Ramsey Marina

[asitis]

If you live in the South, for Marina read 'Bypass'

If you live in the North, for Bypass read 'Marina'

I would prefer brutal honesty, such as "Look we don't really want to build a bypass/ marina, we want to builds flats and houses in a desirable location ". At least everyone could have their say that way.

 

[Ramseyboi]

25 minutes ago, asitis said:

If you live in the South, for Marina read 'Bypass'

If you live in the North, for Bypass read 'Marina'

I would prefer brutal honesty, such as "Look we don't really want to build a bypass/ marina, we want to builds flats and houses in a desirable location ". At least everyone could have their say that way.

 

Both sets of property you refer to would sell before they were built.  We need more modern housing.

In fact in Ballasalla they were able to increase prices after they took deposits and resell the ones where people chose to pull out as demand is so high.

[asitis]

12 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Both sets of property you refer to would sell before they were built.  We need more modern housing.

In fact in Ballasalla they were able to increase prices after they took deposits and resell the ones where people chose to pull out as demand is so high.

Quite probably, but the devious methods employed to gain consents and approvals is objectionable to me. Also properties starting at over a quarter million do not help those who need to get on the housing ladder, we should be addressing those issues and not lining the pockets of developers and shareholders. Developers are only interested in prime sites where demand may be high and profits are high too, but as I have said socially that is not what we need.

[Manx Bean]

37 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Both sets of property you refer to would sell before they were built.  We need more modern housing.

In fact in Ballasalla they were able to increase prices after they took deposits and resell the ones where people chose to pull out as demand is so high.

I don't think people "chose to pull out", I think it's more that the morally bankrupt developer whose primary objective is greed forced them to give up their dream of owning their own home. What an utter bunch of wankers.

[asitis]

44 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

I don't think people "chose to pull out", I think it's more that the morally bankrupt developer whose primary objective is greed forced them to give up their dream of owning their own home. What an utter bunch of wankers.

Very true they were told it's going up x amount, pay up or pull out, some were clearly left with the only option to pull out when they were stretched in the first place ! 

[2112]

47 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

I don't think people "chose to pull out", I think it's more that the morally bankrupt developer whose primary objective is greed forced them to give up their dream of owning their own home. What an utter bunch of wankers.

Ahhhhh but they were a Manx raised company, beloved, praised and permanently endorsed by IOMG. Their actions reflect on our Government and Society. Morals obviously don’t come into it, and I didnt think that a plea to a developer to ‘think of the first time buyer’ is going to cut any mustard. If it did, the Lord Bishop would be there 24/7 praying, pleading and leading a service. 

[2112]

1 hour ago, asitis said:

Quite probably, but the devious methods employed to gain consents and approvals is objectionable to me. Also properties starting at over a quarter million do not help those who need to get on the housing ladder, we should be addressing those issues and not lining the pockets of developers and shareholders. Developers are only interested in prime sites where demand may be high and profits are high too, but as I have said socially that is not what we need.

I don’t these developers have any altruistic thoughts or ‘what can we do for the community’ intentions. I also think there is an element of greed and IOMG are involved somewhere along the lines. What’s in it for us? In this case, a Government prepared to sell out its community and its whole island, in return for nothing but vague promises. The Government had this with the old Lord Street Bus Station Site, which was near enough handed over on a platter. That was to a ‘local developer’ with ties/connections. There is zero chance of anything good ever being built on this site, retail, commercial or residential. If it’s residential there won’t be any social housing, or first time buyers built into the scheme, as these won’t produce money for the developers, or at least a good enough rate of return. Perhaps it could be argued that too much political interference and civil service meddling were involved, and the site should have been left back in Government control. 
 

For the idea of using the beach and other land, the developers must have discussed this with IOMG Civil Servants and Politicos both local and national.
 

I can bet that oooodles of speculative cash has been spent on ideas, greasing the wheels, entertaining and initial odrawings, which is before the proper plans are submitted. The PR campaign as well will not have been cheap either, but this doesn’t matter. These developers know how things work, and I’m sure they will wait a number of years, perhaps in 5 years another Chief Minister, maybe Hooperman has changed his views? 

 

[asitis]

32 minutes ago, 2112 said:

What’s in it for us? In this case, a Government prepared to sell out its community and its whole island, in return for nothing but vague promises.

Perhaps this is government painting itself into a corner in respect of employment, tax and NI take from the industry, so has to keep feeding the beast ?!

[Manx Bean]

23 hours ago, 2112 said:

Ahhhhh but they were a Manx raised company, beloved, praised and permanently endorsed by IOMG. Their actions reflect on our Government and Society. Morals obviously don’t come into it, and I didnt think that a plea to a developer to ‘think of the first time buyer’ is going to cut any mustard. If it did, the Lord Bishop would be there 24/7 praying, pleading and leading a service. 

Of course you're right, and I wouldn't want to correct your take on it. Except, whilst some may have been first time buyers, the whole practice of suddenly bumping a price, or returning a deposit to then bump up the price just to make more money on top of an already healthy margin (and please don't tell me developers are going through a tough time, because I'll puke up my breakfast), should be being raised in Tynwald and legislated against. If the purchaser legitimately withdraws from the sale and forfeits their deposit, then of course its fair game then, but otherwise its disgraceful. 

What say you Stu Peters??

[asitis]

12 minutes ago, Manx Bean said:

Of course you're right, and I wouldn't want to correct your take on it. Except, whilst some may have been first time buyers, the whole practice of suddenly bumping a price, or returning a deposit to then bump up the price just to make more money on top of an already healthy margin (and please don't tell me developers are going through a tough time, because I'll puke up my breakfast), should be being raised in Tynwald and legislated against. If the purchaser legitimately withdraws from the sale and forfeits their deposit, then of course its fair game then, but otherwise its disgraceful. 

What say you Stu Peters??

Speaking up against developers how dare you sir !!

[Ramseyboi]

Hoopers motion today was withdrawn.  What’s that all about?

[pongo]

On 11/14/2021 at 10:51 PM, CallMeCurious said:

Along with the classic projects as the Jurby Airships, Bride Holiday Camp and the Manx Film Industry. 

Not forgetting the magic long wave transmitter. 

[2112]

12 minutes ago, Ramseyboi said:

Hoopers motion today was withdrawn.  What’s that all about?

Has he screwed up his motion, or something else come into play?

[pongo]

On 11/15/2021 at 6:59 AM, asitis said:

properties starting at over a quarter million do not help those who need to get on the housing ladder, we should be addressing those issues and not lining the pockets of developers and shareholders

When looking at property prices (and mortgage costs) it is very typical to use salary as a comparison. In the UK the average property price is appx 8x average wage (or more) now. 

The joint wage of a couple on minimum wage is appx £32K on the IOM (if they are only working 37.5 hours per week). 8x £32K = £256K. Or more than  "a quarter million" *.

So how much should a starter home cost here? Perhaps a purpose built one bedroom apartment for a couple who are not planning to have children at least until their income increases. In reality a property like that still costs rather less than that.

* it sounds a lot when expressed in millions.

Edited November 16, 2021 by pongo

[pongo]

Access to lending would be a different question. But I do not believe that price is the issue.