Friday, 5 September 2014

Friday ramble Manston and the other Riveroak, the biggest pub in Britain for Ramsgate and so on.

Well the school holidays have finally ended and I got the sort of day off yesterday where I have time to paint a picture. Back at work in my bookshop today it’s much quieter, it always is just after the schools have gone back, my guess is that parents and grandparents are recovering. Of course the children are no longer in the children’s section of the bookshop: “Daddy did you have Beano Annuals?” “Yes son, one every year.” “Daddy did you have a Hundred?”


The upshot of all this is I have time to write another blog post, as ever these days Manston Airport is a good starting point. As I guess most people know RiverOak have put the following http://www.savemanstonairport.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Riveroaks-Terms-for-CPO-Agreement-100714.doc agreement to TDC. To be honest I didn’t think much of this until the crossfire began on Manston Pickle. But if you look at the stationary you will see this Riveroak is “RIVEROAK AVIATION ASSOCIATES LLC” whereas the one we were dealing with the other day was “RiverOak Investment Corp LLC” 

So we have:
RiverOak Investment Corp., LLC
One Atlantic Street, Suite 703
Stamford, Connecticut  06901

And we have:

RIVEROAK AVIATION ASSOCIATES, LLC
The Corporation Trust Company
Corporation Trust Center 1209 Orange St
Wilmington, Delaware 19801

There are 250 companies that have an address matching Corporation Trust Center 1209 Orange St Wilmington, DE 19801


Geographically this is a bit like one company being in London and the other in Paris.

This does rather beg the question. Why would those lovely people at RiverOak in Stamford, Connecticut be sending TDC a draft agreement from a company called RIVEROAK in Wilmington, Delaware?

Is this something to do with the placement of capital letters, I have been looking into this one and I am considering starting a Michael’s bookshop company based in Delaware, because I have just put “deleware llc” into google and the top link is http://beginnersinvest.about.com/od/holdingmethods/a/Delaware-LLCs-for-Beginners.htm


Ever since I read the stuff about British Virgin Island’s companies when if first got interested in The Royal Sands I have appreciated the advantages of being able to generate potential creditors (people you will owe money to) who can’t actually find out if you have the money to pay them back.



The pictures illustrating this post are of the tower and admin block at Manston in the mid 1960s but frankly would anyone be able to identify them now?

To be perfectly honest I think if I was going to engage in a major business deal with either Ann Gloag or TDC there would be certain advantages to them no being able to find out my identity or where I kept my money.  


Today of course the fun loving Isle of Thanet Gazette comes out and not having the children on holiday I get the time to get out and buy one, the lead article being the one on The Royal Sands development on the Pleasurama site.

I have to say I was surprised that this article doesn’t contain any comments from Cardy Construction, I would have thought that as it’s their lead article they would have contacted Cardy and that either Cardy would have had something to say to them about the issue, or they would have said they didn’t want to comment about it in which case The Gazette would have said this.

In view of the business with RiverOak let’s hope that TDC have got the right Cardy and not:


From: michaelchild@aol.com [mailto:michaelchild@aol.com] 
Sent: 11 April 2013 12:47
To: Michael Stannard
Subject: Another Cardy?

Michael I don’t know whether you wish to comment on the latest in The Royal Sands fiasco as it occurs to me that it may have an impact on your company’s reputation. 
Re Cardy Developments Ltd" which was dissolved (reg No NI050796) in 2011 
Cardy Developments Ltd" (reg No 06726001) which was originally incorporated as Future Homes On-Line Properties Ltd" in 2008 but renamed to "Cardy Developments Ltd" only on the 4th of April this year. 
Future Homes On-Line Properties Ltd" had Keegan as director, when I checked out his other directorships several years ago.
Companies house now say 
Cardy Developments Limited is an Active, non trading business incorporated in England & Wales on 16th October 2008. Their business activity is recorded as Buying And Selling Of Own Real Estate. Cardy Developments Limited is run by 1 current members. 1 shareholders own the total shares within the company. It is not part of a group. 
The latest Annual Accounts submitted to Companies House for the year up to 31/10/2012 reported 'cash at bank' of £0, 'liabilities' worth £0, 'net worth' of £0 and 'assets' worth £0. Cardy Developments Limited's risk score was amended on 26/04/2010.
Current directors and secretaries
Mr Shaun Patrick Keegan

Best regards Michael
On 11/04/2013 22:37, Michael Stannard wrote:
Hi Michael

Thanks for your email.

