 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Waste of money if you ask me. It makes me laugh that a few very vocal and articulate highland communities have to have their 'way of life' preserved at great public expense. Contrast the level of state aid given per capita to these people with that used to alleviate grinding poverty and inequality in other UK cities and we have one of the great injustices of modern times unfolding before us.
This railway should never have been funded with public money. As it is it should be allowed to fail. But because the funicular stands on a windy Scottish hillside and provides wealth to the middle-class descendants of poor crofters no doubt it will be kept running through state funding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Personally I'm all for it. and so are the other 400,000 people a year that use it.
Just because something is paid for doesn't mean that it is at the expense of other things. I'm actually quite proud of some of the state subsidies we have here in Scotland (free travel for pensioners etc). Indeed I'd rather pay about 3% more tax to get more (as long as it is spent efficiently) but many will disagree. Thats what democracies are all about.
Many pensioners on day trips love to go up there. They are probably not fit enough to walk up. And it allows people with disabling conditions access too.
As for other inequality in uk cities I'd rather they were sorted too.
Cheers
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| glasgowcyclops wrote: |
| Personally I'm all for it. and so are the other 400,000 people a year that use it...... |
Problem is that the 400,00 people who are using it aren't prepared to pay full whack - so of course they are all for it, like you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
From tha article:
"About 400,000 people used the car park last year, according to HIE.
It said half of those visitors used the funicular."
So 200,000 users of the funicular.
It sounds like there's a £1M plus hole in the annual finances. Add a £1 charge for the car park and £3 on to the funicular charge, and you raise £1M if demand is unaffected. Neither seems a particularly big fee / increase to me, so surely they can get the business to roughly break-even point without too much difficulty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There really is an innate amount of crap spouted by journalists over this, when you actually know something about a story journalists keep reporting on you soon realise how little grasp general journalists can possibly get on a specialist story.
The Funicular does not need £4million of repairs or upkeep, this figure has come out of a laughable report by consultants to HIE stating that they should spend up to £10m demolishing and rebuilding the Ptarmigan Restaurant! 
Just on Sunday the Herald Newspaper reported that "There were many years without enough snow for skiers". 
CML's failings do not take away from what HIE funded the Funicular for and it should be remembered that CML has never seen a penny of the construction costs, the Funicular was commissioned by HIE, developed by HIE and has always been owned by HIE. HIE's principle motivation was that CairnGorm Mountain as a focal point attraction for the Strathspey area could be used as a catalyst to unlock large scale private investment and get the redevelopment of Aviemore moving after 20years of stalemate.
Even the Audit Scotland Report which people are using to pan HIE and the Funicular, acknowledge that from this perspective the Funicular was substantial success, very substantially re-invigorating the tourism industry in Strathspey. The redevelopment of the Aviemore Centre has to date brought in £80m of private funding and perhaps as much again is in the pipeline before the development is finished.
It should also not be overlooked that much of the operating companies debts and the project overspends were incurred due to the best part of 5 years delay due to planning and legal wrangles with certain NGO's determined to stop the project. Also some conservation and even certain mountaineering groups were on and remain on a mission to bring about the end to lift served snowsports in the Scottish Highlands. Indeed over a third of the total cost of the project was spent on environmental mitigation works, which included building a tunnel to prevent sky lining, digging the founds for many of the support piers by hand, building a large aerial cable crane (like a giant cable car system that could lift 10tonne concrete beams) to limit machine travel on the ground and even as far as numbering individual rocks with rare lichens and mosses, photographing their position, storing them in the car park then putting them back where they came from according to the logs/photographic records!
Most that are shouting the loudest for it to be shutdown and removed don't really care about the issues and costs associated with the Funicular, their objective is the complete removal of the snowsports area on CairnGorm Mountain including the access roads, restricting access to a mountain experience in the Cairngorms to those physically able and with the skills to undertake the elitist 'long walk in'. They serve no-ones interest but their own and it is not going to happen, because HIE would not and can not spend the sort of sums being talked about on devastating a rural economy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| They serve no-ones interest but their own and it is not going to happen, because HIE would not and can not spend the sort of sums being talked about on devastating a rural economy. |
What do you mean?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Firstly you will lose around 90 full time year round jobs immediately, that has a significant knock on affect on a small town in terms of reduced spending on services and income to other businesses, which in itself will result in some further job loses.
