Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 11:19am Thu 11 Dec 08
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ?
Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised.
The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline.
If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas.
The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there.
Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ?
Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised.
The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline.
If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas.
The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there.
Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Posted by: Stewie Griffin, Glasgow on 11:38am Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy. [/quote] Good post. Right amount of anger, sarcasm and "scunnered".
And where is our picture of Stevie Purcell? He must be in his chambers, greetin'. No arm folding today then.
People Power wrote:
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Good post. Right amount of anger, sarcasm and "scunnered".
And where is our picture of Stevie Purcell? He must be in his chambers, greetin'. No arm folding today then.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:40am Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy. [/quote] Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up.
Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot.
Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time.
People Power wrote:
Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up.
Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot.
Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time.
Posted by: Meep, Shawlands on 11:45am Thu 11 Dec 08
Common sense prevails. At least developers know a recession when it hits them. Down in London property developers and contractors are going bust. so if its happening there it will happen here. Glasgow has an overprovision of hotels that are lying empty. Like i have said before, glasgow is not a tourist city, and this story has proved it again. Glasgow needw new ideas to generate jobs and money cause tourism isnt doing it.
Common sense prevails. At least developers know a recession when it hits them. Down in London property developers and contractors are going bust. so if its happening there it will happen here. Glasgow has an overprovision of hotels that are lying empty. Like i have said before, glasgow is not a tourist city, and this story has proved it again. Glasgow needw new ideas to generate jobs and money cause tourism isnt doing it.
Posted by: jim, Glasgow on 11:49am Thu 11 Dec 08
This hotel was always pie in the sky .it was never going to get off the ground.
This hotel was always pie in the sky .it was never going to get off the ground.
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 11:56am Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote: Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy. [/quote] Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up. Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot. Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time. [/quote] You're right about the Meadowside Quay. A guy I know worked on them, says he'll be surprised if they outlast the mortgages.
The Missing City wrote:
People Power wrote: Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up. Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot. Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time.
You're right about the Meadowside Quay. A guy I know worked on them, says he'll be surprised if they outlast the mortgages.
Posted by: secondcity, Glasgow on 11:57am Thu 11 Dec 08
I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel.
Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel.
Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
Posted by: John, Glasgow on 12:11pm Thu 11 Dec 08
secondcity
[bold]WELL SAID.[/bold] I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland.
[bold]WHY![/bold]
Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These [bold]CRETINS[/bold] don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people.
secondcity
WELL SAID. I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland.
WHY!
Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These
CRETINS don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 12:12pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote:
I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ?
Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box?
I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
secondcity wrote:
I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
?
Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box?
I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 12:13pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Oh well ...
At least the "consultants" got paid ...
Oh well ...
At least the "consultants" got paid ...
Posted by: secondcity, Glasgow on 12:23pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.[/quote] Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city.
The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
The Missing City wrote:
secondcity wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city.
The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 12:32pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]John[/bold] wrote:
secondcity [bold]WELL SAID.[/bold] I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland. [bold]WHY![/bold] Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These [bold]CRETINS[/bold] don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people. [/quote] Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy??
No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures.
Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation.
The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same.
If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces.
Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters?
John wrote:
secondcity WELL SAID. I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland. WHY! Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These CRETINS don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people.
Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy??
No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures.
Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation.
The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same.
If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces.
Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters?
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 12:34pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.[/quote] Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.[/quote] Positive Developments
HA HA HA
Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy??
No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures.
Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation.
The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same.
If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces.
Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters?
Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?
secondcity wrote:
The Missing City wrote: secondcity wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
Positive Developments
HA HA HA
Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy??
No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures.
Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation.
The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same.
If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces.
Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters?
Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?
Posted by: Trouserpress, Glasgow on 12:47pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Actually, Glasgow has a shortage of hotel rooms. It's not just tourists who use them you know.
What a pathetic bunch of whinging non-entities most of you are.
Actually, Glasgow has a shortage of hotel rooms. It's not just tourists who use them you know.
What a pathetic bunch of whinging non-entities most of you are.
Posted by: matthew, Glasgow on 12:50pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.[/quote] Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.[/quote] Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?[/quote] I agree with secondcity in that no matter what is suggested there are certain individuals who will rdidiule it. Missing City states that more impressive structures should be considered. However, if this was put forward you would still find fault. There is no constructive criticism.
The Missing City wrote:
secondcity wrote: The Missing City wrote: secondcity wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?
I agree with secondcity in that no matter what is suggested there are certain individuals who will rdidiule it. Missing City states that more impressive structures should be considered. However, if this was put forward you would still find fault. There is no constructive criticism.
Posted by: phil, Glasgow on 12:53pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Woah, some people get so angry!
Woah, some people get so angry!
Posted by: maccoinnich on 12:54pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote:
Oh well ...
At least the "consultants" got paid ...[/quote] And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?
roor06 wrote:
Oh well ...
At least the "consultants" got paid ...
And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?
Posted by: Stevie, Glasgow on 1:02pm Thu 11 Dec 08
If Glasgow needs yet more 5 and 6 star hotels, who actually stays in them? Considering that end of town is a wash with hotels to begin with and most people will opt for the Travel Lodge and Holiday Inn Express type accomodation rather than the far more expensive hotels.
I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'. I am sure Edinburgh and London proper finance districts are quaking in their boots. It's nothing more than a collection of low skilled, low paid call centres. Nothing highly skilled or technical expertise required. Nothing that can't be shipped somewhere cheaper when the costs increased in Glasgow due to all the expensive hotel rooms being built round about pushing up costs. No fund managers, no accountants, no fund managers. Just more service jobs.
Apart from more low paid service sector jobs what do these hotels add to the economy?
If Glasgow needs yet more 5 and 6 star hotels, who actually stays in them? Considering that end of town is a wash with hotels to begin with and most people will opt for the Travel Lodge and Holiday Inn Express type accomodation rather than the far more expensive hotels.
I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'. I am sure Edinburgh and London proper finance districts are quaking in their boots. It's nothing more than a collection of low skilled, low paid call centres. Nothing highly skilled or technical expertise required. Nothing that can't be shipped somewhere cheaper when the costs increased in Glasgow due to all the expensive hotel rooms being built round about pushing up costs. No fund managers, no accountants, no fund managers. Just more service jobs.
Apart from more low paid service sector jobs what do these hotels add to the economy?
Posted by: secondcity, Glasgow on 1:12pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.[/quote] Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.[/quote] Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?[/quote] Okay, I'll dissect that little rant shall I?
For a start, Manhattan and Canary Wharf, not to mention Frankfurt, Shanghai and so on have their fair share of what can best be described as "boxes". What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top? That hasn't stopped it being an iconic landmark, and at the end of the day these buildings are erected for a function, not just to look good. Incidentally, Glasgow could have had its own iconic, gothic style skyscrapers way back in the early 20th century - Alexander Greek Thomson had come up with some designs but they were thrown out because the fire brigade said they didn't have ladders tall enough!
Now, as for the "they" who "hark on about terrorists" - that is the UK government, not the property developers or the hoteliers or even Glasgow City Council. You seem to have banded everyone in a suit together into one collective "they" but I think you'll find that the architects and developers are as sick and tired of the terror threats as the rest of the world.
As for flying panels and shredding glass, remember the tragic story of that waitress in Edinburgh back in 2000? Killed by a piece of masonry that fell from one of the capital's old buildings. And there have been many similar reports of lucky escapes, even including incidents with our own tenements.
Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.
The Missing City wrote:
secondcity wrote: The Missing City wrote: secondcity wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?
Okay, I'll dissect that little rant shall I?
For a start, Manhattan and Canary Wharf, not to mention Frankfurt, Shanghai and so on have their fair share of what can best be described as "boxes". What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top? That hasn't stopped it being an iconic landmark, and at the end of the day these buildings are erected for a function, not just to look good. Incidentally, Glasgow could have had its own iconic, gothic style skyscrapers way back in the early 20th century - Alexander Greek Thomson had come up with some designs but they were thrown out because the fire brigade said they didn't have ladders tall enough!
Now, as for the "they" who "hark on about terrorists" - that is the UK government, not the property developers or the hoteliers or even Glasgow City Council. You seem to have banded everyone in a suit together into one collective "they" but I think you'll find that the architects and developers are as sick and tired of the terror threats as the rest of the world.
As for flying panels and shredding glass, remember the tragic story of that waitress in Edinburgh back in 2000? Killed by a piece of masonry that fell from one of the capital's old buildings. And there have been many similar reports of lucky escapes, even including incidents with our own tenements.
Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 1:12pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]maccoinnich[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote: Oh well ... At least the "consultants" got paid ...[/quote] And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?[/quote] No ...
However,at a guess,it keeps "certain" people in a job ...
Roll on the next big idea ...
We can all discuss it,feel important,claim max expences,knowing at the end of the day It aint gonna happen ...
Gravy Train ...
maccoinnich wrote:
roor06 wrote: Oh well ... At least the "consultants" got paid ...
And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?
No ...
However,at a guess,it keeps "certain" people in a job ...
Roll on the next big idea ...
We can all discuss it,feel important,claim max expences,knowing at the end of the day It aint gonna happen ...
Gravy Train ...
Posted by: puritycontrol, Glasgow on 1:26pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Aye beat it! take your nice buildings and jobs elsewhere. We dont want them here! Who do they think they are eh? having ideas and stuff, trying to make Glasgow a bit better pfft who needs it! They should build a hostel for all the junkies instead!
Aye beat it! take your nice buildings and jobs elsewhere. We dont want them here! Who do they think they are eh? having ideas and stuff, trying to make Glasgow a bit better pfft who needs it! They should build a hostel for all the junkies instead!
Posted by: Stewie Griffin, Glasgow on 1:31pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'[/quote]
Dear God. How frightening ;)
"How much doll?" Does that count as a financial transaction?
I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'
Dear God. How frightening ;)
"How much doll?" Does that count as a financial transaction?
Posted by: john1, Glasgow on 1:37pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Hmm no surprise that Kenmore, funded by HBOS are in big trouble.
Hmm no surprise that Kenmore, funded by HBOS are in big trouble.
Posted by: equaliser, Glasgow on 1:38pm Thu 11 Dec 08
To all the clowns who have poured so much venom out as a result of this hotel being binned: congratulations, I'm very happy for you that you can rejoice in the loss of future business for Glasgow. What a bunch of morons.
To all the clowns who have poured so much venom out as a result of this hotel being binned: congratulations, I'm very happy for you that you can rejoice in the loss of future business for Glasgow. What a bunch of morons.
Posted by: maccoinnich on 1:40pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]maccoinnich[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote: Oh well ... At least the "consultants" got paid ...[/quote] And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?[/quote] No ...
However,at a guess,it keeps "certain" people in a job ...
Roll on the next big idea ...
We can all discuss it,feel important,claim max expences,knowing at the end of the day It aint gonna happen ...
Gravy Train ...[/quote] I doubt Kenmore (a private company) paid their own staff and external consultants (your "certain" people) to enter a competition for the sake of it.
They probably had faith at some point that they could make the economics of this development stack up. Since then, certain major events have happened across the world, that are having a direct impact on the property sector.
roor06 wrote:
maccoinnich wrote:
roor06 wrote: Oh well ... At least the "consultants" got paid ...
And why shouldn't they have been? Do you think Architects and Engineers should work for free?
No ...
However,at a guess,it keeps "certain" people in a job ...
Roll on the next big idea ...
We can all discuss it,feel important,claim max expences,knowing at the end of the day It aint gonna happen ...
Gravy Train ...
I doubt Kenmore (a private company) paid their own staff and external consultants (your "certain" people) to enter a competition for the sake of it.
They probably had faith at some point that they could make the economics of this development stack up. Since then, certain major events have happened across the world, that are having a direct impact on the property sector.
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 1:42pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]puritycontrol[/bold] wrote:
Aye beat it! take your nice buildings and jobs elsewhere. We dont want them here! Who do they think they are eh? having ideas and stuff, trying to make Glasgow a bit better pfft who needs it! They should build a hostel for all the junkies instead![/quote] The junkies are being put up in the overpriced eyesores on the Broomielaw,unbelieve
able? ...
Homeowners are up in arms but,just shows you can lead a horse to water etc,etc
puritycontrol wrote:
Aye beat it! take your nice buildings and jobs elsewhere. We dont want them here! Who do they think they are eh? having ideas and stuff, trying to make Glasgow a bit better pfft who needs it! They should build a hostel for all the junkies instead!