I am however already fully aware of all such information. 

Kind Regards

Michael 


Phew I have just checked the council’s website and it says Cardy Construction Ltd and not Cardy Developments Ltd, although I am wondering if there could be a Cardy Construction Ltd in Delaware or the British Virgin Islands.

I guess the sooner TDC employ another lawyer to replace the one the lost the better, it certainly needs someone there who understands the small print.

Incidentally before anyone gets too exited this post is meant to be humorous and not to be taken too seriously.   


Of on another tangent here, it would be completely wrong to assume the London boroughs sending their poor and disadvantaged people to Margate was something new, this one says “Late of The Old Kent Road” which Monopoly players will know is the apotheosis of not being Mayfair. Sorry about apotheosiseing the children just asked what antidisestablishmentarianism meant and I thought trying to explain this in terms of the Church of England, which is how you usually do it, seemed a bit mean, so I have just had a go in terms of Monopoly, although I think I may have missed a positive or negative out somewhere I don't think it matters that much as I think we all stopped listening about half way.      


I am still pondering, expand the picture of the ad “…the existence of a future state. Up to the end of 1902

I have ate shot and left and come to the conclusion that a child who had no concept to a future state would have no imagination. 


The content of the next lot of Manston equipment disposals has gone online see http://www.ppauctions.com/_assets/auctions/122/flysheet/Flysheet.pdf there is a certain irony to “11x wooden / metal frame stable doors” but we are where we are.

I will ramble on there 

160 comments:

  1. Once again Riveroak have jumped the gun as the face to face interviews for any preferred TDC partner don't take place until the middle of the month. Part of their pressurising of the council no doubt. Unless of course they have already been given the nod in which case there should be TDC press release.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A few too many assumptions there, 3:24, suggesting that you actually know nothing. Perhaps you can explain what written submissions have to do with face to face interviews for, surely, one normally precedes the other. As for being given the nod, well the only nodding going on around here is normally off at the boring comments on blogsites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I refer you to the latest news - market testing underway item on the front page of the TDC web site where it states "Following registration, applicants will then have to complete a questionnaire to identify their interest, capacity and capability in the market. Questionnaires need to be completed and submitted by no later than Monday 1 September.

      The third and final stage will then involve face to face sessions which would be likely to take place in mid-September, although the exact details are still to be decided and depend on the level of response to the earlier phases."

      Why are you such a rude person that is not capable of making a reply in a civil manner?

      Delete
    2. I can be as civilised as the next person when there is something sensible to respond to. Your first comment was simply conjecture without substance and, therefore, hardly warranted serious consideration. That explains my rather tongue in cheek reply, but, if that offended you, such was not my intent. Have a nice weekend.

      Delete
    3. William. The anonymous posting (3:24 pm) was not addressed to you. It has been quite nice since you took a break from the blog scene. If you've decided to come back, please could you post your thoughts and not feel it is somehow your duty to respond to everything, and to add gratuitous insults in the process?

      Delete
    4. 6:53, few comments are addressed and surely most of us just express an opinion to which anyone can respond. As for the frequency of comments well, in my case, it rather depends how I feel and whether there is a topic that takes my interest. Your remark about gratuitous insults is also not understood for I can find no where in my comment where an insult is directed at anyone. That said, please rest assured I shall not be commenting that frequently as I find most of what passes for debate on the blogs ill informed, repetitive and all too often motivated entirely by self interest.

      Delete
  3. I suspect the criticism is aimed at Riveroak's tactic of making public everything which they submit to the council, so that the council is besieged by letters from the angry mob demanding to know why they haven't agreed to have Riveroak's babies. The council is there to represent local people, and the opinions of people who live outside Thanet are irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Knowing how divisive the issue is, I am staggered that Iris, TDC leader, is opening their hoe-down at the caravan site tomorrow. She appears to have no political savvy whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Riveroak make everything public, whereas Ms Gloag has secret meetings with both TDC and KCC. Whichever side of the argument you agree with, I know which one's more likely to win the public's support.