You remove the most visited paid for summer attraction in the area, that will reduce visitor spend in the area, visitor dwell time in the area and almost certainly also reduce visitation to the area in the summer season. All these will be multiple reductions in demand for other local businesses and service providers, leading to further job losses which in turn will have their own negative multiplier effect.
However the big hit, the double whammy if you like is that you dent summer income potential, then absolutely devastate the winter business that enables some businesses to stay afloat at all, while allowing others to remain as viable year round businesses. Without the ski area and funicular many more businesses would become seasonal, with the implications that has on the community. Plus ski and snowboard retail shops, gear hire outlets, ski schools etc would all be out of business. Even restaurants and hotels that stay open all year will have to employ fewer staff as they wont get the big busy periods in winter that pay the way for the rest of the season.
HIE is a development agency, it's remit is to strengthen Highland Communities, not pull the rug from under them. I also think there is a degree of politics of envy in some of this from Central Belt MSPs, but it's hardly HIE's fault that Scottish Enterprise has been widely regarded as an ineffective failure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Winterhighland wrote: |
| There really is an innate amount of crap spouted by journalists over this |
It seems it's not just journos spouting clueless "crap" Alan! 
| PJSki wrote: |
| What do you mean? |
I think to anyone withn an iota of knowledge about the funicular debacle it's perfectly clear what he means, if anyone doesn't they might try finding out a bit about the issue before making comments here - start with Winterhighland, Highland Instinct, HIE and a google search.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Winterhighland wrote: |
Firstly you will lose around 90 full time year round jobs immediately, that has a significant knock on affect on a small town in terms of reduced spending on services and income to other businesses, which in itself will result in some further job loses.
You remove the most visited paid for summer attraction in the area, that will reduce visitor spend in the area, visitor dwell time in the area and almost certainly also reduce visitation to the area in the summer season. All these will be multiple reductions in demand for other local businesses and service providers, leading to further job losses which in turn will have their own negative multiplier effect.
However the big hit, the double whammy if you like is that you dent summer income potential, then absolutely devastate the winter business that enables some businesses to stay afloat at all, while allowing others to remain as viable year round businesses. Without the ski area and funicular many more businesses would become seasonal, with the implications that has on the community. Plus ski and snowboard retail shops, gear hire outlets, ski schools etc would all be out of business. Even restaurants and hotels that stay open all year will have to employ fewer staff as they wont get the big busy periods in winter that pay the way for the rest of the season.
HIE is a development agency, it's remit is to strengthen Highland Communities, not pull the rug from under them. I also think there is a degree of politics of envy in some of this from Central Belt MSPs, but it's hardly HIE's fault that Scottish Enterprise has been widely regarded as an ineffective failure. |
I think you mean its remit is to pump in disproportionate amounts of money to help sustain an idyllic lifestyle for for vocal highlanders and their future generations. I wish a quango would pump money into my area and business.
All this money if being spent in the wrong place and it isn't fair that a few whining communities should get so much of it. These people are rich enough and clever enough to sort themselves out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| roga wrote: |
| Winterhighland wrote: |
| There really is an innate amount of crap spouted by journalists over this |
It seems it's not just journos spouting clueless "crap" Alan!
| PJSki wrote: |
| What do you mean? |
I think to anyone withn an iota of knowledge about the funicular debacle it's perfectly clear what he means, if anyone doesn't they might try finding out a bit about the issue before making comments here - start with Winterhighland, Highland Instinct, HIE and a google search. |
Actually I try to avoid propaganda.
I'm more interest in funding going to people at the bottom rather than those on the upper-middle rung.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PJSki, you ski Scotland or ever skied Scotland?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| roga wrote: |
| PJSki, you ski Scotland or ever skied Scotland? |
Since before you ever did, laddie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Quote: |
All this money if being spent in the wrong place and it isn't fair that a few whining communities should get so much of it
|
PJSki, Where is LONDON? lets think if we can all think about
| Quote: |
disproportionate amounts of money
|
That may have been spent there in the same time frame.......oh let me start, how about 'The Dome'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| kevindonkleywood wrote: |
| Quote: |
All this money if being spent in the wrong place and it isn't fair that a few whining communities should get so much of it
|
PJSki, Where is LONDON? lets think if we can all think about
| Quote: |
disproportionate amounts of money
|
That may have been spent there in the same time frame.......oh let me start, how about 'The Dome' |
Built as part of the regeneration of a deprived area. Last time I was in the highlands I didn't see much in the way of deprivation. Still, the Scots have always been very good at sustaining the unsustainable in terms of their well off rural and highland communities. In my opinion enough is now enough and they should be left to sink or swim. But I do recognise that some of you old boys won't be guaranteed your subsidised skiing in the future if the free market or fair distribution of wealth and opportunity were allowed to prevail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| Since before you ever did, laddie. |
You're avoiding the question but I'll presume from that you mean you did once many years ago, so why are you not skiing there this season? Best season in living memory or are you averse to any ski resort that's subsidised ... in which case you'll be avoiding most of the Alps too I guess!