The junkies are being put up in the overpriced eyesores on the Broomielaw,unbelieve
able? ...
Homeowners are up in arms but,just shows you can lead a horse to water etc,etc
Posted by: Stevie, Glasgow on 1:46pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Stewie Griffin[/bold] wrote:
[quote]I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'[/quote] Dear God. How frightening ;) "How much doll?" Does that count as a financial transaction?[/quote] I worked in the IFSD for 2 years and left work around half 5 one Friday night and got asked if I wanted 'business' from a girl hanging around outside!
The company I worked for handed out panic alarms to female staff due to a spate of attacks in the area.
Maybe before building all these expensive hotels and trying to attract businesses to set up in the area they want to get rid of the prostitution, junkies, and homeless units which frequent the area first?
The place is a no go area after a certain point in the evening when the scum come out to play.
My feeling is alot of these companies will be off to somewhere cheaper when they don't have to pay back the grants which attracted them their in the first place. It's mostly all transaction processing and call centre jobs which can be moved fairly easily to other cities around the world.
Stewie Griffin wrote:
I laugh when I hear people calling the Broomielaw 'The International Financial Services District'
Dear God. How frightening ;) "How much doll?" Does that count as a financial transaction?
I worked in the IFSD for 2 years and left work around half 5 one Friday night and got asked if I wanted 'business' from a girl hanging around outside!
The company I worked for handed out panic alarms to female staff due to a spate of attacks in the area.
Maybe before building all these expensive hotels and trying to attract businesses to set up in the area they want to get rid of the prostitution, junkies, and homeless units which frequent the area first?
The place is a no go area after a certain point in the evening when the scum come out to play.
My feeling is alot of these companies will be off to somewhere cheaper when they don't have to pay back the grants which attracted them their in the first place. It's mostly all transaction processing and call centre jobs which can be moved fairly easily to other cities around the world.
Posted by: speedfreak, Glasgow on 1:48pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Great - another development has failed
Great - another number of jobs associated with the design, construction and servicing of the development have gone
Great - increased unemployment, more dependence on the State for handouts.
Those celebrating the demise of this plan make me sick. How can anyone who lives in or cares about Glasgow be pleased about this? Narrow-minded, self-interested, self-righteous idiots.
Glasgow is a city that's driving to move forward and create opportunities - my worry is that a moronic (and hopefully minority) proportion of its population would like to see it stagnate.
As for Glasgow not being a tourist city - why the hell not, exactly?
Get a life. I would say get a job, but with your mindset you are probably unemployable anyway.
Great - another development has failed
Great - another number of jobs associated with the design, construction and servicing of the development have gone
Great - increased unemployment, more dependence on the State for handouts.
Those celebrating the demise of this plan make me sick. How can anyone who lives in or cares about Glasgow be pleased about this? Narrow-minded, self-interested, self-righteous idiots.
Glasgow is a city that's driving to move forward and create opportunities - my worry is that a moronic (and hopefully minority) proportion of its population would like to see it stagnate.
As for Glasgow not being a tourist city - why the hell not, exactly?
Get a life. I would say get a job, but with your mindset you are probably unemployable anyway.
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 2:06pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]speedfreak[/bold] wrote:
Great - another development has failed Great - another number of jobs associated with the design, construction and servicing of the development have gone Great - increased unemployment, more dependence on the State for handouts. Those celebrating the demise of this plan make me sick. How can anyone who lives in or cares about Glasgow be pleased about this? Narrow-minded, self-interested, self-righteous idiots. Glasgow is a city that's driving to move forward and create opportunities - my worry is that a moronic (and hopefully minority) proportion of its population would like to see it stagnate. As for Glasgow not being a tourist city - why the hell not, exactly? Get a life. I would say get a job, but with your mindset you are probably unemployable anyway.[/quote] Lighten up ...
OK another failed opportunity,hopefull
y there will be more failed opportunities to look forward to ...
As for unemployable,accordi
ng to the DWP if you can boil a kettle your fit for work ...
speedfreak wrote:
Great - another development has failed Great - another number of jobs associated with the design, construction and servicing of the development have gone Great - increased unemployment, more dependence on the State for handouts. Those celebrating the demise of this plan make me sick. How can anyone who lives in or cares about Glasgow be pleased about this? Narrow-minded, self-interested, self-righteous idiots. Glasgow is a city that's driving to move forward and create opportunities - my worry is that a moronic (and hopefully minority) proportion of its population would like to see it stagnate. As for Glasgow not being a tourist city - why the hell not, exactly? Get a life. I would say get a job, but with your mindset you are probably unemployable anyway.
Lighten up ...
OK another failed opportunity,hopefull
y there will be more failed opportunities to look forward to ...
As for unemployable,accordi
ng to the DWP if you can boil a kettle your fit for work ...
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 2:21pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]secondcity[/bold] wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.[/quote] ? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.[/quote] Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.[/quote] Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?[/quote] Okay, I'll dissect that little rant shall I? For a start, Manhattan and Canary Wharf, not to mention Frankfurt, Shanghai and so on have their fair share of what can best be described as "boxes". What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top? That hasn't stopped it being an iconic landmark, and at the end of the day these buildings are erected for a function, not just to look good. Incidentally, Glasgow could have had its own iconic, gothic style skyscrapers way back in the early 20th century - Alexander Greek Thomson had come up with some designs but they were thrown out because the fire brigade said they didn't have ladders tall enough! Now, as for the "they" who "hark on about terrorists" - that is the UK government, not the property developers or the hoteliers or even Glasgow City Council. You seem to have banded everyone in a suit together into one collective "they" but I think you'll find that the architects and developers are as sick and tired of the terror threats as the rest of the world. As for flying panels and shredding glass, remember the tragic story of that waitress in Edinburgh back in 2000? Killed by a piece of masonry that fell from one of the capital's old buildings. And there have been many similar reports of lucky escapes, even including incidents with our own tenements. Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.[/quote] Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.
Yes, and how things have changed - take away the wealth locally and place it in the hands of shareholders and megabicks investors across the world who probably don't give a monketys for this place excpet to give people a job and make money from the place at the same time.
Maybe that's why most people aren't proud anymore. These things mean nothing to the average Glaswegian.
secondcity wrote:
The Missing City wrote: secondcity wrote: The Missing City wrote: secondcity wrote: I have to admit I hadn't heard about this development - when I first saw the headline I thought it was referring to the Jumeirah hotel. Still a shame. You guys gloating about the development's demise are pathetic.
? Errr Don't thinkso - its just another glass building - a box - do you whip your pants down everytime the ET shows a picture of a glass box? I have to wonder what sort of brain you would have to possess to be able to get a kick out of seeing pictures of glass boxes, must be a buzz on a par with those anorak types who hang about train platforms.
Rather an extreme response don't you think? I don't "whip my pants down" at anything in any newspaper but I do like to read about positive developments in my home city. The Missing city? More like Missing Brain Cells.
Positive Developments HA HA HA Yes but does it have to be glass boxes??? - is that the new **** in the architecture world - cool glamourous and sexy?? No, its cold, ugly, lazy architecture, no imagination to build impressive structures - Manhattan, Canary Wharf have some impressive structures. Here they hark on about terrorists and try to freak us out and get us all paranoid yet they build lego structures made of glass, easy terrorist targets = instant devstation. The idea is modelled on the modernist movement harking back to the 50's and 60's except no orgy of concrete, just glass and therefore the visions remain the same. If its not buildings which have panels flying off with the risk of decapitating people from the neck down, its glass which could shred a human into tiny little pieces. Some BBC Scotland staff apparently do not like the building they sit in as it gives them a feeling of being sea-sick due to the floor to ceiling glass wall effect makes them think they are on a boat - stuff them I suppose - who cares what people think that have to use such buildings, as long as they look shiny - what else matters? Yes that is not the work of missing brain cells! Well done Secondcity - by the way you are referring to Birmingham huh? Second City since 1951 HUH?
Okay, I'll dissect that little rant shall I? For a start, Manhattan and Canary Wharf, not to mention Frankfurt, Shanghai and so on have their fair share of what can best be described as "boxes". What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top? That hasn't stopped it being an iconic landmark, and at the end of the day these buildings are erected for a function, not just to look good. Incidentally, Glasgow could have had its own iconic, gothic style skyscrapers way back in the early 20th century - Alexander Greek Thomson had come up with some designs but they were thrown out because the fire brigade said they didn't have ladders tall enough! Now, as for the "they" who "hark on about terrorists" - that is the UK government, not the property developers or the hoteliers or even Glasgow City Council. You seem to have banded everyone in a suit together into one collective "they" but I think you'll find that the architects and developers are as sick and tired of the terror threats as the rest of the world. As for flying panels and shredding glass, remember the tragic story of that waitress in Edinburgh back in 2000? Killed by a piece of masonry that fell from one of the capital's old buildings. And there have been many similar reports of lucky escapes, even including incidents with our own tenements. Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.
Finally you questioned my Secondcity moniker. I am of course referring to the period when Glasgow was the second city of the British Empire - a time when its citizens actually had ambition and pride in their home town.
Yes, and how things have changed - take away the wealth locally and place it in the hands of shareholders and megabicks investors across the world who probably don't give a monketys for this place excpet to give people a job and make money from the place at the same time.
Maybe that's why most people aren't proud anymore. These things mean nothing to the average Glaswegian.
Posted by: Mick, Glasgow on 2:30pm Thu 11 Dec 08
I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 2:34pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Mick[/bold] wrote:
I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.[/quote] More fool you ...
Mick wrote:
I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
More fool you ...
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 2:35pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Mick[/bold] wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.[/quote] More fool you ...[/quote] I second that!
roor06 wrote:
Mick wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
More fool you ...
I second that!
Posted by: Brad on 2:48pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Shame this is not going ahead - although it sounded a bit far-fetched.
I can't get particularly excited about the aethsetics of glass boxes but their presence and function is more important. No-one'll build anything here if Glasgow alone in the world insists on building out of sandstone.
Shame this is not going ahead - although it sounded a bit far-fetched.
I can't get particularly excited about the aethsetics of glass boxes but their presence and function is more important. No-one'll build anything here if Glasgow alone in the world insists on building out of sandstone.
Posted by: Mick, Glasgow on 3:21pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Mick[/bold] wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.[/quote] More fool you ...[/quote] I second that![/quote] What a riposte! Your double-header witty retort has me on the ropes. Please, please no more.
The Missing City wrote:
roor06 wrote: Mick wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
More fool you ...
I second that!
What a riposte! Your double-header witty retort has me on the ropes. Please, please no more.
Posted by: John Kebab, Glasgow on 3:22pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice[/quote]
Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be...
But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice
Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be...
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 3:41pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Mick[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]roor06[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Mick[/bold] wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.[/quote] More fool you ...[/quote] I second that![/quote] What a riposte! Your double-header witty retort has me on the ropes. Please, please no more. [/quote] It was ambitious,that was my point,always doomed to failure,but hey who cares we all got put up in 4star hotels we had a honk planning it all out putting forward mad ideas (glass,concrete) next...
Mick wrote:
The Missing City wrote: roor06 wrote: Mick wrote: I think anyone celebrating the demise of an ambitious opportunity which would have brought more finance and jobs to Glasgow should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves, especially that clown People Power. I suspect most of those above who do feel smug, actually don't have jobs, so they don't really understand the importance of the loss.
More fool you ...
I second that!
What a riposte! Your double-header witty retort has me on the ropes. Please, please no more.
It was ambitious,that was my point,always doomed to failure,but hey who cares we all got put up in 4star hotels we had a honk planning it all out putting forward mad ideas (glass,concrete) next...
Posted by: Hoof Hearted, GlasVegas on 3:49pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]John Kebab[/bold] wrote:
[quote]But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice[/quote] Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be... [/quote] Quality!
Unfortunately John, your post will be lost in the handbag fight that's currently going on.
John Kebab wrote:
But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice
Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be...
Quality!
Unfortunately John, your post will be lost in the handbag fight that's currently going on.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 3:55pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[italic]What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top?[/italic]
Has the Empire State Building changed shape since I last looked at it?
Those Art Deco dudes have a lot to answer for, fooling us us ordinary people into believing they were iconic structures that they designed - I suppose the Beresford in Sauchiehall St is a box to that effect as well - Terrible!
I need to have a look again!