    ReplyDelete
  6. River oak is a property company!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Saturday Ramble Manston Pleasurerama and the biggest pub in the world

    My view on resent events in our wonderful town have dismayed me I just cant believe the stupidity of some of our residents I don't mean to be rude but some people should know better. Firstly the pleasurerama site why after so many years would people complain when the council negotiate a positive outcome form a sticky situation, don't they know that if TDC have to go though the courts it could be tied up in legal battle for decades another common remark on the proposed building is the size I would suggest that people have a real look at the building its not a shoe box that you would expect a greedy developer to build its a good structure with good lines its also has the added bonus of a row of retail units (shops) something that is rarely done in a town these days. It also has a very large price tag at its current market value not every company would want to take that sort of risk for that sort of return, If this project fails then the next person WILL build a shoe box just like all the other new builds blighting our seafront. Also the wall behind the site this is the ugliest thing in the whole of Ramsgate the new building will cover it up perfectly. lastly there is the matter of regeneration this will never happen if amateur residents play planning officers or borough engineer's or Councillors why not leave this to the people that have trained to do the job?

    The biggest pub ever
    Why don't people understand that the pavilion is under lease to Rank and even though TDC hold the freehold it is ranks decision to sub lease the building. again if this does not happen, then what will Ramsgate be faced with? the most prominent building in Ramsgate being used for drunks to sit outside and for crap graffiti artists to tag. Why not let someone who is going to spend more money on doing it up than it would cost to buy any of the surrounding buildings? In my view people who don't think about what they say and its outcome should keep their view to themselves.

    Manston, This ex-airport is a worry not only are TDC running head long into a partnership with a company that clearly aren't who TDC think they are but also are ready to ruin Ramsgate beyond all recognition for (what they think) is the greater good of Thanet. This is not the case. 1) The pollution will tip us over the recommended safe level in the whole of Thanet, taking years off our lives. 2) The congestion on the roads for anybody trying to get out of Thanet will be a nightmare, what with all the lorry's+ all the fuel to refill the aircraft and other related airport traffic. There are so many other problems with this planned airport city it would take me all day to go though them, so ill stop now. When will TDC stop spending our money on reports that will never come to anything?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Purple Om, reading your first two paragraphs I thought you had suddenly become sensible and could see merit in the lesser of evils. Then I read your third paragraph, and off you go with the fairies again, dreaming up pollution levels with not a shred of evidence to back them on your assumption that a few planes are more polluting than a sprawling housing or industrial estate might be. Next you conjure up all the airport related traffic when, for years, you have told us the airport will never succeed whoever runs it.

      Maybe I am missing something, but just why would all these lorries go to an airport that has just a handful of aircraft movements?

      Delete
    2. William I think you should catch up with recent proposals from RiverOak and their Airport City, 750,000 tonnes of cargo a year + training flights + passenger flights = 150-170 planes a day
      I would expect more from you but it just goes to show how bad the Cllrs and MPs are around here
      A FEW PLANES,OFF WITH THE FAIRIES, DREAMING, CONJURE, how rude and wrong can you be ?????????????

      Delete
    3. firstly PO your belief that what is proposed for Pleasurama is "the only game in town" commentary is odd. Maybe you should do your own investigation instead of relying on statements made by others that you take at face value. You state several things about RO based on your beliefs and other people's statements,

      Secondly your understanding of the Rank situation is seriously undermined when you state Rank are going to sublet it to Wetherspoons.

      Delete
    4. Purple Om, you didn't answer my question regarding the poor state of the cliffs (and please, there's no need to shout at people on here).

      Delete
    5. Barry, do rank hold the lease?
      Barry, have Riveroak started a new company that's registered in Delaware?
      Barry, have TDC sold a lease on the Pleasurama site?
      If the answer to all these questions is yes then I think it is you who doesn't understand
      But please tell me how the council will get out of these contracts without doing a deal with the owners of the leases?????
      Again please tell me how a company that started this year just after Tony F came to them with a proposal from RG, that TDC would CPO Manston if there was a interested party Now tell me that Michael is wrong about Delaware company's

      Delete
    6. 9;27 please see my above comment 3;44
      In my own personal view, I think the cliffs are fine but my opinion counts for nothing as does everybody else's

      Delete
    7. Barry I have just read tour blog I see you have gone out on a limb and accused everybody. Not
      If you were that confidant you would have risked being sued. I'm not saying your not right, there is a lot of you scratch my back and ill scratch yours just look at the old owner and the new owner of K.I.A. You could either say its was a backhander that made the pleasurerama site empty for so long or it could just be the largest contraction of money by the banks the world has ever seen.

      Delete
    8. I don't normally agree with Purple Om, but he's absolutely right that we should be happy that both the former Pleasurama site and the decaying Pavilion are finally going to be built on / renovated. This could very soon be the best seafront in Kent, so I find it extremely ironic that a group calling themselves "Friends of Ramsgate Seafront" oppose such schemes (at least "Save Manston Airport" do exactly what it says on the tin).