Actually the other 4 Scottish ski areas get little or absolutely no public help whatsoever so they'd be okay for you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Whilst we all may have opinions 
lets think about the sums of money spent by the LDA and GLA then maybe you could throw some flames at the billions wasted there before we look to criticise what are really 'crumbs' from the 'table full of cake' that gets spent in the South East.
As for the idea that the money could be better spent alliviating 'grinding poverty' in the inner cities........have you looked at the sums of money that are already spent suposedly addressing that very issue? how much actual difference would be made?
Yes it may be a misguided project in the eyes of some and yes it should have cost less but unfortunately its positive impact is not seen in its own balance sheet but that was the whole point of the project in the first place. It must be pointed out that a lot of the money went to consultants and 'experts' that live........mmmm let me think where?????
We can all read the tabloid papers but we dont have to believe what is written in them
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
PJSki. The UK has amongst the poorest and least well funded rural infrastructure and services out of the major European countries, if you consider the journey times from Paris to the various corners of France by train and compare them to the UK you start to get some idea of the extent to which the UK fails as a unified state and of the extent to which your argument is laughable.
Despite the Eastern European countries that have joined the EU, the Highlands & Islands (HIE area) continues to get transitional funding under the EU objective 1 development funds and from the EU social funds because median incomes are so far below the EU average. Where does this fit with the upper-middle rung? Yes there is that rung there, mostly from people who have retired to the area from outside it - that might bring some veneer of wealth but it does nothing to and can not sustain living viable communities. Indeed because of the wealth disparity across the UK it creates it's own major headaches with managing development within the National Park, wealthy retires form the SE in particular can outstrip locals in the housing market every time.
If you follow your logic you will have a community of middle class and upper middle class, because no-one working in the local industries or born locally would be able to compete in the housing market, but you do not then have a wealthy community, you ultimately end up with a lifeless and non-viable community of people who have come to the area to die and the communities die with them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| Built as part of the regeneration of a deprived area. Last time I was in the highlands I didn't see much in the way of deprivation. Still, the Scots have always been very good at sustaining the unsustainable in terms of their well off rural and highland communities. In my opinion enough is now enough and they should be left to sink or swim. But I do recognise that some of you old boys won't be guaranteed your subsidised skiing in the future if the free market or fair distribution of wealth and opportunity were allowed to prevail. |
I presume you whined as loudly about the subsidies given recently to bankers so they could continue subsidising businesses like yours?
I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find many Scots who'd be more than happy to be left "to sink or swim" by people like you in the SE of England ... mind you I know a fair few in other parts of England, particularly the north, who'd feel the same!
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Wed 3-03-10 14:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
Last time I was in the highlands I didn't see much in the way of deprivation
|
But you visited 
have you lived in a rural community? l
Take a look at the goverment indicies of deprivation.
Spend some time away from the touristy areas and go and look at the council estates and industrial areas and tell us just how vibrant the ecconomic situation is.
Unfortunately by its very nature a rural community is dispersed and the 'in your face' signs of deprivation are not as clear as they can be somewhere like Bradford for example. If you actually look at the reality though it is a long way from the picture postcard image some hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| kevindonkleywood wrote: |
| We can all read the tabloid papers but we dont have to believe what is written in them |
I presume you're using "tabloid papers" as a euphemism for The Mail! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
roga, I could not possibly comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
^ lol, I thought you might not be able to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| roga wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
| Since before you ever did, laddie. |
You're avoiding the question but I'll presume from that you mean you did once many years ago, so why are you not skiing there this season? Best season in living memory or are you averse to any ski resort that's subsidised ... in which case you'll be avoiding most of the Alps too I guess!