(2 Minute Pause)
Nope it looks like a rectangle with various columns rising up its entire length and then the columns that rise to the top of the building end in a symmetrical fashion - awful fancy design for a box!
The Art-Deco style building was actually described as a phenomenon when it opened on March 1, 1931, after two years of planning and construction. The architectural firm of Shreve, Lamb, and Harmon supposedly drew up the plans in two weeks. Construction began in 1930 and several workers, mostly European immigrants, died by falling to their deaths. It is located at the intersection of Fifth Avenue and 34th Street. It holds the distinction of being one of the Seven Wonders of the Modern World and was named an historical landmark in 1986.
Unlike the modern “Sears Tower” in Chicago, the Empire State Building has the classical appeal of the art deco style that was embraced in the 1920s and 30s. Many buildings throughout the world constructed during this period were also modeled in this artistic, architectural style.
Unlike other tall buildings which only have a single observation tower enclosed by glass, the Empire State Building has two observation decks. It is one of the most popular observatories in the world and each year, approximately 110 million people visit the Empire State Building.
Can any kid-on skyscraper building in Glasgow do that? (Not that Glasgow is a skyscraper city, so much that some people want it to be the case).
But as I said before, this is a forum where opinions don't go beyond this forum, why people get upset because their wee glass boxes canny get constructed I have no idea - everybody is losing money on this Credit Crunch, unless you have never worked that is!
What is the Empire State Building but a concrete box with an antenna at the top?
Has the Empire State Building changed shape since I last looked at it?
Those Art Deco dudes have a lot to answer for, fooling us us ordinary people into believing they were iconic structures that they designed - I suppose the Beresford in Sauchiehall St is a box to that effect as well - Terrible!
I need to have a look again!
(2 Minute Pause)
Nope it looks like a rectangle with various columns rising up its entire length and then the columns that rise to the top of the building end in a symmetrical fashion - awful fancy design for a box!
The Art-Deco style building was actually described as a phenomenon when it opened on March 1, 1931, after two years of planning and construction. The architectural firm of Shreve, Lamb, and Harmon supposedly drew up the plans in two weeks. Construction began in 1930 and several workers, mostly European immigrants, died by falling to their deaths. It is located at the intersection of Fifth Avenue and 34th Street. It holds the distinction of being one of the Seven Wonders of the Modern World and was named an historical landmark in 1986.
Unlike the modern “Sears Tower” in Chicago, the Empire State Building has the classical appeal of the art deco style that was embraced in the 1920s and 30s. Many buildings throughout the world constructed during this period were also modeled in this artistic, architectural style.
Unlike other tall buildings which only have a single observation tower enclosed by glass, the Empire State Building has two observation decks. It is one of the most popular observatories in the world and each year, approximately 110 million people visit the Empire State Building.
Can any kid-on skyscraper building in Glasgow do that? (Not that Glasgow is a skyscraper city, so much that some people want it to be the case).
But as I said before, this is a forum where opinions don't go beyond this forum, why people get upset because their wee glass boxes canny get constructed I have no idea - everybody is losing money on this Credit Crunch, unless you have never worked that is!
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 3:56pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Hoof Hearted[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]John Kebab[/bold] wrote: [quote]But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice[/quote] Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be... [/quote] Quality! Unfortunately John, your post will be lost in the handbag fight that's currently going on. [/quote] ah got it ... 2x14 storey hotel blocks sliding along the motorway would make for convenient weary travellers ...
Hoof Hearted wrote:
John Kebab wrote: But the 30-floor design which also included two 14-storey office blocks next door, has now been put on ice
Can I just point out that all of you have missed how dangerous this proposition could be...
Quality! Unfortunately John, your post will be lost in the handbag fight that's currently going on.
ah got it ... 2x14 storey hotel blocks sliding along the motorway would make for convenient weary travellers ...
Posted by: People Power on 4:24pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Pete[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote: Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy. [/quote] Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up. Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot. Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time. [/quote] You're right about the Meadowside Quay. A guy I know worked on them, says he'll be surprised if they outlast the mortgages.[/quote]
Cheers Pete,
Agree with you here 110% I knew the architects who designed the phases of the Glasgow Harbour flats, and it has to be said that this was one of their worst attempts for modern architecture, and building designs.
As for this Hotel not getting off the ground, literally - all I can say is that this downturn or recession clearly has it's plus points too.
Lets see what Purcell & his delusional ideals (with his tail between his legs no doubt)has to say for himself now - LOL ;-)
Pete wrote:
The Missing City wrote: People Power wrote: Ha ha ha ha! Where's the surprise here then ? Yet another "red herring" that hasn't materialised. The very idea of such a building was ludicrous anyway. These glass eyesores do nothing for the skyline. If Councillors want Glasgow to be Glas-vegas, they should bu*ger off to Las Vegas and give us peace with their ridiculous, grandiose ideas. The out of scale, "monolithic eyesore" in the Glasgow Harbour Development, at Meadowside Quay has already ruined the skyline of the Clyde there. Why can't councillors ever get the re-development and re-generation of this city right, without going completely o.t.t. and gentrifying Glasgow, with no consideration for Social, and affordable housing, or developments for all. Not just the wealthy.
Thats what Brad and I were talking about yesterday - and then this pops up. Credit Crunch is hitting harder than what I thought - or maybe I was tuning too much into what Purcell was saying in this paper - it appears even he cannot do anything about this - hence the story minus his mugshot. Yes PP some of the buildings beyond the SECC are an absolute shambles - I hate to imagine what it will all look like in 10-15 years time.
You're right about the Meadowside Quay. A guy I know worked on them, says he'll be surprised if they outlast the mortgages.
Cheers Pete,
Agree with you here 110% I knew the architects who designed the phases of the Glasgow Harbour flats, and it has to be said that this was one of their worst attempts for modern architecture, and building designs.
As for this Hotel not getting off the ground, literally - all I can say is that this downturn or recession clearly has it's plus points too.
Lets see what Purcell & his delusional ideals (with his tail between his legs no doubt)has to say for himself now - LOL ;-)
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 4:34pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]John[/bold] wrote:
secondcity [bold]WELL SAID.[/bold] I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland. [bold]WHY![/bold] Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These [bold]CRETINS[/bold] don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people. [/quote]
John,
In response to your post, I'm sure that most moderate people of Glasgow would agree with you up to a point,
The problem lies within the obstinate, and grandiose way in which G.C.C. is slowly gentrifying this city into a playground for the rich yuppies.
All people want is a bit more rationale, and common sense when it comes to the design of, choice of location, size / scale, and intended clientelle for a hotel like this.
Really there are far more basic, and common sensical things needed to improve this city for it's own people first and foremost, before we go racing ahead to the 2014 "Commonwealth Games" agenda, and build superhotels, and facilities which we may not even manage to maintain, or support post - 2014!
Thats not being [bold]CRETINOUS![/bold] Thats just plain [bold]COMMON SENSICAL![/bold]
John wrote:
secondcity WELL SAID. I own my business that successfully exports all around the world and I have just opened my first overseas office with the long term view of closing down Scotland. WHY! Because I am sick to the teeth of dead beats like all the writers above you who gloat at things that go wrong in Scotland. These CRETINS don't realise the more projects we get the better for our economy but more important our people.
John,
In response to your post, I'm sure that most moderate people of Glasgow would agree with you up to a point,
The problem lies within the obstinate, and grandiose way in which G.C.C. is slowly gentrifying this city into a playground for the rich yuppies.
All people want is a bit more rationale, and common sense when it comes to the design of, choice of location, size / scale, and intended clientelle for a hotel like this.
Really there are far more basic, and common sensical things needed to improve this city for it's own people first and foremost, before we go racing ahead to the 2014 "Commonwealth Games" agenda, and build superhotels, and facilities which we may not even manage to maintain, or support post - 2014!
Thats not being
CRETINOUS! Thats just plain
COMMON SENSICAL!
Posted by: Brad on 4:47pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]Really there are far more basic, and common sensical things needed to improve this city for it's own people first and foremost[/quote] No, that's cretinous. Those things (whatever they are) will not happen because this hotel doesn't get built. All that happens is we have an empty site benefiting no-one.
If developers want to come here, buy sites from the public sector and build at their own risk with their own cash, I'd have thought that was positive.
As it is, the public purse (which pays for all the things you want) has missed out on millions, the riverside has missed out on redevelopment, construction firms have missed out on contracts, Weegies have missed out on jobs. No-one has benefited from this except the moaners.
Really there are far more basic, and common sensical things needed to improve this city for it's own people first and foremost
No, that's cretinous. Those things (whatever they are) will not happen because this hotel doesn't get built. All that happens is we have an empty site benefiting no-one.
If developers want to come here, buy sites from the public sector and build at their own risk with their own cash, I'd have thought that was positive.
As it is, the public purse (which pays for all the things you want) has missed out on millions, the riverside has missed out on redevelopment, construction firms have missed out on contracts, Weegies have missed out on jobs. No-one has benefited from this except the moaners.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 5:01pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Yes,
Glasgow has missed out, however, the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it, lets not have anymore eyesores.
Also, the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise, whether people want to blame the economic downturn alone.
Innevitably the potential for jobs, might have been there. But would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term ? I have my doubts.
Lets not kid ourselves on about how Purcell & co are trying to sell this city to the outside world. Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them, until it is recognised that we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage......
not just re-build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction.
Yes,
Glasgow has missed out, however, the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it, lets not have anymore eyesores.
Also, the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise, whether people want to blame the economic downturn alone.
Innevitably the potential for jobs, might have been there. But would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term ? I have my doubts.
Lets not kid ourselves on about how Purcell & co are trying to sell this city to the outside world. Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them, until it is recognised that we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage......
not just re-build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction.
Posted by: trigot, glasgow on 5:13pm Thu 11 Dec 08
I disagree - Hotels in glasgow are booming, from the biggest to the smallest. Just last week i took 2 couples back to dundee in my cab because they couldnt find a place to stay after their bus left without them from the coldplay concert.Maybe a 6 star is taking it too far but hotels always do well in Glasgow.
I disagree - Hotels in glasgow are booming, from the biggest to the smallest. Just last week i took 2 couples back to dundee in my cab because they couldnt find a place to stay after their bus left without them from the coldplay concert.Maybe a 6 star is taking it too far but hotels always do well in Glasgow.
Posted by: Brad on 5:14pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Let me address your points...
[quote]Glasgow has missed out[/quote] Yes, and it's nto somethign to be pleased about.
[quote]the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it[/quote] That's your opinion, certainly not fact. I prefer most buildings to empty derelict land, which is the alternative. You haven't actually specified what you'd like to see. I suspect it is not realistic...
[quote]the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise[/quote] I agree - but it's up to the developers to have their own ideas. It's their money, their risk. No public money was involved here, as far as I know.
[quote]would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term[/quote] You mean like the Radisson? How many high-end hotels have closed in Glasgow lately? Or anywhere in Scotland?
[quote]Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them[/quote] I agree, it's not (x2). But it's not generally trying to compete with them. It's competing with Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham, [italic]et al[/italic].
[quote]we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage[/quote] This was a derelict site in a sea of derelict sites. There was nothing to save or restore. Where there is, great. Glasgow's Victorian architecture is often wonderful - I'm sure you would have objected to that at the time too.
[quote]build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction[/quote] There is a comprehensive plan for the waterfront - you may not agree with it but it has a clear focus. Riverside redevelopment has been anything but manic. It's even less so now.
Can you tell me [bold]one[/bold] good thing about this development not going ahead?
Let me address your points...
Glasgow has missed out
Yes, and it's nto somethign to be pleased about.
the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it
That's your opinion, certainly not fact. I prefer most buildings to empty derelict land, which is the alternative. You haven't actually specified what you'd like to see. I suspect it is not realistic...
the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise
I agree - but it's up to the developers to have their own ideas. It's their money, their risk. No public money was involved here, as far as I know.
would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term
You mean like the Radisson? How many high-end hotels have closed in Glasgow lately? Or anywhere in Scotland?
Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them
I agree, it's not (x2). But it's not generally trying to compete with them. It's competing with Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham,
et al.
we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage
This was a derelict site in a sea of derelict sites. There was nothing to save or restore. Where there is, great. Glasgow's Victorian architecture is often wonderful - I'm sure you would have objected to that at the time too.
build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction
There is a comprehensive plan for the waterfront - you may not agree with it but it has a clear focus. Riverside redevelopment has been anything but manic. It's even less so now.