      Delete
    9. Actually, Save Manston Airport does not do what it says on the tin. The airport closed several months ago, and the assets have been sold. It is now just a brownfield site. If they were being honest, the group should have changed its name to the Reopen Manston Airport Group, the Buy the Airport Regardless of Cost (BAROC) Group, the Thanet wing of the Stop Boris Island Group, or the Run Around East Kent Shouting Through a Megaphone Group.

      Delete
    10. PO you said Rank will sublet to wetherspoons. In that you are wrong. please endeavour to get your facts right.
      anon 8:10 FORS do not oppose the scheme just the alleged developer will you get your facts right as well. There is however a large groundswell of people in Ramsgate that feel disenfranchised by the local govt as they had never been consulted about what was to be built on the site.
      Finally PO are you advocating that anyone who blogs should make slanderous statements for the sheer hell of it. My name is centre stage on all my posts and on my blog whereas you post under a "nom de blog". All I seek to do on the blog is pose questions based on the evidence uncovered. You seem just to endeavour to stir up trouble. If you are so afraid of revealing your own identity then all I can say is your statements are simply wrong. Please try and understand business.

      Delete
    11. Barry firstly Rank hold the lease on the pavilion when TDC got feed up with it not being used and falling into disrepair they approached rank but only with Ranks consent did they allow Witherspoon to obtain the lease from rank on the proviso that Witherspoon would pay for the prepares something that TDC should have forced rank to do under their lease agreement then TDC would extend the lease to Witherspoon. Its not a new lease its an extension of the original lease. Really what I'm saying is without Ranks consent Witherspoon would not have the pavilion and TDC would be left with a rotting building.
      Secondly I have posted all my views with my own name many times don't say I'm afraid, as you know if I believe in something then I'll just say it no matter what the backlash, which is more than I can say for some.
      "Finally PO are you advocating that anyone who blogs should make slanderous statements for the sheer hell of it"
      No I'm not they would be fact, NOT slanderous. Is there any point in writing if all your going to do is imply that somebody has done something wrong or are you just stirring up trouble?

      Delete
    12. PO this is what you said " it is ranks decision to sub lease the building." This is totally wrong

      Fact: Rank had a fully repairable lease with 34 years remaining in 2013
      Fact: Rank's lease (according to legal advice, allowed then to not repair until they relinquished that lease.
      Fact repairs were said to be between £2-3M
      Fact: They said they couldn't sell on the lease as there wasn't enough years remaining
      Fact: TDC offered to extend the lease by 66 years to enable them to sell it on
      Fact Rank didn't want to do that as they would have then have had to spent money repairing the building
      Fact: Rank advised Wetherspoons who enter into a Back to Back transfer of the lease putting the repairs onto Spoons
      Fact: TDC have acted as go between to facilitate this deal in their capacity as Freeholder

      Rank are no sub leasing they are removing themselves leaving Spoons as owners of the NEW head lease for the building. You understand now.

      "Secondly I have posted all my views with my own name many times" You may have elsewhere but on Thanetonline you hide behind a "nom de blog" so your statement is irrelevant. Identify yourself and maybe your comments might have more impact.
      Finally my blog is fact. interpretation of the facts is left to the reader. If you disagree then say so and then a debate can occur, or do your own research

      Delete
    13. Barry your splitting hairs you have said nothing different than me, stop being petty. It was Ranks choice not TDCs
      If you don't recognize people's views that don't post under their own name then why did you respond to my original post?
      I have never mentioned your views so I cant see where that statement came from perhaps you feel the need to explain yourself but I was not asking, other than the pleasurerama site I have never seen you have a strong view one way or another, Don't they call that sitting on the fence? My view is Ramsgate has suffered many years of neglect because it was under a flightpath now its not the money is rolling in with 3 large projects planned with more to follow all for the seafront lets give these investors encouragement so more will come along. Anyway your view is different than mine lets leave it at that.

      Delete
    14. was that some sort of apology?
      why is it when people find themselves painted into a corner they resort to begging off?

      Maybe you will think before you press enter or maybe, god forbid, you actually get your facts right before you post

      Delete
    15. Barry I have no time to get every single detail absolutely right. If you would point out where I made a big enough mistake to warrant such a fuss then Ill endeavour to avoid doing it again.

