Kopek Posted June 24 Share Posted June 24 Let's be fair to him, not everyone is 'in it' for the money? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Lamb Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 On 6/24/2024 at 11:36 AM, The Phantom said: I think he was an IT teacher who had to quit in order to campaign? Anyway following not getting voted in, he then got re-employed by one of the gaming cos on a shit load more than he would as a teacher (and probably more than he would get as an MHK). So that ship has probably sailed for Garff. He would have been on more as an experienced science teacher and head of year than as an MHK, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/roundhouse-expected-to-lose-1-million-in-six-months-time/ Brilliant. So can I expect another 33% rise of my rates again next year to fund this folly? Admittedly most of this loss will likely be due to the fact it can't operate properly until this road situation is sorted out. But it's still going to have be paid for this year. What would happen if all the Braddan rate payers just refused to pay the increase. Accept the pre Roundhouse costs are acceptable (plus maybe inflation) but the lion's share of this increase is purely due to this shambles. If only we could all get together and agree.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarndyce Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 26 minutes ago, The Phantom said: So can I expect another 33% rise of my rates again next year to fund this folly? Yes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 Well well, they've finally agreed a way forward!!! Pity it took this long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 I don’t think for a minute that the problem with access is the main problem here, true it has not helped but the interest that is due on the loan they have taken out will surely swallow all or most of the rents they are getting. However they have got their new posh offices and I hope they enjoy them and can afford to heat them as the size of the building will cost something to heat. They surely will have to employ a caretaker and cleaners that is without maintenance. A folly indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 There’s only one realistic option. Commissioners move back to the old offices. Lock the doors of the Roundhouse, sell it. Swallow the capital loss. But ongoing revenue losses of £2 million a year aren’t sustainable and shouldn’t be charged to the rate payers. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Poppins Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 5 hours ago, The Phantom said: https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/roundhouse-expected-to-lose-1-million-in-six-months-time/ Brilliant. So can I expect another 33% rise of my rates again next year to fund this folly? Admittedly most of this loss will likely be due to the fact it can't operate properly until this road situation is sorted out. But it's still going to have be paid for this year. What would happen if all the Braddan rate payers just refused to pay the increase. Accept the pre Roundhouse costs are acceptable (plus maybe inflation) but the lion's share of this increase is purely due to this shambles. If only we could all get together and agree.... Could they take some form of legal action against Jessopp? Not sure what type of action, but surely he can be held responsible for the gross mismanagement of this project? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 4 hours ago, The Phantom said: https://www.three.fm/news/isle-of-man-news/roundhouse-expected-to-lose-1-million-in-six-months-time/ Brilliant. So can I expect another 33% rise of my rates again next year to fund this folly? I wouldn't get out the pitchforks quite yet, this may be poor reporting and/or accounting. The figures appear to come from the Commissioners' Minutes of 25 June: https://braddan.im/download/2024-06-25-public-minutes/ [downloads] Scanned documents so literally skewed: This seems to show a nett anticipated loss of £1,026,559 as opposed to an estimated one of £988,330. But presumably the estimated one is as per the Braddan budget for 2024-5, so the addition expenditure to be covered is only £38,229. Which isn't great but won't require 33% rate rises on the already large one from the current. As you can see the biggest contribution to the deficit by far is capital costs, and locking the place up and walking away isn't going to help get rid of those (and you would have expected them to be budgeted for properly). In other news from the minutes only 12 people turned up to the Commissioners' 'Surgery' not all of them complaining about the Roundhouse. And the cafe still doesn't have a tenant, so they are readvertising. But they do have a dentist. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Poppins Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 21 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: I wouldn't get out the pitchforks quite yet, this may be poor reporting and/or accounting. The figures appear to come from the Commissioners' Minutes of 25 June: https://braddan.im/download/2024-06-25-public-minutes/ [downloads] Scanned documents so literally skewed: This seems to show a nett anticipated loss of £1,026,559 as opposed to an estimated one of £988,330. But presumably the estimated one is as per the Braddan budget for 2024-5, so the addition expenditure to be covered is only £38,229. Which isn't great but won't require 33% rate rises on the already large one from the current. As you can see the biggest contribution to the deficit by far is capital costs, and locking the place up and walking away isn't going to help get rid of those (and you would have expected them to be budgeted for properly). In other news from the minutes only 12 people turned up to the Commissioners' 'Surgery' not all of them complaining about the Roundhouse. And the cafe still doesn't have a tenant, so they are readvertising. But they do have a dentist. How much is the place insured for? 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred the shred Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 What about interest payments on the loan ? Is that Capital costs ? and if so that is for six months and it is all estimated……I would deffo get the pitchforks out 🤨. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 Let's be fair, I doubt Braddan comms, including Jessop, could have foreseen how this would work out??? With luck on their side and lower inflation, it could have been a 'cash cow' for them and their ratepayers? It could have provided a valuable facility to many Island groups and individuals and if they now sort out the 'access', may yet prove to be??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosley Posted July 19 Share Posted July 19 20 minutes ago, Kopek said: It could have provided a valuable facility to many Island groups and individuals and if they now sort out the 'access', may yet prove to be??? It could never have done. John Wright is largely right above in that the ongoing revenue losses of £2 million a year aren’t sustainable and shouldn’t be charged to the rate payers. It’s a pure folly because there was no actual business case to start with even without the road access. The rents they thought they could get are uncommercial and not based in reality at all to the point that they themselves are left staffing a largely empty £9 million pound cafe. Anyone who signs a commercial lease to have an independent business inside that unit would be mental at this stage. It’s going to suck a huge amount of ratepayers cash for 10 years or more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 That may be so, but, the original concept was one that could have worked? Hindsight is ........................... It may yet turn out to be fruitful once this access is sorted??? Dont be so pessimistic!!!!! then we'll be saying it has drawn revenue away from the subsidised NSC!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosley Posted July 20 Share Posted July 20 9 minutes ago, Kopek said: That may be so, but, the original concept was one that could have worked? So you think that spending £10M to build something similar to the NSC a mile and a half down the road from the NSC was a sensible business model? When the NSC is already subsidized to operate? Or that anyone wants to pay a premium rent to secure premises to house their play group or cafe in a poorly assessable place with limited parking. Even on the cafe front less than a mile away is Cycle 360 with about 40 parking spaces immediately outside directly accessible from the main road rather than turning off at the Strang and weaving halfway around the hospital estate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.