Can you tell me
one good thing about this development not going ahead?
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 5:39pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
Let me address your points... [quote]Glasgow has missed out[/quote] Yes, and it's nto somethign to be pleased about. [quote]the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it[/quote] That's your opinion, certainly not fact. I prefer most buildings to empty derelict land, which is the alternative. You haven't actually specified what you'd like to see. I suspect it is not realistic... [quote]the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise[/quote] I agree - but it's up to the developers to have their own ideas. It's their money, their risk. No public money was involved here, as far as I know. [quote]would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term[/quote] You mean like the Radisson? How many high-end hotels have closed in Glasgow lately? Or anywhere in Scotland? [quote]Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them[/quote] I agree, it's not (x2). But it's not generally trying to compete with them. It's competing with Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham, [italic]et al[/italic]. [quote]we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage[/quote] This was a derelict site in a sea of derelict sites. There was nothing to save or restore. Where there is, great. Glasgow's Victorian architecture is often wonderful - I'm sure you would have objected to that at the time too. [quote]build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction[/quote] There is a comprehensive plan for the waterfront - you may not agree with it but it has a clear focus. Riverside redevelopment has been anything but manic. It's even less so now. Can you tell me [bold]one[/bold] good thing about this development not going ahead?[/quote] I can - it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river.
What they planning to do if there's was a major flood in the area - was that thought of? Would these structures have the capability of being dis-assembled into flatpacks and brought back out again once the area was dry? ;-)
Brad wrote:
Let me address your points... Glasgow has missed out
Yes, and it's nto somethign to be pleased about. the Clydes riverside and it's surroundings are already tainted, and spoiled by the ugly buildings along it
That's your opinion, certainly not fact. I prefer most buildings to empty derelict land, which is the alternative. You haven't actually specified what you'd like to see. I suspect it is not realistic... the unrealistic, and overadventurous scale of this project / hotel is a major factor in it's failure to materialise
I agree - but it's up to the developers to have their own ideas. It's their money, their risk. No public money was involved here, as far as I know. would a hotel at such a high end of the market truly have remained sustainable in the long term
You mean like the Radisson? How many high-end hotels have closed in Glasgow lately? Or anywhere in Scotland? Glasgow is not Las Vegas. It is not Dubai. And, it will never compete with them
I agree, it's not (x2). But it's not generally trying to compete with them. It's competing with Edinburgh, Manchester, Birmingham, et al. we must retain, and restore our cuture through Glasgows existing listed buildings / heritage
This was a derelict site in a sea of derelict sites. There was nothing to save or restore. Where there is, great. Glasgow's Victorian architecture is often wonderful - I'm sure you would have objected to that at the time too. build what are effectively glass boxes in a manic fashion with no real focus or direction
There is a comprehensive plan for the waterfront - you may not agree with it but it has a clear focus. Riverside redevelopment has been anything but manic. It's even less so now. Can you tell me one good thing about this development not going ahead?
I can - it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river.
What they planning to do if there's was a major flood in the area - was that thought of? Would these structures have the capability of being dis-assembled into flatpacks and brought back out again once the area was dry? ;-)
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 5:41pm Thu 11 Dec 08
But anyway who cares?
Ha Ha Ha
Its not our river its Purcell's River! A River that doesn't really do anything! Very little activity except for a boat show in the summer.
But anyway who cares?
Ha Ha Ha
Its not our river its Purcell's River! A River that doesn't really do anything! Very little activity except for a boat show in the summer.
Posted by: wild wadi, kirkie on 5:41pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]trigot[/bold] wrote:
I disagree - Hotels in glasgow are booming, from the biggest to the smallest. Just last week i took 2 couples back to dundee in my cab because they couldnt find a place to stay after their bus left without them from the coldplay concert.Maybe a 6 star is taking it too far but hotels always do well in Glasgow.[/quote] The Great Eastern was so busy people had to sleep outside on the pavement.
trigot wrote:
I disagree - Hotels in glasgow are booming, from the biggest to the smallest. Just last week i took 2 couples back to dundee in my cab because they couldnt find a place to stay after their bus left without them from the coldplay concert.Maybe a 6 star is taking it too far but hotels always do well in Glasgow.
The Great Eastern was so busy people had to sleep outside on the pavement.
Posted by: Brad on 5:49pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river[/quote] Like what? And when? And who is going to build it?
Chances are, no-one is going to build anything there for the foreseeable. That's the real alternative. And if the city tried to impose draconian conditions - such as you seem to be implying - it will be so. Developers will take their money elsewhere.
it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river
Like what? And when? And who is going to build it?
Chances are, no-one is going to build anything there for the foreseeable. That's the real alternative. And if the city tried to impose draconian conditions - such as you seem to be implying - it will be so. Developers will take their money elsewhere.
Posted by: Brad on 5:53pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]But anyway who cares?[/quote] I **** well care. I want to see this city do well, its people have jobs, empty sites get built on, people come visit and spend money. I want the riverside to be somewhere you can go and enjoy a stroll and a drink - not an empty wasteland.
But anyway who cares?
I **** well care. I want to see this city do well, its people have jobs, empty sites get built on, people come visit and spend money. I want the riverside to be somewhere you can go and enjoy a stroll and a drink - not an empty wasteland.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 5:56pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river[/quote] Like what? And when? And who is going to build it? Chances are, no-one is going to build anything there for the foreseeable. That's the real alternative. And if the city tried to impose draconian conditions - such as you seem to be implying - it will be so. Developers will take their money elsewhere.[/quote] And who else is going to offer them the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer?
Glasgow should be good for business - but it applies only to a minority of people who probably don't even come from Glasgow anyway - no room for ordinary small traders anynmore so I couldn't give a stuff - most of this stuff does not affect ordinary Glaswegians unless your a pure toff from the West End - ahhhh Nirvana - all else is irrelevant!
Brad wrote:
it will allow for something a bit more appealing rather than a glass box or a collection of stupid looking glass boxes all along the river
Like what? And when? And who is going to build it? Chances are, no-one is going to build anything there for the foreseeable. That's the real alternative. And if the city tried to impose draconian conditions - such as you seem to be implying - it will be so. Developers will take their money elsewhere.
And who else is going to offer them the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer?
Glasgow should be good for business - but it applies only to a minority of people who probably don't even come from Glasgow anyway - no room for ordinary small traders anynmore so I couldn't give a stuff - most of this stuff does not affect ordinary Glaswegians unless your a pure toff from the West End - ahhhh Nirvana - all else is irrelevant!
Posted by: tadger, big smoke on 5:56pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Do you think they will build the 6 star job now or was that another pie in the sky ET story,OLD SYD WAS RIGHT PURCELL AND HIS GANG NEED BLOOTERED,AND FOR THE CLOWNS on about jobs it would have been the sauasage rolls and co who would have been working in the place on the minimum wage, the only business it would have brought would have been for the red light district as there is no finacial district i know about so get real baboons and go ape
Do you think they will build the 6 star job now or was that another pie in the sky ET story,OLD SYD WAS RIGHT PURCELL AND HIS GANG NEED BLOOTERED,AND FOR THE CLOWNS on about jobs it would have been the sauasage rolls and co who would have been working in the place on the minimum wage, the only business it would have brought would have been for the red light district as there is no finacial district i know about so get real baboons and go ape
Posted by: People Power on 6:03pm Thu 11 Dec 08
I could tell you [bold]One[/bold] good thing about this development not going ahead, in fact I could tell you, and the rest of the posters [bold]several good reasons......[/bold]
But, as you are opting to object, or contradict every opinion I give, I won't waste my breathe.
Clearly you have your opinions, and I have my own.
Lets just say that until G.C.C. and Purcell realise this is about regenerating, and improving our city for its own residing population, not just the tourist trade, or 2 week long 2014 Commonwealth Games charade this city will continue be an over glamourised P.R. exercise on paper, with no real substance or style.
I could tell you
One good thing about this development not going ahead, in fact I could tell you, and the rest of the posters
several good reasons......
But, as you are opting to object, or contradict every opinion I give, I won't waste my breathe.
Clearly you have your opinions, and I have my own.
Lets just say that until G.C.C. and Purcell realise this is about regenerating, and improving our city for its own residing population, not just the tourist trade, or 2 week long 2014 Commonwealth Games charade this city will continue be an over glamourised P.R. exercise on paper, with no real substance or style.
Posted by: Brad on 6:06pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]I could tell you One good thing[/quote] Go on then...
Most of the regeneration in Glasgow has little to do with tourism, btw.
I could tell you One good thing
Go on then...
Most of the regeneration in Glasgow has little to do with tourism, btw.
Posted by: Brad on 6:09pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]there is no finacial district i know about[/quote] That doesn't reflect well on your knowledge of the city.
Try looking up JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, Resolution, National Australia Group, AXA, Norwich Union, ACE Insurance, Direct Line, esure, First Data for starters. All within a stone's throw of the Jumeriah site - I hope it does go-ahead.
there is no finacial district i know about
That doesn't reflect well on your knowledge of the city.
Try looking up JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, Resolution, National Australia Group, AXA, Norwich Union, ACE Insurance, Direct Line, esure, First Data for starters. All within a stone's throw of the Jumeriah site - I hope it does go-ahead.
Posted by: Brad on 6:11pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer[/quote] And what are they? They're set and collected nationally.
[quote]unless your a pure toff from the West End[/quote] Eh?
the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer
And what are they? They're set and collected nationally.
unless your a pure toff from the West End
Eh?
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:13pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]But anyway who cares?[/quote] I **** well care. I want to see this city do well, its people have jobs, empty sites get built on, people come visit and spend money. I want the riverside to be somewhere you can go and enjoy a stroll and a drink - not an empty wasteland.[/quote] What? And I don't? - I grew up seeing fields full of weeds along this river, but I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink to enjoy on my stroll - just office blocks and hotels - museums and auditoriums - maybe I could walk away up the SECC to get a vending machine or I could go a long walk over to Plantation Quay and get something there - that's a good walk I suppose, if you don't want to scrtach yourself to death at having to go to a grubby shop in the Finniieston part of Argyle St or Tesco's down at Wellington St for the moment, thats about your whack.
Maybe I should be minted and sit in a hotel or a restaurant when doing a Clydeside stroll and do what the tourists do - is that viable at 2 or 3 in the afternoon? Maybe your not an average Glaswegian and you have wads of dirty, sexy money bursting out your pockets and you can do that sort of stuff.
Thats just for now, maybe in 10 years it will be a different picture, we just have to wait and see.
Brad wrote:
But anyway who cares?
I **** well care. I want to see this city do well, its people have jobs, empty sites get built on, people come visit and spend money. I want the riverside to be somewhere you can go and enjoy a stroll and a drink - not an empty wasteland.
What? And I don't? - I grew up seeing fields full of weeds along this river, but I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink to enjoy on my stroll - just office blocks and hotels - museums and auditoriums - maybe I could walk away up the SECC to get a vending machine or I could go a long walk over to Plantation Quay and get something there - that's a good walk I suppose, if you don't want to scrtach yourself to death at having to go to a grubby shop in the Finniieston part of Argyle St or Tesco's down at Wellington St for the moment, thats about your whack.
Maybe I should be minted and sit in a hotel or a restaurant when doing a Clydeside stroll and do what the tourists do - is that viable at 2 or 3 in the afternoon? Maybe your not an average Glaswegian and you have wads of dirty, sexy money bursting out your pockets and you can do that sort of stuff.
Thats just for now, maybe in 10 years it will be a different picture, we just have to wait and see.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:16pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer[/quote] And what are they? They're set and collected nationally. [quote]unless your a pure toff from the West End[/quote] Eh? [/quote] So there's no concessions for new multinationals setting up in Glasgow then? so are you telling me there's some sort of casting couch going on at the City Chambers, is that how we have had the 'competitive edge' over Edinburgh etc?
Brad wrote:
the rates on offer that Glasgow can offer
And what are they? They're set and collected nationally. unless your a pure toff from the West End
Eh?
So there's no concessions for new multinationals setting up in Glasgow then? so are you telling me there's some sort of casting couch going on at the City Chambers, is that how we have had the 'competitive edge' over Edinburgh etc?
Posted by: Brad on 6:17pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]What? And I don't?[/quote] it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel.
[quote]I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink[/quote] No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places!
What? And I don't?
it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel.
I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink
No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places!