Actually the other 4 Scottish ski areas get little or absolutely no public help whatsoever so they'd be okay for you! |
We aren't talking about them or my skiing preferences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Something about some government indices of deprivation to keep in mind is that car ownership is used as a indicator of affluence, in rural areas it is nothing of the sort. Indeed some of the areas of the UK with lowest incomes compared to the average across the UK have the highest % of car ownership. You can live without a car in a city, you can not live in disperse rural communities with little or no access to services on your immediate doorstep without a car.
Various government policies of recent times make this sort of situation even worse, closing rural post offices, requiring passport applicants to go to a passport office for an interview, closing rural driving test centres (just a small selection). What well below average income and well above average car ownership tells you is not a story of affluence but one of exceptionally low or no disposal income and one of fuel poverty. We all pay the same road tax, fuel duty is set at the same rate, then VAT is applied on top, which acts as a extra kick in the teeth in terms of petrol prices, which in parts of the Highlands & islands are the highest in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| roga wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
| Built as part of the regeneration of a deprived area. Last time I was in the highlands I didn't see much in the way of deprivation. Still, the Scots have always been very good at sustaining the unsustainable in terms of their well off rural and highland communities. In my opinion enough is now enough and they should be left to sink or swim. But I do recognise that some of you old boys won't be guaranteed your subsidised skiing in the future if the free market or fair distribution of wealth and opportunity were allowed to prevail. |
I presume you whined as loudly about the subsidies given recently to bankers so they could continue subsidising businesses like yours?
I presume you whined as loudly about the subsidies given recently to bankers so they could continue subsidising businesses like yours? I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find many Scots who'd be more than happy to be left "to sink or swim" by people like you in the SE of England ... mind you I know a fair few in other parts of England, particularly the north, who'd feel the same! |
Don't be stupid. I complain about upside down funding and you bring up quantitative easing, presumably in an inept attempt to make me look hypocritical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| We aren't talking about them or my skiing preferences. |
Very true in reality we seem to be talking about your ideological preferences
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Winterhighland, Not to mention the removal of ambulance cover and the closure of hospitals and the centralisation of healthcare by the health trusts forced to work to the same per capita funding as highly populated areas. This is also true of Education delivery and youth provision which in many rural communities has now become non viable and we have seen the closure of schools, the disbanding of youth groups and the removal of services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| PJSki wrote: |
| Don't be stupid. I complain about upside down funding and you bring up quantitative easing, presumably in an inept attempt to make me look hypocritical. |
Ah, I'll take from that non answer that it's fine in your book to chuck a few billion at the richest and greediest (many of whom just happen to be in your neck of the woods) but not okay for far smaller amounts to be used to help regenerate communities in other parts of the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
It would be far better i presume to have everyone employed directly or indirectly in this project made redundant and left to claim benifit?
Oh look even if you do the sums fairly conservatively it is cheaper to keep it going. now that is a surprise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| roga wrote: |
| PJSki wrote: |
| Don't be stupid. I complain about upside down funding and you bring up quantitative easing, presumably in an inept attempt to make me look hypocritical. |
Ah, I'll take from that non answer that it's fine in your book to chuck a few billion at the richest and greediest (many of whom just happen to be in your neck of the woods) but not okay for far smaller amounts to be used to help regenerate communities in other parts of the UK. |
Don't be even more stupid. Desperate economic times call for desperate measures. I have no idea what would have happened had governments around the world not stepped in when and as they did. It's a shame that those that got us into the mess in the first place also benefited from the bailout. As you can imagine, I hate bankers in general, and, like pretty much everyone, I have no choice but to deal with them from time to time. Rest assured, I don't deal with them knowingly or willingly. Short of starving to death, there will always be a bank involved in any business chain I'm involved with.
Anyway, these highland communities have enough intelligence and access to enough private funding to stand on their own two feet, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| kevindonkleywood wrote: |
It would be far better i presume to have everyone employed directly or indirectly in this project made redundant and left to claim benifit?
Oh look even if you do the sums fairly conservatively it is cheaper to keep it going. now that is a surprise. |
What like most other employees of private companies? Yeah, fecking right. No pain, no gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look chaps and chapesses. Its a democracy here. Lets all just have out own opinions etc. Vote for who we like etc.
PJski is entitled to the view that they prefer. Some may not agree, me included but I'll defent to the hilt his right to that view.
Who was it that said that?
Cheers
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
The Scots vs English debate again.
Born and raised North of 'The Wall' and South of 'The Border' I can opt out of this one as both sides are wrong. |
Just don't mention the football.
|
|
|
|
|
|
brian
brian
Guest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
