implications than the C&MV project. I'm not trying to draw direct comparisons here, or set project against project and I'm sure we could debate other / similar projects in this respect, but I'm just interested as to why you have only selected one such project for specific focus in this particular respect?

That's not allowed Mr G. You are the man paid to develop music and as such have a duty (despite what others say) to answer the public's questions on this issue. Keep it up. PS. Which band is playing the last post and chorus for you? And i dont disagree.........but unless there is something really new to cover then I'm starting to feel, maybe wrongly, that I've just about said it all and we are now debating in circles and nothing much new of real relevance is coming to the surface, so I'm actually prioritising developing music in fact as I have normally do on a day to day basis (having given so much time to this site last week) I will be posting the events we are involved in this year on this site soon so you will see the amount of things happening that I also have to deal with. However I will be keeping an eye on the site of course and will chip in if necessary....don't worry.

And now I really have sounded my 'last post' on this issue for the time being. - I will stand by for the clever comments..........

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!!! Cheers for this Michael - I wid have expected no less of de and nothing wrong with agreeing to differ.

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 This is disgraceful - you should be ashamed of yourself poster. Well done the lads for putting a stop to this kind of thing.

Reality in its own right of course and I'm sure it serves the purpose ver well - but hardly a full blown service to be equated against the new facility proposal

Do you happen to know how many people it takes for a film showing to break even even on a single night if there are no major overheads? I dont but I believe they would not be astronomical, especially if the building also had other income streams operating at the same time. i think the overheads will be higher now - when Islesburgh took films in they would have to pay theatre staff and the cut to the film man - thats all noW the new arts lot will have the HIRE the theatre from the council/Islesburgh then pay their own staff to man the doors - so its going to cost the arts lot more. I persume they will be programming the theatre but i persume the wont get it for free! by the Way the 'Shetland Arts' is a half baked idea of a name in my oppinion it should have been 'Shetland Arts Development' Just read this fully. The Garriison will come under the new Arts Develomment Agency's remit as of 1st April (no jokes please) so it would be unlikely we would hire it from ourselves. We had to hire it from Islesburgh prior to this anyway (the internal money go round again. As to paying our staff to man it. Nobody at the Arts Trust (or indeed those of us transferring to the new agency) earns overtime or any other perks for working extra hours - so if you see us there, or anywhere at events in the evening or weekends - we are working for nothing (unlike some other Trusts) - again no sympathy required.

Oh and just for clarity - all the info I have provided is official and has been fully discussed by either the project team or the combined steering group or more likely both. Where my cooments are personal I have stated this. OK I have stuck my head above the parapet but only in the interests of gettin official info out to those of you who are concerned something I am quite prepared to live with whatever. Mind you we have also had anonymous postings from someone who clearly says they currently work for Islesburgh and are of a much more personal approach so.......

First you say we dont communicate or provide enough info, then..........

Do you happen to know how many people it takes for a film showing to break even even on a single night if there are no major overheads? I dont but I believe they would not be astronomical, especially if the building also had other income streams operating at the same time. i think the overheads will be higher now - when Islesburgh took films in they would have to pay theatre staff and the cut to the film man - thats all noW the new arts lot will have the HIRE the theatre from the council/Islesburgh then pay their own staff to man the doors - so its going to cost the arts lot more. I persume they will be programming the theatre but i persume the wont get it for free! by the Way the 'Shetland Arts' is a half baked idea of a name in my oppinion it should have been 'Shetland Arts Development' SAD - Oh please. Imagine the alugh you would have had at our expense then!!!

thats a good point! Answered this before. The Ice Factory was turned down due to the fear that someone might fall into the sea - among other things I suspect. When it was pointed out that this approach might force the closure of the Thule, Captain Flints the Boating Club and the Queens (both of whom are built into the sea) to name but three, there were all round. That's Shetland for you. Has anyone been to the Tyne and seen the nightclub there? Cant recall anyone drowning there? not been to the tyne . but i know a few have died in lerwick harbour. water is a great atraction for children so will the cinema and music venue be fenced off Any genuine risk will be assessed prior to and during any construction phase as it would be with any project so if this is seen as a genuine issue I am sure it will be addressed in the appropriate manner

Would you throw your own money at something that "could start a trend"? Trends are, by their very nature, cyclical and what's popular one year won't be another year. I hardly think "could start a trend" is a sound footing to commit this amount of money. Try getting a bank loan for something that "could start a trend". Good luck. Its keeping up with tyrends thats important if you want to survive.