      Delete
    16. so your previous wasnt the apology however this one is. I accept you got it wrong now we can move on

      Delete
    17. With the Pavilion there are 4 issues outstanding:

      1. Why TDC/Rank did no repairs at all until the site was vacated
      2. What TDC/Rank have done since then: clearly nothing - and the lease seems to have reverted to TDC otherwise why are they involved?
      3. Where is the consultation on Wetherspoons or anyone else taking on the repairs etc - the current arrangment seems rigged in favour of Wetherspoon
      4. Will a huge pub/splitting up the building be best for Ramsgate

      Delete
    18. So it looks like FORS wants a few swings and maybe a slide (if they can afford it) with some grass in stead of £30 million project for the pleasurerama site I cant wait to see how this brings prosperity to Ramsgate, as if we don't have enough parks and public open spaces. Their new way of condemning the site, is to complain about the shadow that the hotel will cause, Maybe they need to do some research and find out facts for themselves in stead of reading what other people have written, as the site is almost south facing and behind it is a huge wall.

      Delete
    19. whoever you are PO you are sadly mixed up between what FORS would like and what people post on Facebook. If I didn't know better I would assume that you get some sort of strange gratification from stirring up trouble. You are obviously one of these people who, sadly, behave for the thrill of pebble throwing with little else occupying your mind.

      Delete
    20. Barry, a few days ago you said on here that SMA should remove misleading quotes posted by others from their FB page, but now you're saying that any misleading posts on the FORS FB page should be ignored. You really can't have it both ways.

      Delete
    21. Anon please stop performing a Kylie. the two things are poles apart.
      Currntly SMA are deleting everything that calls into question the spin they are using like Adem asking admin to clarify the statement that night flights aren't required when he says he heard, during the Winter Garden meeting, they were necessary.
      On FORS which is an open forum people can post anything so long as it meets with the Acceptable use policy but it is wrong of PO to quote those comments as FORS policy or even that they are endorsed by the constituted group.

      Delete
    22. Barry James not defending the developers here but the main issue here is not the housing element. When you look at the plans it is the hotel that will block the sunlight. A compromise would be not building a hotel at the western end of the plot but making a gesture and having that as a community space. where events could be staged which would also mean the sunlight wouldn't be blocked out

      Delete
    23. PO having you lift that from FORS from my own post on the subject of the hotel is somewhat of a compliment "plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery"

      Especially as the Labour Councillor with the planning remit "liked" the post

      Delete
    24. "Performing a Kylie"? What on earth is that supposed to mean, or did you just make that up?

      Delete
    25. sorry anon far to subtle "Minogue returned to prominence in 2000 with the single "Spinning Around""

      Delete
    26. Phew... I pictured all of you wearing tight gold hot pants!

      Delete
  8. But what about the cliffs situation Purple Om, are you happy with that?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Can anybody substantiate the claim that Ann Gloag has held secret meetings with both TDC and KCC? If not, should the person making the claim not withdraw it? I know that the SMA campaigners have made this claim but, in common with most other claims they have made, there is no evidence to substantiate it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Confirmed publicly by both Iris Johnston and Paul Carter (google it!).

      Delete
    2. Anyone can contact their local authority for pre-planning advice and that doesn't need to be disclosed to the public, in the same way if you or I wanted to talk to someone before we built an extension. Nothing secret and wouldn't result in something that would bypass planning laws....

      Delete
    3. I've tried googling it and I can find no record of secret meetings between Ann Gloag and TDC or KCC. I can find no record of Iris Johnston or Paul Carter confirming that secret meetings took place. Again, I know that SMA have made this claim, but it isn't true.

      Delete
    4. Just because you can't find it on google, doesn't mean to say that it didn't happen - it doesn't have every single bit of information, including confidential ones on there, no matter what some think. If you go back in time a few months when it was all being discussed, you will find it is actually true but Paul Carter "couldn't remember what was discussed", plus a number of freedom of information requests.

      Delete
  10. You're absolutely correct 9:39 and no-one's accusing anyone of doing anything illegal, but my point is that River Oak have chosen NOT to go down this route and have made everything public instead. If Ann Gloag did the same thing then she may get more support from the Manston sceptics who are undecided either way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It all comes down to what you think Riveroak are trying to achieve by publicising things like their version of a contract between themselves and the council. At the moment, Riveroak are bidding to be TDC's CPO partner. No decision has been made to confirm that Riveroak has been successful. Even if Riveroak were chosen, the contract between themselves and TDC would be subject to negotiation. I doubt that it would look anything like the one-sided wish-list they have produced. Ann Gloag is doing nothing wrong whatsoever, by maintaining a level of confidentiality about her proposals until she is ready to unveil them. I would go so far as to say this is normal business practice. I expect her to unveil proposals imminently and I expect this to signal an end to the CPO nonsense.