Posted by: bluey, glasgow on 6:23pm Thu 11 Dec 08
I'm disappointed that the hotel is not going ahead and a bit saddened by the amount of glee this has generated.
Glasgow is a tourist destination - it's often highly regarded as a city break in destination polls and guides. As such, it should be able to appeal to all budgets for its visitors. It has the best arts infrastructure and shopping outside of London.
My friends visiting me in October also ended up sharing a room in Paisley because their visit coincided with a sporting event and concert - the hotels were fully booked all across Glasgow. (Though they were a bit perturbed that the cab would only take them there if they paid upfront for the journey - female married mothers and professionals all - IT consultant, solicitor and media producer, so not exactly Jakey material).
I reckon there is plenty of room for a luxury hotel in Glasgow city centre that affluent visitors can book and where visiting sports teams, successful business people and entertainers can stay.
I'm disappointed that the hotel is not going ahead and a bit saddened by the amount of glee this has generated.
Glasgow is a tourist destination - it's often highly regarded as a city break in destination polls and guides. As such, it should be able to appeal to all budgets for its visitors. It has the best arts infrastructure and shopping outside of London.
My friends visiting me in October also ended up sharing a room in Paisley because their visit coincided with a sporting event and concert - the hotels were fully booked all across Glasgow. (Though they were a bit perturbed that the cab would only take them there if they paid upfront for the journey - female married mothers and professionals all - IT consultant, solicitor and media producer, so not exactly Jakey material).
I reckon there is plenty of room for a luxury hotel in Glasgow city centre that affluent visitors can book and where visiting sports teams, successful business people and entertainers can stay.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:30pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]What? And I don't?[/quote] it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel. [quote]I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink[/quote] No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places! [/quote] As it stands, there is going to be an empty site for the forseeable - a riverside full of hotels - seems odd
But even if there was still another hotel, is it still going to provide provision to even get as much as a drink just by popping in off the street - or the Clyde Walkway, in this case?
No - you answerwed that question yourself.
Brad wrote:
What? And I don't?
it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel. I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink
No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places!
As it stands, there is going to be an empty site for the forseeable - a riverside full of hotels - seems odd
But even if there was still another hotel, is it still going to provide provision to even get as much as a drink just by popping in off the street - or the Clyde Walkway, in this case?
No - you answerwed that question yourself.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 6:33pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]bluey[/bold] wrote:
I'm disappointed that the hotel is not going ahead and a bit saddened by the amount of glee this has generated. Glasgow is a tourist destination - it's often highly regarded as a city break in destination polls and guides. As such, it should be able to appeal to all budgets for its visitors. It has the best arts infrastructure and shopping outside of London. My friends visiting me in October also ended up sharing a room in Paisley because their visit coincided with a sporting event and concert - the hotels were fully booked all across Glasgow. (Though they were a bit perturbed that the cab would only take them there if they paid upfront for the journey - female married mothers and professionals all - IT consultant, solicitor and media producer, so not exactly Jakey material). I reckon there is plenty of room for a luxury hotel in Glasgow city centre that affluent visitors can book and where visiting sports teams, successful business people and entertainers can stay. [/quote] That will be the impressive new structure on Argyle St, unlike the propsal for a box by the Clyde. - the sooner its built Bluey and the council removes that crettin who owns the Pawn Shop, the better that part of Glasgow will become.
Hotels away out on the clyde, nothing around the area - seems hardly viable, yet some appear to disagree.
bluey wrote:
I'm disappointed that the hotel is not going ahead and a bit saddened by the amount of glee this has generated. Glasgow is a tourist destination - it's often highly regarded as a city break in destination polls and guides. As such, it should be able to appeal to all budgets for its visitors. It has the best arts infrastructure and shopping outside of London. My friends visiting me in October also ended up sharing a room in Paisley because their visit coincided with a sporting event and concert - the hotels were fully booked all across Glasgow. (Though they were a bit perturbed that the cab would only take them there if they paid upfront for the journey - female married mothers and professionals all - IT consultant, solicitor and media producer, so not exactly Jakey material). I reckon there is plenty of room for a luxury hotel in Glasgow city centre that affluent visitors can book and where visiting sports teams, successful business people and entertainers can stay.
That will be the impressive new structure on Argyle St, unlike the propsal for a box by the Clyde. - the sooner its built Bluey and the council removes that crettin who owns the Pawn Shop, the better that part of Glasgow will become.
Hotels away out on the clyde, nothing around the area - seems hardly viable, yet some appear to disagree.
Posted by: tadger, big smoke on 7:02pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]there is no finacial district i know about[/quote] That doesn't reflect well on your knowledge of the city. Try looking up JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, Resolution, National Australia Group, AXA, Norwich Union, ACE Insurance, Direct Line, esure, First Data for starters. All within a stone's throw of the Jumeriah site - I hope it does go-ahead.[/quote] Financial district your having a laugh 3 banks you name how many employees???????????
?4 insurance companies most of they jobs are call centre hardly a financial district,am sick of the companies you name phoning me trying to tout business they wont be about much longer in glasgow maybe once once they have trained there Indian workforce up which wont take long you,ll know what i,m on about,DIRECT LINE GEES A BREAK, ESURE am actually insured with them but hardly a financial institution and as for Barclays did they not just buy over Morgan Stanley credit cards????????????ans
wer yes,and are Morgan Stanley not part of the RBS?????????? I THINK ITS BRADS KNOWLEDGE THAT NEEDS AN MOT
Brad wrote:
there is no finacial district i know about
That doesn't reflect well on your knowledge of the city. Try looking up JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Barclays, Resolution, National Australia Group, AXA, Norwich Union, ACE Insurance, Direct Line, esure, First Data for starters. All within a stone's throw of the Jumeriah site - I hope it does go-ahead.
Financial district your having a laugh 3 banks you name how many employees???????????
?4 insurance companies most of they jobs are call centre hardly a financial district,am sick of the companies you name phoning me trying to tout business they wont be about much longer in glasgow maybe once once they have trained there Indian workforce up which wont take long you,ll know what i,m on about,DIRECT LINE GEES A BREAK, ESURE am actually insured with them but hardly a financial institution and as for Barclays did they not just buy over Morgan Stanley credit cards????????????ans
wer yes,and are Morgan Stanley not part of the RBS?????????? I THINK ITS BRADS KNOWLEDGE THAT NEEDS AN MOT
Posted by: tadger, big smoke on 7:04pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]What? And I don't?[/quote] it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel. [quote]I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink[/quote] No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places! [/quote] Oh and BT HA HA HA HA HA IS THIS DISTRICT EVEN A QUARTER OF A MILE SQUARE??????????????
???????
Brad wrote:
What? And I don't?
it appears not. You'd rather an empty site than a new hotel. I don't know of anywhere along the Clyde where I can just pop in and get a drink
No - because there aren't enough buildings full of people down there to be customers for such places!
Oh and BT HA HA HA HA HA IS THIS DISTRICT EVEN A QUARTER OF A MILE SQUARE??????????????
???????
Posted by: tadger, big smoke on 7:34pm Thu 11 Dec 08
WATCHING CORRIE ????????????OR ARE YOU RESEARCHING GOOGLE EARTH NOT BAD VIEW OF YOUR FINANCIAL DISTRICT PLENTY OF SPACES
WATCHING CORRIE ????????????OR ARE YOU RESEARCHING GOOGLE EARTH NOT BAD VIEW OF YOUR FINANCIAL DISTRICT PLENTY OF SPACES
Posted by: ahiggins, glasgow on 8:04pm Thu 11 Dec 08
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot.
Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have.
what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot.
Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have.
what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.
Posted by: tadger, big smoke on 8:25pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]ahiggins[/bold] wrote:
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot. Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have. what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.[/quote] Glasgow has an airport on its outskirts that does not even have direct flights with any major airlines to your top European cities except Amsterdam unless you go via,ryanair probably bring more Europeans to the city than the so called international in paisley,and the conferences etcetera are the only thing that keeps the stats the way they are,i,m not against growth but it must be sustainable or it,s no use
ahiggins wrote:
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot. Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have. what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.
Glasgow has an airport on its outskirts that does not even have direct flights with any major airlines to your top European cities except Amsterdam unless you go via,ryanair probably bring more Europeans to the city than the so called international in paisley,and the conferences etcetera are the only thing that keeps the stats the way they are,i,m not against growth but it must be sustainable or it,s no use
Posted by: Brad on 8:45pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]Financial district your having a laugh 3 banks you name how many employees???????????
?4 insurance companies most of they jobs are call centre hardly a financial district[/quote] 25,000 financial services employees in Glasgow, most in the "IFSD".
Morgan Stanley part of RBS???? Err, naw.
Financial district your having a laugh 3 banks you name how many employees???????????
?4 insurance companies most of they jobs are call centre hardly a financial district
25,000 financial services employees in Glasgow, most in the "IFSD".
Morgan Stanley part of RBS???? Err, naw.
Posted by: SunnyJhim, South of the River on 8:47pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep.
They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom.
Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver.
And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m.
In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep.
They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom.
Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver.
And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m.
In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.
Posted by: wild wadi, kirkie on 8:47pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]ahiggins[/bold] wrote:
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot. Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have. what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.[/quote] I wasn't going to comment but this post had me in stitches.Am away back to ma cheap cider.
ahiggins wrote:
quite honestly the disgraceful attitudes demonstrated by those utterly ignorant and negative writers (eg people power) are the shame of the city. imagine gloating about regeneration lost? or loss of 200+ jobs? or the personal loss of developers willing to invest equity in Glasgow. your comments are a simple demonstration of lack of education and idiocy. and it is clear you know zero (alongside your equally ill educated compatriots who dont seem to have a clue about glasgow being one of europe's top tourist locations). do you have a single clue about how much money your city brings in through tourism? or the massive convention industry? your attempt at diverting the argument into architecture just underlines your further total ignorance. what on earth do you know??? and do you want Glasgow to remain in the dark ages behind other european cities to maintain a nice 4 storey sandstone image to satisfy you bunch of ill educated dolts who have no forward thought for the city's future? I bet you spend your spare time nursing a pint of putrid lager and sharing your baseless views with any unfortunates who happen to be in earshot. Glasgow is fantastic. it has its flaws but it is vibrant, creative, driven, warm and up there as a city to rival others worldwide. we want to welcome tourist money and the pubs and restaurant income which also benefit. we welcome the intellectual benefit of the attendance of world class brains coming to our conferences, many sponsored by the excellent universities we have. what we dont welcome is BACKWARD idiotic simpletons who scoff at anything which moves us forward or begrudge the good fortune of those willing to risk their capital to grow our city. wake up, get out of your medieval hovels and look forward. stop expressing views which embarrass the rest of us, working class glaswegians who market our city as the magnet for creativity it should be. your comments are a turgid reminder of the kind of small mindedness which holds scotland back and should be cast to the wilderness.
I wasn't going to comment but this post had me in stitches.Am away back to ma cheap cider.
Posted by: Brad on 8:48pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]Hotels away out on the clyde, nothing around the area - seems hardly viable, yet some appear to disagree[/quote] Like the City Inn? The Marriott? The Hilton?
Hotels away out on the clyde, nothing around the area - seems hardly viable, yet some appear to disagree
Like the City Inn? The Marriott? The Hilton?
Posted by: Brad on 8:49pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]if there was still another hotel, is it still going to provide provision to even get as much as a drink just by popping in off the street - or the Clyde Walkway, in this case?
No - you answerwed that question yourself.[/quote] Did I? I can't imagine that you wouldn't be able to get a drink here? Why not?
if there was still another hotel, is it still going to provide provision to even get as much as a drink just by popping in off the street - or the Clyde Walkway, in this case?
No - you answerwed that question yourself.
Did I? I can't imagine that you wouldn't be able to get a drink here? Why not?
Posted by: Brad on 9:10pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote]Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep.[/quote] I wouldn't put Missing City in this group. He and I have differences of view (although we agree on much too), and I think he is too nostlagic for a Victorian past that never was (my view), but I think he wants the city to do well. Meep is an entirely different story, possibly mentally-unstable, and in a category (and hopefully a place) all by himself(I'm pretty sure meep's a he). People Power is an extreme left-wing, anti-anything vaguely capitalist (like the idea of a hotel in the city centre), including (when last I heard) the the idea of working for a wage.
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep.
