Billy One Mate Posted January 31, 2006 Author Share Posted January 31, 2006 Not at all GTBB I would just like this question answering. Government state that this Company has a proven track record. It cant if it wasnt set up until 6/9/05. No conspiracy theory just fact. Then again the DTL did state that Hilton/Sefton were not included on the list because they had no track record in Hotel Construction. If Government had stated that the individuals that were involved in this NEW Company had a proven track record in Hotel development then that would be a different matter, but they DIDNT. Also it appears from the press release that the hotel side is a side issue. 75 Appartments Work out the value. NO CONSPIRACY HERE JUST FACTS Just thought I would add the following from the Governments website Another is Askett Hawk Developments which has a strong track record in hotel development and consulting and, whilst no specified operator is identified at present, their previous clients include Hilton, Renaissance and Hyatt. They are currently involved in a major development adjacent to Bournemouth Conference centre. They have an excellent track record in delivering quality mixed use and regeneration schemes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyconcrete Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 It doesnt make sense to me. I'm sure originally they wanted a big-name operator/developer to build this flagship hotel - but on the surface, looks like they've got some bloke and his mate who have been "involved" with a number of schemes. I'm sure the DTL have done their research, but it doesnt give you any degree of confidence to the other big brand developers/operators. I'd be more convinced if they had a portfolio of the guys work and examples of other developments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I've not tried to research this company, but often companies with a known pedigree will set up a new company to take on venture such as this; hence there will be very little at Companies House (a newly formed company) or on the interweb. Has anyone got access to Companies House (beyond the basic info which is there for free) which will show who the shareholders are? The track record will probably be in the shareholders and promotors, or am I spoiling another conspiracy theory? Probably find that the shareholders will just be other companies...I downloaded the Directors info of Companies House web site and googled for their names...structural engineers by the looks of it. Which is something I guess! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringwraith Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 CLICK Follow the page down, all I could find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 75 apartments?? why on earth do we need another 75 apartments? What a load of bollocks, a Bus Station is what we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisner Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 It's ok, it's ok. The chap was born and educated on the Isle of Man and knows the site 'quite well' and visits the Island 'quite a lot'.. Here is the Manx Radio interview/chat from Mandate this morning: 20060201_Askett_blah_blah.mp3 It's worth a listen to get the measure of the chap. His business partner is a Doctor. So everything is alright. Our Government like people with 'titles' like Dr and Captain and stuff like that. And the consultant chap who done and looked after/is looking after IRIS and will also do the Airport (at £1Million+ !!) is a Doctor of something or other. And the chap who was MEA was born and educated here. So everything is alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCMR Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 The Government is ripping the public of again, they have sold or leased this land for a fraction of its worth £2 million, I would like to know the true worth of this land (remember Ramsey post office and land). In the interview Mr Pearce admitted that they were to set up a new company called Askett/Hawk developments with the backing of the RBS. So fact is this new company has no experience of major development, only the fact that one of the partners of this proposed new company was employed by a company that has done major works, and their main object is to make a killing on the 75 appartments that the Island dont need. Will they get a DTL grant as well to build Tourist appartments that will end up being rented by the finance sector Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxchatterbox Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I agree with B1M... ....and as for the relationship with RBSI what's with calling them "partners"...bet RBSI didn't know they were....partners share...which is different from "backers" or "associates"... How much of a Govt Grant do AskHaw expect?? (never mind the capital allowance tax breaks already on offer) ..and I wonder if any financial arrangement has been agreed between AskHaw or either of its directors/shareholders and the firm or any parties connected to it that handled the bidding list... .....and as I said previously somebody somewhere knows somebodysomewhere else..nudge nudge wink wink... ...as for the other site....the developer should put up or shut up..actions speak louder than words..if the private developer (which doesn't have to do anything in partnership with Govt) can't get detailed planning and contractors on site this year then I don't we should expect anything whilst it is involved.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy One Mate Posted February 1, 2006 Author Share Posted February 1, 2006 Could someone please answer this question? Why does our Government refuse to give out the full truth when making Public Statements? In regard to the bus station redevelopment we have been told over the past twelve months the following which is well documented. 1. The selected Companies in regard to the shortlist for the site had far exceeded the pre determined criteria ie A track record in regeneration development and hotel operation. 2. Askett/Hawk Deveopments has a proven track record in Hotel Development and has worked with major hotel chains. This is totally unfactual ASKETT/HAWK DEVELOPMENTS do not exist Askett/Hawk Properties Ltd was incoporated last year. Does Government not realise that by telling downright lies they do nothing for their credibility and put serious doubt in many peoples mind about any decision they take. I am in noway infering that the two named gentlemen who are going to incorporate this new company are not credible but our Government certainly hasnt helped them and has given a lorry load of fuel for the conspiratists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haX0red_Account Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 with B1M on this- yet another crass attempt at nepotism, cronyism you name it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy One Mate Posted February 1, 2006 Author Share Posted February 1, 2006 Douglas North MHK Bill Henderson is asking Mr Cretney to give an assurance the firms in the running for the tender will have a proven track record in hotel development, their financial affairs are in order, no previous record of non-payment to contractors and aren't subject to any government inquiry or likely to be subject of forthcoming litigation. Anybody know how Mr Cretney answered this question in Tynwald because it would have been impossible with Askett/Hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FCMR Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 He done his usual thing broke into the Stutters In the Governments tender documents I think it states that the company must be on the approved list of contractors to tender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxchatterbox Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 notwithstanding all the valid comments posted previously and by B1M.... the IOM Examiner this week seems to have ignored the situation.... ...which just goes to prove they don't have the balls to call themselves independent journalists.. ....makes you wonder who the Manx connected family are that's involved in the development and what moves might have been done behind the scenes by the family or politicians to sanitise the report on page 2 this week....CM is quoted...seems like he's in the know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy One Mate Posted February 6, 2006 Author Share Posted February 6, 2006 It was interesting to note from the CM that the other two tenderers were not out of the running yet. It is a shame that nobody told him that one of the remaining two actually withdrew from the race in November. Forgot to add that allegedly this was when they were told that residential development would not be accepted for part of the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haX0red_Account Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 did anyone ever find out any extra on this? another one for me MHK I reckon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.