      Delete
    2. 9;57
      shhhhhh !!!

      Delete
    3. What amazes me is that because TDC have started the due processes for a CPO to possibly take place, SMA think it is a done deal...... it is just the start of a very long convoluted court proceeding with no guarantees, just look at how long Dreamland has taken !!

      Delete
    4. SMA seem to be running out of steam if their AGM is anything to go by

      Delete
    5. So are FORS if their lack of influence over recent progess is anything to go by.

      Delete
    6. I don't know what it's like at FORS, but SMA has suffered the same problem as Margate Town Team in that a group with good intentions has been hijacked by left-wingers who put their own egos before the group.

      Delete
    7. anon 10:34 "FORS have combined stamina with local voluntary works, and earned their right to be heard. Now a properly constituted group, and contributing to trying to achieve actions which will further their goal." Chris Wells
      If only we were as rich as the money men behind Riveroak :)

      Delete
    8. My point exactly Barry, the local right (Tory / UKIP) largely support voluntary / campaign groups, while the left (Labour / Green) hijack it for their own purposes when it suits them. Witness the Tory and UKIP cllrs / candidates that attended the SMA events over the weekend while Labour and Green stayed away with the exception of Iris (who knew she had to be there or her leadership would go the same way as Clive's)... Remember this at voting time.

      Delete
  11. There is a real divide between the instantaneous responses on blog sites and social media, and the detail needed to thrash out serious business negotiation, which takes time and caution on most occasions. Added to that is a serious dose of cynicism regarding previous council decisions and who was involved in them. For example, it was Iris Johnston and Richard Nicolson's negotiating expertise that gave us SFP and the years of delay at Pleasurama; now with delicious irony they are back in charge to sort it out. Thinking about Manston leads you to ponder how successful they were in this last negotiation with international business, and the previous labour cabinet role in projecting an anti Manston image. That is why Iris needs to be on the white charger at everything, to hide the past. Furthermore many anti Pleasurama campaigners are against the whole concept; similarly many anti night flight campaigners are basically anti airport; others claiming pro airport whilst knowing the limitations on operation will scupper any real chance of success. It is a complex arena of multi faceted opinion to tiptoe through, with limited tolerance of others views on any subject that is emotionally charged. On top of that, we have the management of the potential political earthquake of UKIP, the coming elections, the confusion in many minds as to how to best exploit their chance to make their voice heard in a tight potential set of results. At local, as well as national level, many feel the decision makers are increasingly distant from the views of their voters on the ground. Any statement, or decision made now could have massive implications for the ballot box next May. Truth to tell, it is hardly surprising many politicians are reluctant to say too much; and those that are, usually covering past mistakes in current hubris. Above in this thread, Riveroak are criticised for openness; Ann Gloag for secrecy. For once we should appreciate the difficulty local politicians find themselves in, with all sides lined up ready to declare they know the best way that all want. FORS have combined stamina with local voluntary works, and earned their right to be heard. Now a properly constituted group, and contributing to trying to achieve actions which will further their goal. Who and how Purple Om represents, other than himself, is difficult to measure. In such tight times, such realities count in getting your voice heard.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Sorry I haven’t had time to contribute to the comments here, I have been very busy with family and work commitments.

    So the best I can do is a few further notes on the issues here.

    On Manston.

    I have been told that the council is aware to a degree about the implications of RiverOak forming a Delaware LLC and that the support for the cpo coming from a company where there is potential that the identity of the company directors would be concealed from TDC.

    I am told that only about 25 people turned up to the Save Manston Airport Special General Meeting, there appears to be some confusion as to whether this number of people constituted a quorum. I don’t believe the Manston music event was very well attended either, so I am not really certain if the impetus is going out of the campaign.

    Anyway I gather that quite a few local politicians turned up to the meeting and with only around 25 of the Save Manston Airport group turning up to the meeting I guess questions about whether this is a vote winner are inevitable.

    On Pleasurama

    I think the situation is that the cabinet will only be requested to give their permission for negotiations to continue and frankly I don’t think the council really have any other option but to continue negotiations at this stage.