I wouldn't put Missing City in this group. He and I have differences of view (although we agree on much too), and I think he is too nostlagic for a Victorian past that never was (my view), but I think he wants the city to do well. Meep is an entirely different story, possibly mentally-unstable, and in a category (and hopefully a place) all by himself(I'm pretty sure meep's a he). People Power is an extreme left-wing, anti-anything vaguely capitalist (like the idea of a hotel in the city centre), including (when last I heard) the the idea of working for a wage.
Posted by: HOLY WILLIE, GLASGOW on 9:24pm Thu 11 Dec 08
If this hotel had been built then apart from management it would have been staffed by foreigners working their butts off for a pittance of a wage thus making it easy for the government to allow the pathetic minimum wage to continue while they tell us that the ongoing deluge of non christian and mainly criminal immigrants is good for our economy.
Maybe they think we are oblivious to the fact that rape is just one of the crimes to have escalated five fold in glasgow since their arrival in droves.
If this hotel had been built then apart from management it would have been staffed by foreigners working their butts off for a pittance of a wage thus making it easy for the government to allow the pathetic minimum wage to continue while they tell us that the ongoing deluge of non christian and mainly criminal immigrants is good for our economy.
Maybe they think we are oblivious to the fact that rape is just one of the crimes to have escalated five fold in glasgow since their arrival in droves.
Posted by: wild wadi, kirkie on 9:37pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]HOLY WILLIE[/bold] wrote:
If this hotel had been built then apart from management it would have been staffed by foreigners working their butts off for a pittance of a wage thus making it easy for the government to allow the pathetic minimum wage to continue while they tell us that the ongoing deluge of non christian and mainly criminal immigrants is good for our economy. Maybe they think we are oblivious to the fact that rape is just one of the crimes to have escalated five fold in glasgow since their arrival in droves.[/quote] Hoaly Willie!I'm not a christian myself but I do agree with you on the exploitation of migrant workers. Also we are brought up to tell the truth so why won't the authorities tell us the truth about who exactly is committing most of the crime in this country?
HOLY WILLIE wrote:
If this hotel had been built then apart from management it would have been staffed by foreigners working their butts off for a pittance of a wage thus making it easy for the government to allow the pathetic minimum wage to continue while they tell us that the ongoing deluge of non christian and mainly criminal immigrants is good for our economy. Maybe they think we are oblivious to the fact that rape is just one of the crimes to have escalated five fold in glasgow since their arrival in droves.
Hoaly Willie!I'm not a christian myself but I do agree with you on the exploitation of migrant workers. Also we are brought up to tell the truth so why won't the authorities tell us the truth about who exactly is committing most of the crime in this country?
Posted by: Stevie, Glasgow on 9:42pm Thu 11 Dec 08
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs?
Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture?
If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today.
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs?
Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture?
If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today.
Posted by: SunnyJhim, South of the River on 9:44pm Thu 11 Dec 08
Which group of immigrants arriving in waves committing crimes like rape are you referring too?
Anglo-Saxons from the late 80s onwards; Pakistanis/Banglades
his/Indians in the 50s/60s; Lithunanian Jews before and after WW2; Protestant and Catholic Irish in the 18th, 19th and 20th Cent; earlier groups of Anglo-Saxons/Flems/F
rench and Waloons in the Middle Ages; assorted Gaels then Scots plus Vikings and Britons in the Dark Ages; mibbe the Romans before them; or the Picts who 'settled' the country in the first place?
You Willie - and your kind - are the only group I like to see forceably transplanted from these shores. I'm not a religious man in any way, shape or form but when I read or hear your brand of ignorance I do believe that it would be enough to make Jesus weep. Go in peace 'Holy' man.
Which group of immigrants arriving in waves committing crimes like rape are you referring too?
Anglo-Saxons from the late 80s onwards; Pakistanis/Banglades
his/Indians in the 50s/60s; Lithunanian Jews before and after WW2; Protestant and Catholic Irish in the 18th, 19th and 20th Cent; earlier groups of Anglo-Saxons/Flems/F
rench and Waloons in the Middle Ages; assorted Gaels then Scots plus Vikings and Britons in the Dark Ages; mibbe the Romans before them; or the Picts who 'settled' the country in the first place?
You Willie - and your kind - are the only group I like to see forceably transplanted from these shores. I'm not a religious man in any way, shape or form but when I read or hear your brand of ignorance I do believe that it would be enough to make Jesus weep. Go in peace 'Holy' man.
Posted by: SunnyJhim, South of the River on 9:49pm Thu 11 Dec 08
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs?
Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture?
If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today.
====================
====================
=======
No one would question the right of others to have an opinion for or against; it's the ignorance of the commentary that makes it a no-debate.
FOR EXAMPLE...what £300m of 'Enterprise agency' money are you referring to? No such pot of cash exists anywhere in Scotland. This is an almost exclusively private, entrepreneurial investment...or it would have been had the economic climate been different. There is hardly a city on the planet unaffected by these type of private sector investment decisions being put on hold.
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs?
Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture?
If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today.
====================
====================
=======
No one would question the right of others to have an opinion for or against; it's the ignorance of the commentary that makes it a no-debate.
FOR EXAMPLE...what £300m of 'Enterprise agency' money are you referring to? No such pot of cash exists anywhere in Scotland. This is an almost exclusively private, entrepreneurial investment...or it would have been had the economic climate been different. There is hardly a city on the planet unaffected by these type of private sector investment decisions being put on hold.
Posted by: Stevie, Glasgow on 9:56pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]SunnyJhim[/bold] wrote:
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs? Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture? If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today. ==================== ==================== ======= No one would question the right of others to have an opinion for or against; it's the ignorance of the commentary that makes it a no-debate. FOR EXAMPLE...what £300m of 'Enterprise agency' money are you referring to? No such pot of cash exists anywhere in Scotland. This is an almost exclusively private, entrepreneurial investment...or it would have been had the economic climate been different. There is hardly a city on the planet unaffected by these type of private sector investment decisions being put on hold.[/quote] It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.
Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too.
SunnyJhim wrote:
See all these folk who are moaning about folk thinking that building this hotel is not a good thing, wouldn't you rather the Enterprise agency spent £300m attracting skilled and technical jobs to central Glasgow rather than low paid service jobs? Should you not be aspiring higher in life than turning Glasgow into a service sector call centre culture? If you want to know what the IFSD is like after dark just have a wee look at the front page of the ET today. ==================== ==================== ======= No one would question the right of others to have an opinion for or against; it's the ignorance of the commentary that makes it a no-debate. FOR EXAMPLE...what £300m of 'Enterprise agency' money are you referring to? No such pot of cash exists anywhere in Scotland. This is an almost exclusively private, entrepreneurial investment...or it would have been had the economic climate been different. There is hardly a city on the planet unaffected by these type of private sector investment decisions being put on hold.
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.
Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too.
Posted by: Glaspaper, Glasgow on 10:08pm Thu 11 Dec 08
I think some people seem to be missing a vital point here. I don't think anyone on this post wants to see a loss of money and jobs to Glasgow. That is not the issue. The issue is whether or not we allow property developers the freedom to build what they want and change our cityscpape (which belongs to each and every citizen of Glasgow, rich and poor). I've seen this sort of thing happen to other cities, often with a very negative outcome. I currently live in Vancouver, which is a very prosperous city, although construction has obviously slowed down temporarily. The city setting is dramatic - the pacific ocean to the West and the snow-capped mountains to the North. But most new buildings that go up in Vancouver are very 'samey' - generic steel and glass residential towers litter the skyline (i choose the word 'litter' carefully). Vancouver has some older districts which have become much-loved charming places to be in the downtown area because they feel so far removed from this generic profit-driven style of architecture prevalent in the city today. So i guess the point i'm making is that this debate is one that is fundamentally about architecture and urban design - there is not much point in repopulating the River Clyde with shiny new buildings if no one wants to live or work there.
There's a reason why it's important that architects are involved in these kind of projects - because I don't want to live in a Glasgow that hands over control of the city to the money-men. If we invest money and effort into building the right buildings in the right places we might start to see the economic benefits to the city a little bit down the line.
(I'd like to add that i've worked as an architect in Glasgow and Vancouver. And i'm NOT big on conservationism - I DO believe that Glasgow should look to the future....just a bit more carefully).
I think some people seem to be missing a vital point here. I don't think anyone on this post wants to see a loss of money and jobs to Glasgow. That is not the issue. The issue is whether or not we allow property developers the freedom to build what they want and change our cityscpape (which belongs to each and every citizen of Glasgow, rich and poor). I've seen this sort of thing happen to other cities, often with a very negative outcome. I currently live in Vancouver, which is a very prosperous city, although construction has obviously slowed down temporarily. The city setting is dramatic - the pacific ocean to the West and the snow-capped mountains to the North. But most new buildings that go up in Vancouver are very 'samey' - generic steel and glass residential towers litter the skyline (i choose the word 'litter' carefully). Vancouver has some older districts which have become much-loved charming places to be in the downtown area because they feel so far removed from this generic profit-driven style of architecture prevalent in the city today. So i guess the point i'm making is that this debate is one that is fundamentally about architecture and urban design - there is not much point in repopulating the River Clyde with shiny new buildings if no one wants to live or work there.
There's a reason why it's important that architects are involved in these kind of projects - because I don't want to live in a Glasgow that hands over control of the city to the money-men. If we invest money and effort into building the right buildings in the right places we might start to see the economic benefits to the city a little bit down the line.
(I'd like to add that i've worked as an architect in Glasgow and Vancouver. And i'm NOT big on conservationism - I DO believe that Glasgow should look to the future....just a bit more carefully).
Posted by: HOLY WILLIE, GLASGOW on 10:09pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]SunnyJhim[/bold] wrote:
Which group of immigrants arriving in waves committing crimes like rape are you referring too?
Anglo-Saxons from the late 80s onwards; Pakistanis/Banglades
his/Indians in the 50s/60s; Lithunanian Jews before and after WW2; Protestant and Catholic Irish in the 18th, 19th and 20th Cent; earlier groups of Anglo-Saxons/Flems/F
rench and Waloons in the Middle Ages; assorted Gaels then Scots plus Vikings and Britons in the Dark Ages; mibbe the Romans before them; or the Picts who 'settled' the country in the first place?
You Willie - and your kind - are the only group I like to see forceably transplanted from these shores. I'm not a religious man in any way, shape or form but when I read or hear your brand of ignorance I do believe that it would be enough to make Jesus weep. Go in peace 'Holy' man.[/quote] Jesus died on the cross for you yet you boast about not being a religious man,it is non believers like you who cause jesus to weep,but nevertheless i shall pray forgiveness for your soul
Praise the lord
SunnyJhim wrote:
Which group of immigrants arriving in waves committing crimes like rape are you referring too?
Anglo-Saxons from the late 80s onwards; Pakistanis/Banglades
his/Indians in the 50s/60s; Lithunanian Jews before and after WW2; Protestant and Catholic Irish in the 18th, 19th and 20th Cent; earlier groups of Anglo-Saxons/Flems/F
rench and Waloons in the Middle Ages; assorted Gaels then Scots plus Vikings and Britons in the Dark Ages; mibbe the Romans before them; or the Picts who 'settled' the country in the first place?
You Willie - and your kind - are the only group I like to see forceably transplanted from these shores. I'm not a religious man in any way, shape or form but when I read or hear your brand of ignorance I do believe that it would be enough to make Jesus weep. Go in peace 'Holy' man.
Jesus died on the cross for you yet you boast about not being a religious man,it is non believers like you who cause jesus to weep,but nevertheless i shall pray forgiveness for your soul
Praise the lord
Posted by: roor06, glasgow on 10:56pm Thu 11 Dec 08
[quote][bold]SunnyJhim[/bold] wrote:
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep. They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom. Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver. And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m. In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.[/quote] Sunny ...
my post is this,just incase you read it wrong.
The Clyde harbour dont need "Foriegn investment"
Espescially Hotels (ask meep)
SunnyJhim wrote:
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep. They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom. Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver. And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m. In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.
Sunny ...
my post is this,just incase you read it wrong.
The Clyde harbour dont need "Foriegn investment"
Espescially Hotels (ask meep)
Posted by: Smeeagain, Lanarkshire on 11:13pm Thu 11 Dec 08
In the words of Pete Townsend....why don't you all F...f...ff..ff.fade away!
In the words of Pete Townsend....why don't you all F...f...ff..ff.fade away!
Posted by: SunnyJhim, South of the River on 11:17pm Thu 11 Dec 08
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.
Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too.
====================
====================
====================
====================
==============
Look mate. You and every other non-informed individual using this site should stop building your anti-development mantras based upon the way in which the ET presents the, er, facts. NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case, and developed the site; as well as securing a preferred operator to then run the project,eg, another Jumeriah or similar.
So in fact this site was being disposed of in a highly sustainable, highly robust way with money going back into the public purse...it is precisely because the successful bidder (Kenmore) could no longer guarntee the viability of the project in the current economic climate that the decision not to let them acquire the land was made.
I make no moral judgement on the quality of the proposed architecture or anything else; suffice to say the right decision was made not to proceed just now.
Roor ya tube...do us a favour and stop replying to my posts. You are boring and not very funny with it. Capital and investment is global and mobile...get over it. Can you, for example, guarantee for me, that the pension you will receive when you retire has been raised from ring-fenced investments made in Clyde Valley cottage industries? No? Thought not but the fact it has been accumulated by government and pension companies investing in dodgy overseas diamond mines and other unwanted 'foriegn investments' won't stop you friggin spending it on cheap jake when the time comes.
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.
Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too.
====================
====================
====================
====================
==============
Look mate. You and every other non-informed individual using this site should stop building your anti-development mantras based upon the way in which the ET presents the, er, facts. NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case, and developed the site; as well as securing a preferred operator to then run the project,eg, another Jumeriah or similar.
So in fact this site was being disposed of in a highly sustainable, highly robust way with money going back into the public purse...it is precisely because the successful bidder (Kenmore) could no longer guarntee the viability of the project in the current economic climate that the decision not to let them acquire the land was made.
I make no moral judgement on the quality of the proposed architecture or anything else; suffice to say the right decision was made not to proceed just now.
Roor ya tube...do us a favour and stop replying to my posts. You are boring and not very funny with it. Capital and investment is global and mobile...get over it. Can you, for example, guarantee for me, that the pension you will receive when you retire has been raised from ring-fenced investments made in Clyde Valley cottage industries? No? Thought not but the fact it has been accumulated by government and pension companies investing in dodgy overseas diamond mines and other unwanted 'foriegn investments' won't stop you friggin spending it on cheap jake when the time comes.
Posted by: Stevie, Glasgow on 12:02am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]SunnyJhim[/bold] wrote:
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money. Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company. Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too. ==================== ==================== ==================== ==================== ============== Look mate. You and every other non-informed individual using this site should stop building your anti-development mantras based upon the way in which the ET presents the, er, facts. NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case, and developed the site; as well as securing a preferred operator to then run the project,eg, another Jumeriah or similar. So in fact this site was being disposed of in a highly sustainable, highly robust way with money going back into the public purse...it is precisely because the successful bidder (Kenmore) could no longer guarntee the viability of the project in the current economic climate that the decision not to let them acquire the land was made. I make no moral judgement on the quality of the proposed architecture or anything else; suffice to say the right decision was made not to proceed just now. Roor ya tube...do us a favour and stop replying to my posts. You are boring and not very funny with it. Capital and investment is global and mobile...get over it. Can you, for example, guarantee for me, that the pension you will receive when you retire has been raised from ring-fenced investments made in Clyde Valley cottage industries? No? Thought not but the fact it has been accumulated by government and pension companies investing in dodgy overseas diamond mines and other unwanted 'foriegn investments' won't stop you friggin spending it on cheap jake when the time comes. [/quote] I know exactly where the site is as I have been parking my car on it for the last few years....
I don't know about being anti development. But let's face it, the area is mostly derelict land round about it on both sides of the river. Scenic views of the homeless unit on the opposite side of the Clyde, Kingston Bridge, and the MOD building.
As you say, Scottish Enterprise own the site. They are also selling their offices further up the Broomielaw.
Also, the GCC tout the site as the IFSD. So why aren't they trying to attract more FS companies rather than turning the land over to another hotel when there is at least 8 within half a mile of it.
The problem with hotels like this is they aren't highly sustainable in a recession when companies are cutting back on travel and quite a few conferences have been cancelled in Glasgow in recent times already. Several hotels have changed hands in Glasgow catering for the higher end of the market in recently too.
But hey ho. Because we disagree that a hotel might not be the best use of the land in the middle of the IFSD, we're non informed or anti development.
Maybe a few of us know the area pretty well and can see what problems should be dealt with first rather than GCC and Scottish Enterprise having big fan fares about building projects which come to nothing and the people wonder why?
Presumable the site wasn't disposed off if the developers have pulled out and it will be back on the market?
SunnyJhim wrote:
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money. Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company. Scottish Enterprises building on the same block was getting punted not so long ago too. ==================== ==================== ==================== ==================== ============== Look mate. You and every other non-informed individual using this site should stop building your anti-development mantras based upon the way in which the ET presents the, er, facts. NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case, and developed the site; as well as securing a preferred operator to then run the project,eg, another Jumeriah or similar. So in fact this site was being disposed of in a highly sustainable, highly robust way with money going back into the public purse...it is precisely because the successful bidder (Kenmore) could no longer guarntee the viability of the project in the current economic climate that the decision not to let them acquire the land was made. I make no moral judgement on the quality of the proposed architecture or anything else; suffice to say the right decision was made not to proceed just now. Roor ya tube...do us a favour and stop replying to my posts. You are boring and not very funny with it. Capital and investment is global and mobile...get over it. Can you, for example, guarantee for me, that the pension you will receive when you retire has been raised from ring-fenced investments made in Clyde Valley cottage industries? No? Thought not but the fact it has been accumulated by government and pension companies investing in dodgy overseas diamond mines and other unwanted 'foriegn investments' won't stop you friggin spending it on cheap jake when the time comes.
I know exactly where the site is as I have been parking my car on it for the last few years....
I don't know about being anti development. But let's face it, the area is mostly derelict land round about it on both sides of the river. Scenic views of the homeless unit on the opposite side of the Clyde, Kingston Bridge, and the MOD building.
As you say, Scottish Enterprise own the site. They are also selling their offices further up the Broomielaw.
Also, the GCC tout the site as the IFSD. So why aren't they trying to attract more FS companies rather than turning the land over to another hotel when there is at least 8 within half a mile of it.
The problem with hotels like this is they aren't highly sustainable in a recession when companies are cutting back on travel and quite a few conferences have been cancelled in Glasgow in recent times already. Several hotels have changed hands in Glasgow catering for the higher end of the market in recently too.
But hey ho. Because we disagree that a hotel might not be the best use of the land in the middle of the IFSD, we're non informed or anti development.
Maybe a few of us know the area pretty well and can see what problems should be dealt with first rather than GCC and Scottish Enterprise having big fan fares about building projects which come to nothing and the people wonder why?
Presumable the site wasn't disposed off if the developers have pulled out and it will be back on the market?
Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 2:58am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
I could tell you [bold]One[/bold] good thing about this development not going ahead, in fact I could tell you, and the rest of the posters [bold]several good reasons......[/bold] But, as you are opting to object, or contradict every opinion I give, I won't waste my breathe. Clearly you have your opinions, and I have my own. Lets just say that until G.C.C. and Purcell realise this is about regenerating, and improving our city for its own residing population, not just the tourist trade, or 2 week long 2014 Commonwealth Games charade this city will continue be an over glamourised P.R. exercise on paper, with no real substance or style. [/quote] What tourist trade over 2 weeks of competition do you mean the foreign athletes and their support staff because there wont be anybody else. The bbc might have booked out the 6 star hotel but your average joe couldn't buy a pint in the place without a visit to the bankmanager for another mortgage on his house. The fact the credit crunch has left the place empty makes a mockery of the compulsary purchase order forced on the previous tenants for a pie in the sky 600 star hotel in glasgow. Think how much we are losing in rates from those businesses in the heart of the international financial district or by its glasgow name the telesales midden.
People Power wrote:
I could tell you One good thing about this development not going ahead, in fact I could tell you, and the rest of the posters several good reasons...... But, as you are opting to object, or contradict every opinion I give, I won't waste my breathe. Clearly you have your opinions, and I have my own. Lets just say that until G.C.C. and Purcell realise this is about regenerating, and improving our city for its own residing population, not just the tourist trade, or 2 week long 2014 Commonwealth Games charade this city will continue be an over glamourised P.R. exercise on paper, with no real substance or style.
What tourist trade over 2 weeks of competition do you mean the foreign athletes and their support staff because there wont be anybody else. The bbc might have booked out the 6 star hotel but your average joe couldn't buy a pint in the place without a visit to the bankmanager for another mortgage on his house. The fact the credit crunch has left the place empty makes a mockery of the compulsary purchase order forced on the previous tenants for a pie in the sky 600 star hotel in glasgow. Think how much we are losing in rates from those businesses in the heart of the international financial district or by its glasgow name the telesales midden.
Posted by: sydney merriwether, yermawshoose on 4:19am Fri 12 Dec 08
Whit the f u c k I just got in from a good night of boozin' and debauchery and wot have I stumbled into? is this a Gay chat room or summit? I notice all the posters in here are all guys, don't you all have something better to do than Chattin' each other up. LIKE TRYING TO FIND A BIT A NANNY, why are you all getting upset and slagging each other off over this tidbit of news, and that guy HOLY WILLIE leave him alone. he died for our sins Y'know. I'm away to my bed...........
Whit the f u c k I just got in from a good night of boozin' and debauchery and wot have I stumbled into? is this a Gay chat room or summit? I notice all the posters in here are all guys, don't you all have something better to do than Chattin' each other up. LIKE TRYING TO FIND A BIT A NANNY, why are you all getting upset and slagging each other off over this tidbit of news, and that guy HOLY WILLIE leave him alone. he died for our sins Y'know. I'm away to my bed...........
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:08am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]SunnyJhim[/bold] wrote:
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep. They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom. Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver. And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m. In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.[/quote] I think your full of your own pish!
If you can't read prioperly then don't bother branding me as something I am not you ****!
SunnyJhim wrote:
Folks shouldn't get too wound by reactionary, cave dwelling luddites like roor, people power, missing city or meep. They wait every day for this paper to be uploaded then head directly for every of positive or negative business or economic development story...then crap all over it regardless of context or background from the comfort of their shared one-room bedsit somewhere near the lip of Mount Doom. Nothing constructive or visionary ever appears in their cyber-shoite ramblings...just the same old same old. I'd love a sliding doors moment where I could pop my head in and see what kind of City would have been rebuilt from the ashes and mistakes of the 60s and 70s by these fuds...the thought makes me shiver. And at the same time as making their claims to be psuedo-guardians of this City's soul and moral fibre, they get busy typing bile about the disadvantaged and dispossesed as being little more than human detrius...a City full of worthless junkies, pitiful drunks, cardboard gangsters, zombie-like neds and sub-working class sc*m. In fact, I actually wonder why they don't post their 'thoughts for the day' to the Sun or outraged Daily Mail. If anyone ever wanted a living or 'virtual' definition of the so-called Scottish Cringe, all they'd have to do is have a read at some of this shameful lots postings.
I think your full of your own pish!
If you can't read prioperly then don't bother branding me as something I am not you ****!
Posted by: Brad on 10:17am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote]NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case[/quote] This is correct.
[quote]Scottish Enterprise ... are also selling their offices further up the Broomielaw[/quote] This is not correct.
[quote]GCC tout the site as the IFSD. So why aren't they trying to attract more FS companies[/quote] You need a mix of uses: hotels are important supporting infrastructure.
NO OR LITTLE PUBLIC MONEY was going into this development. Scottish Enterprise own the site. They were/are flogging it off to the most appropriate bid from a short list of property developers (in this case those specialising in 5-star hotel developments because that is the usage this site has been set aside for based on a whole raft of development criteria). The successful bidder would then raise the capital investment (if they had not already done so), which happened to be budgeted by the developers at £300m in tis case
This is correct.
Scottish Enterprise ... are also selling their offices further up the Broomielaw
This is not correct.
GCC tout the site as the IFSD. So why aren't they trying to attract more FS companies
You need a mix of uses: hotels are important supporting infrastructure.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:19am Fri 12 Dec 08
There will be those on here who get obver excited at the prospect of a shiny new box popping up on the Clyde, no matter how hideous it looks - it looks like the Television Centrwe on the Thames built for London Weekend Television back in the 60's - and as we can see, it looks like design hasn't moved on very much - so those in support of this hideous glass box must be really boring people - there's a glass tower being built in Argyle street which far beyond the scope of what this other hotel could manage.