Well done guys.

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

the very reason why the business sees a two screen option as the most viable believe it or not.

Do you happen to know how many people it takes for a film showing to break even even on a single night if there are no major overheads? I dont but I believe they would not be astronomical, especially if the building also had other income streams operating at the same time.

Hows about this for a scenario Monday - Film - 50 people - everybody spends £5 on food/drink - £250 Tuesday - Film and small music event - 150 people - average spend £5 - £750 Wednesday - Film - 100 people - average spend £5 - £500 Thusday - Film and a gig 150 people- average spend £8 - £1200 Friday - Film and a gig - 700 people - average spend £12 - £8,400 Saturday - Film and a gig - 700 peolpe - average spend £12 - £8,400 Sunday - Film and small gig - 100 people - average spend £5 - 500 Total income through food/drink - £20,000 which equals out at £2,857 per day. If you add on to that cafe takings through the day from passing trade (its going to be closest cafe to where I work) I don't think it is unreasonable to expect an average of £1400 to come in. The argument is how much of that is displacement from existing businesses and how much of it is 'new' trade. Hardly like for like - The Garrison tuck shop versus a cafe bar. Reality?

What? No pub benefits from the Folk Festival, Blues Festival, concerts in Clickimin orwherever, people going to other pubs before the North Star or Posers - please!!!! Sorry totally disagree and I have been there many times. Take just two instances - Proclaimers and Steve Earle. Sure I only went to the Lounge (and took them all with me I hasten to add) but both bars were full to overfolowing and those were on week nights. And there are instances of many smaller concerts having a similar effect. Not disagreeing but the fact is it was only shown here two weeks ago - still fine in my personal opinion. Hopefully not a problem seeing as everyone is airing their's in this context.

thats a good point! Answered this before. The Ice Factory was turned down due to the fear that someone might fall into the sea - among other things I suspect. When it was pointed out that this approach might force the closure of the Thule, Captain Flints the Boating Club and the Queens (both of whom are built into the sea) to name but three, there were all round. That's Shetland for you. Has anyone been to the Tyne and seen the floating nightclub there? Cant recall anyone drowning there?

Not sure of your point here but as I say I'm not a cinema expert. However here's a couple of personal observations. Breakback Mountain was showing in Glasgow when I was there in mid-Jan and it only came here last week. I saw Walk the Line about 6 weeks ago on the mainland - then I saw it again on a plane while I was travelling about a month back.......its only here next time around. Good enough for me though as I will see it again then.....great film!!!! Wish I had as many flight as everyone seems to think I do - not need to get catty. As I say, forget the flight then, the film was showing nationally weeks ago so and many films dont get here at all so there are good arguments on both sides - I am not disagreeing with you. I simply am not sure of all the outs and in's And sadly we dont even get all the top films here. I have been waiting to see Wolf Creek, a fairly high profile film, which was also showing in Glasgow in Jan, but to the best of my knowledge it's not been here yet Dont get me wrong Film Mobile Scotland and the Garrison do a great job under the circumstances but you can only do so much and show so many films on a once-a-monthy cycle. Sometimes we get the films early sometimes I suspect its about par for the course with other local cinemas - which is still pretty acceptable for those of us that dont have the option of seeing the film any other way - until the DVD comes out of course. Somebody highlighted the improving quality of pirate DVD's in an earlier comment. I seriously hope we never see those as a serious competitor (as they seemed to imply they might become) or a valid reason for not having an official entertainment facility in Shetland. Shame on them for that!!!! If that were the case there would be no industry left to debate anyway. Sure Harry Potter was an amazing coup but "one swallow don't make a summer" as they say. As I say no cinema expert (hence Breakback rather than Brokeback Mountain) but as someone said earlier if this is a problem, and we are told it wont be, will it not be partially compensated for by the fact we have more films more regularly - again just my personal thoughts. Another personal thought - if this does turn out to be true, and as I say we have been told otherwise, can anyone tell me what the problem is with waiting a few weeks to see a film anyway? I'm told we don't need a Rolls Royce service but some seem to disagree. And who decides what a Turkey as you put it is anyone. [/i] You are quite right about the USA leg of the flight - the first time I have been there in the six years I have been doing this job by the way and somebody else paid - so no need for snide remarks. I stand corrected - as I say no expert.