    I will try to do something again to stress to the council the potential for financial liability on the cliff and sea defence. Perhaps try to get them to try and transfer the sea defence to the Environment agency. To my mind the real problem is the cliff façade and doing anything than starting with a new cliff façade that has some chance of lasting about as long as the development is just bonkers.

    On The Pavillion

    My understanding is that Rank were prepared to hand the building back to TDC if they could get out of the repairs obligations.

    I also think that the sea defence situation on the sea side of the Pavillion may soon become a critical factor, there is now very little dry sand between the sea and the Pavillion at high tide and here also I think it very likely that we may have waves hammering on a sea defence for the first since 1915.

    I think it is pretty obvious that sea defences that haven’t been maintained in a hundred years because the sea hasn’t come any where near them for a hundred years need reviewing when the sea starts to get close to them again.

    Underlying this is the problem that the council have pretty much run out of money, they have got themselves involved in some expensive projects that district councils wouldn’t normally engage in, Dreamland being the latest and I am a bit concerned that Ramsgate may be going from not getting a fair share of the cake to not getting any cake at all.

    ReplyDelete

  13. Evening Michael,

    I must have missed this when I was away but yesterday's Manstophile meeting (attendance about 20) has brought to light something that needs airing. Cllr Alan Marsh (Conservative Sturry and Herne Bay) is now an advisor to none other than Riveroak of Stamford or Delaware or wherever they say they're based these days.

    Now call me old fashioned but isn't there a conflict of interests here? What are the terms of his relationship with all interested parties exactly?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you also remember he already declared this interest at the KCC meeting back in July when they unanimously backed TDC in attempting to retain the airport. It was shown on the internet for all to see. This is quite different from those who are involved in development companies or organisations who don't appear to believe it is a conflict of interest to be involved in local planning.

      Delete
  14. Following on from my last comment, Riveroak have banged on about having sooooo much experience in the Aviation industry that it's hard to see what a Kent Councillor could bring to that table (albeit he did use Manston often we're told)

    Also, if Marsh's area of expertise is as a customer, I.e. a pilot, again, I can't see what he could possibly be offering them (I believe there are pilots in America).

    So what does that leave us with? Could Cllr Marsh take this opportunity to tell the voters of Kent, you know, those of us he is given hefty allowances by to represent, what he's doing advising an American investment/real-estate/aviation company when he should be, if he's interested in job creation, be talking to the British owner of the land that used to be an airport. Maybe this is the face of modern Conservatism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haven't MP's been caught out being the mouthpieces for private enterprise

      Delete
  15. I didn't realise Manston is in Sturry or Herne Bay? You learn something new everyday on this blog!

    ReplyDelete
  16. If you want to deny that you ever met the Leader of KCC, the best way to do this might be to meet with one of his lackeys instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So to clarify, you're saying it's ok for Ann Gloag to have a meeting with the head of KCC (of which the details remain secret), but not ok for the head of another company to meet a lowly councillor?

      Delete
  17. Soooo... the person collecting signatures in the High Streets and promising 6,500 jobs at least is not SMA, it's another group !!!

    On Friday the 22nd, of August, THINK SUPPORT MANSTON AIRPORT (TSMA), launched a new public awareness campaign on the streets of East Kent. This has been in close liaison with Beau Webber & John Buckley with whom I have been working since 1st of August. We, (TSMA) now have a total of 7449 members, of which 7151 are paper signatures. These member signatures have been collected over the last 15 days while campaigning on the streets and talking to the public face-to-face.
    TSMA support a very different area to the other groups involved in supporting Manston airport. All other groups are fundamentally on line campaigns. Although TSMA have an Internet/Facebook presence, TSMA was set up by myself, Jennifer Jones & Matthew Baldwin, as a public interface group to interest & inform, the many thousands of people that do not have Internet knowledge or availability. Not only to enlist their membership, but also to inform & update current information. This not only includes walking the streets & in town centres, but also involves speaking to groups and interested parties by way of talks.
    Our membership will continue growing & we are offering our totals to support ALL other groups in agreed initiatives so that it can be genuinely claimed that the initiative agreed has the support of a membership which includes TSMA supporter totals. This is already happening with SMA & we are currently working with two of the groups & writing to the chairs of all other groups with the same offer of cooperation. I would stress that this is neither a competition or a race, it is a genuine undertaking from retired people who have the passion & time to make this aspect of the campaign work. And who enjoy standing around on street corners for days on end!!!?
    Our sole intention and purpose, and the remit from our members is: To undertake, or support, any reasonable initiative to secure the reopening of, & the future prosperity & success of Manston Airport.
    We sincerely hope that this will grow into a cohesive single campaign in support of what we all wish for. A successful and prosperous MANSTON AIRPORT, plus employment and prosperity for the future of Thanet & Kent.
    We would like to thank everyone who supports us in the hard work we have undertaken. Specifically I would like to thank Beau Webber, John Buckley & Kirrian Wilson & the guys at Manston Works, for their support, understanding & trust.
    Interesting Facts:
    1). Yesterday was a FULL MOON! lol
    2). I have read that more than 60% of over 65's do not have a computer or access to one.
    That is why THINK SUPPORT MANSTON AIRPORT exists and will continue to exist in full support of ALL GROUPS and their members who's only motivation is to genuinely SAVE & SUPPORT MANSTON AIRPORT.