It also appears that people here in Glasgow, if they are from Glasgow are quite happy for developers to come in and just build whatever they want - most people using thjis forum probably wouldn't ever use this hotel, besides there is nothing around it - the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings so why go and spoil it by putting a glass box in amongst it - doesn't compliment the other structures rather it opposes them.
If thats still not good enough for some then obviously some people need their head checked (No pointing elbows at Sunny Jhim)
There will be those on here who get obver excited at the prospect of a shiny new box popping up on the Clyde, no matter how hideous it looks - it looks like the Television Centrwe on the Thames built for London Weekend Television back in the 60's - and as we can see, it looks like design hasn't moved on very much - so those in support of this hideous glass box must be really boring people - there's a glass tower being built in Argyle street which far beyond the scope of what this other hotel could manage.
It also appears that people here in Glasgow, if they are from Glasgow are quite happy for developers to come in and just build whatever they want - most people using thjis forum probably wouldn't ever use this hotel, besides there is nothing around it - the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings so why go and spoil it by putting a glass box in amongst it - doesn't compliment the other structures rather it opposes them.
If thats still not good enough for some then obviously some people need their head checked (No pointing elbows at Sunny Jhim)
Posted by: Brad on 10:21am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote]It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.[/quote]
This is not correct. SE did not pull the plug on this, even if the ET story reads a bit like that. Also, no direct financial inducement would have been given to a hotel developer.
It was the Enterprise company pulled the plug on the hotel. I am meary wondering if spending £300m on one hotel is the best use of the money available? It is indeed part enterprise money and part private money.
Also, no doubt the developers would have been offered grants and assistance to build the hotel in the first place by the 'Enterprise' company.
This is not correct. SE did not pull the plug on this, even if the ET story reads a bit like that. Also, no direct financial inducement would have been given to a hotel developer.
Posted by: Brad on 10:23am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote]the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings[/quote] With the exception of Clydeport, they're just boxes too.
the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings
With the exception of Clydeport, they're just boxes too.
Posted by: 2for1, Glasgow on 10:32am Fri 12 Dec 08
OMG... some people on this page realy need to be dragged into the 21st century! Name me one city in the world where developers are sitting round their desks, pondering over how to build buildings in the same style they used 100 years ago!? NO WHERE!!! (and before you all try and take the p*ss and say 'no where'... just because of the 'credit crunch', these guys still go to work and do their jobs, so YES they ARE still developing and designing buildings... even if no one wants to build AT THE MOMENT!) Of course this city will have bold, revolutionary buildings, and the taller the better, because it will show that as a city, we are aiming higher both physicaly and metaphoricaly! No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era! So why dont you channel all your negative energies into preservation of our existing buildings and learn to live in harmony with the futuristic, glass 'boxes' - such a dumb label anyway, that way Glasgow can have the best of both; a clean (haha, that's a joke.. I still remember the battered sausage squashed into Sauchiehall st!) modern city (yay, for the sex apeal to investors!) with a wonderful, historic collection of buildings resting in the shaddows waiting for tourist to discover as they tour the city! (Yay for the tourists!)
2f1
[italic]I'm your toy, your 21st century boy![/italic]
OMG... some people on this page realy need to be dragged into the 21st century! Name me one city in the world where developers are sitting round their desks, pondering over how to build buildings in the same style they used 100 years ago!? NO WHERE!!! (and before you all try and take the p*ss and say 'no where'... just because of the 'credit crunch', these guys still go to work and do their jobs, so YES they ARE still developing and designing buildings... even if no one wants to build AT THE MOMENT!) Of course this city will have bold, revolutionary buildings, and the taller the better, because it will show that as a city, we are aiming higher both physicaly and metaphoricaly! No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era! So why dont you channel all your negative energies into preservation of our existing buildings and learn to live in harmony with the futuristic, glass 'boxes' - such a dumb label anyway, that way Glasgow can have the best of both; a clean (haha, that's a joke.. I still remember the battered sausage squashed into Sauchiehall st!) modern city (yay, for the sex apeal to investors!) with a wonderful, historic collection of buildings resting in the shaddows waiting for tourist to discover as they tour the city! (Yay for the tourists!)
2f1
I'm your toy, your 21st century boy! Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:33am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings[/quote] With the exception of Clydeport, they're just boxes too.[/quote] Well I thought there was a bit of imagination put into then, especially the Scottish Enterprise building - but if you're saying they are just boxes then it just proves that most Architects today are lazy people who draw up 90 degree angles all their working life.
Flat, Boring and hardly proper use of the imagination and Easy Money by the looks of things!
Brad wrote:
the other buildings on the Broomielaw are decent buildings
With the exception of Clydeport, they're just boxes too.
Well I thought there was a bit of imagination put into then, especially the Scottish Enterprise building - but if you're saying they are just boxes then it just proves that most Architects today are lazy people who draw up 90 degree angles all their working life.
Flat, Boring and hardly proper use of the imagination and Easy Money by the looks of things!
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:42am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]2for1[/bold] wrote:
OMG... some people on this page realy need to be dragged into the 21st century! Name me one city in the world where developers are sitting round their desks, pondering over how to build buildings in the same style they used 100 years ago!? NO WHERE!!! (and before you all try and take the p*ss and say 'no where'... just because of the 'credit crunch', these guys still go to work and do their jobs, so YES they ARE still developing and designing buildings... even if no one wants to build AT THE MOMENT!) Of course this city will have bold, revolutionary buildings, and the taller the better, because it will show that as a city, we are aiming higher both physicaly and metaphoricaly! No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era! So why dont you channel all your negative energies into preservation of our existing buildings and learn to live in harmony with the futuristic, glass 'boxes' - such a dumb label anyway, that way Glasgow can have the best of both; a clean (haha, that's a joke.. I still remember the battered sausage squashed into Sauchiehall st!) modern city (yay, for the sex apeal to investors!) with a wonderful, historic collection of buildings resting in the shaddows waiting for tourist to discover as they tour the city! (Yay for the tourists!) 2f1 [italic]I'm your toy, your 21st century boy![/italic] [/quote] No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era!
I know of a few buildings built or re-built in the past 15 years which compliment the Victorian Era - these can be found at Maryhill, Hillhead, Scotstoun & Sauchiehall Street.
As for the glass boxes - refer to the above - they are ****, unimaginitive and boring - a few lights I suppose would make all the difference eh.
Still, if Glass Towers are the way to go - then there should be more along the lines of the Argyle International - not something thats a carbon copy of 60's crap.
I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building as well, gets rid of an old building which doesn't really do much justice. But skyscrapers along Clyde Street facing Carlton Place - nah, thats another example of Civic Vandalism.
2for1 wrote:
OMG... some people on this page realy need to be dragged into the 21st century! Name me one city in the world where developers are sitting round their desks, pondering over how to build buildings in the same style they used 100 years ago!? NO WHERE!!! (and before you all try and take the p*ss and say 'no where'... just because of the 'credit crunch', these guys still go to work and do their jobs, so YES they ARE still developing and designing buildings... even if no one wants to build AT THE MOMENT!) Of course this city will have bold, revolutionary buildings, and the taller the better, because it will show that as a city, we are aiming higher both physicaly and metaphoricaly! No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era! So why dont you channel all your negative energies into preservation of our existing buildings and learn to live in harmony with the futuristic, glass 'boxes' - such a dumb label anyway, that way Glasgow can have the best of both; a clean (haha, that's a joke.. I still remember the battered sausage squashed into Sauchiehall st!) modern city (yay, for the sex apeal to investors!) with a wonderful, historic collection of buildings resting in the shaddows waiting for tourist to discover as they tour the city! (Yay for the tourists!) 2f1 I'm your toy, your 21st century boy!
No one will build victorian style buildings ever again, because this is not the Victorian era!
I know of a few buildings built or re-built in the past 15 years which compliment the Victorian Era - these can be found at Maryhill, Hillhead, Scotstoun & Sauchiehall Street.
As for the glass boxes - refer to the above - they are ****, unimaginitive and boring - a few lights I suppose would make all the difference eh.
Still, if Glass Towers are the way to go - then there should be more along the lines of the Argyle International - not something thats a carbon copy of 60's crap.
I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building as well, gets rid of an old building which doesn't really do much justice. But skyscrapers along Clyde Street facing Carlton Place - nah, thats another example of Civic Vandalism.
Posted by: Brad on 10:49am Fri 12 Dec 08
Having looked at the plans for 236 Broomielaw (unlike most posters here, TMC excepted), I actually think its simple lines would make a good contrasting compliment to the more fussily-detailed buildings to its East. And I like that the glass will bring light and motion to the frontage, and reflect what little daylight we get for much of the year. It's a good scale and mass too, in my view. I'm not that sure about the tower but have no huge objection to it. It's slim enough not to leave the rest of the city in shadow.
But I don't think all that matters nearly as much as the fact that it isn't being built, and that nothing probably will be on that site for years now.
Having looked at the plans for 236 Broomielaw (unlike most posters here, TMC excepted), I actually think its simple lines would make a good contrasting compliment to the more fussily-detailed buildings to its East. And I like that the glass will bring light and motion to the frontage, and reflect what little daylight we get for much of the year. It's a good scale and mass too, in my view. I'm not that sure about the tower but have no huge objection to it. It's slim enough not to leave the rest of the city in shadow.
But I don't think all that matters nearly as much as the fact that it isn't being built, and that nothing probably will be on that site for years now.
Posted by: Brad on 10:53am Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote]I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building[/quote]
I'd far rather see that on the Broomielaw - it is out of keeping with some good decent old buildings on Clyde Street. But there's not much chance of it being built in the foreseeable either. Or Custom House Quay.
I'd be surprised to see very many private developments going on site along the river in the next few years. I hope I'm wrong.
I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building
I'd far rather see that on the Broomielaw - it is out of keeping with some good decent old buildings on Clyde Street. But there's not much chance of it being built in the foreseeable either. Or Custom House Quay.
I'd be surprised to see very many private developments going on site along the river in the next few years. I hope I'm wrong.
Posted by: 2for1, Glasgow on 11:13am Fri 12 Dec 08
TMC, we agree on something! The Dixon Tower will look good when it's built... if it's built! But that just goes to show, big, tall glass buildings can look good, but they cant all look the same... that would be boring and similar to this mono-60's concrete mess people talk about! So, some should be square, some should be tall and rectangle, some should be shaped like a gherkin, some should be shaped like... well you get my point!
2f1
TMC, we agree on something! The Dixon Tower will look good when it's built... if it's built! But that just goes to show, big, tall glass buildings can look good, but they cant all look the same... that would be boring and similar to this mono-60's concrete mess people talk about! So, some should be square, some should be tall and rectangle, some should be shaped like a gherkin, some should be shaped like... well you get my point!
2f1
Posted by: Brad on 11:42am Fri 12 Dec 08
It's hip to be square, as the song goes...
It's hip to be square, as the song goes...
Posted by: Titus a duxas, Ft.McMurray on 12:23pm Fri 12 Dec 08
Ach,, wah ...waaah.whit dae ye want oan the river a nice wee power station? shipbuilding? These Gless Monstrosities, are the best thing tae happen oan the river since that wee guy whitshisname? Mungo paddled up the river, get used to it, it's the future.
Ach,, wah ...waaah.whit dae ye want oan the river a nice wee power station? shipbuilding? These Gless Monstrosities, are the best thing tae happen oan the river since that wee guy whitshisname? Mungo paddled up the river, get used to it, it's the future.
Posted by: wild wadi, kirkie on 12:44pm Fri 12 Dec 08
[quote][bold]Brad[/bold] wrote:
[quote]I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building[/quote] I'd far rather see that on the Broomielaw - it is out of keeping with some good decent old buildings on Clyde Street. But there's not much chance of it being built in the foreseeable either. Or Custom House Quay. I'd be surprised to see very many private developments going on site along the river in the next few years. I hope I'm wrong.[/quote] many? don't you mean any?
Brad wrote:
I also believe that the Dixon Tower when that is built will be an interesting building
I'd far rather see that on the Broomielaw - it is out of keeping with some good decent old buildings on Clyde Street. But there's not much chance of it being built in the foreseeable either. Or Custom House Quay. I'd be surprised to see very many private developments going on site along the river in the next few years. I hope I'm wrong.
many? don't you mean any?
Comment | Read Comments (102)