    ReplyDelete

  18. Anon 1.46pm


    I hate to spoil the party but you do realise that we have footage of one of your members talking about 6,500 jobs.

    Due to misrepresentation, you do realise that you have now openly invalidated all signatures collected to date, made your claimed 'membership' figure meaningless and though we won't be complaining, damaged the Manstophile's reputation still further.

    Would you like to start again but this time, reign in your man with the megaphone. He's doing you far more harm than you realise.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anon 10.08pm

    That's exactly what I'm saying.

    Ann Gloag owns 700 acres of land in Kent so she is entitled to speak to the leader of the council should she wish. There is no conflict there.

    That an American company is accessing a County Councillor whilst pursuing a business relationship with a District council within said county I would suggest, is creating a conflict.

    Perhaps Cllr Marsh would like to step out of the shadows and tell those of us whose taxes his generous allowances are paid out of, what his dealings are precisely, who with, when and why?


    ReplyDelete
  20. Anon 10.08pm

    That's exactly what I'm saying.

    Ann Gloag owns 700 acres of land in Kent so she is entitled to speak to the leader of the council should she wish. There is no conflict there.

    That an American company is accessing a County Councillor whilst pursuing a business relationship with a District council within said county I would suggest, is creating a conflict.

    Perhaps Cllr Marsh would like to step out of the shadows and tell those of us whose taxes his generous allowances are paid out of, what his dealings are precisely, who with, when and why?


    ReplyDelete
  21. Barry, you have assumed that I have apologized when I have not, you have attacked me for posting sub leased when I should have said sold, the real fact is the Rank extended their lease and sold it to who THEY wanted to, my point was Ranks CHOICE. This is what I wrote

    "Why don't people understand that the pavilion is under lease to Rank and even though TDC hold the freehold it is ranks decision to sub lease the building"

    Also Barry you say
    I'm "stirring up trouble" " You are obviously one of these people who, sadly, behave for the thrill of pebble throwing with little else occupying your mind"
    NO Barry I just don't agree with your objection to the planned RSD I don't know if you had these objections when it went to planning but planning was granted End of
    You are a founder member of FORS Admin and secretary ( I think ) you sent a statement to TDC on behalf of FORS that would have them believe that a good majority of members, were in favour this. This was before the meeting so you could not have gauged how people felt. As a member of FORS I can tell you now, I do not support this anti regeneration of the seafront. How you can possibly deem a 4 star hotel lots of retail units and luxury flats with a build cost of £30m as a bad thing? In a derelict/run down seafront as we have, this is crazy. Why not do some research into regeneration of areas and see what sort mistake your making. If this was your own personal view I wound't mind but you sent that letter to TDC almost straight away without consulting your members on behalf of your members, in my view misleading TDC into thinking thats the view of residents of Ramsgate or FORS members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps Barry can start a poll so that the people of Ramsgate (or at least FORS members) can make their views known?

      Delete
    2. there is a poll and people on FORS voted. PO knows this as he says he is on FORS FB page. I have no idea whether he has ever joined the constituted group as he hides behind a "nom de blog"

      I have no idea what the anon who says FORS have achieved nothing means. bearing in mind we are not elected in power, however our protesting did stop the freehold being sold to SFP before they built anything,

      Delete
    3. Barry I am a paid up member of FORS, so that will narrow it down a bit. You and Michael know who I am, so stop this constant drone about "nom de blog". If I wish to post in here under Purple Om that's my choice
      I have never seen a poll on FORS fb page so please could you post a link. I wonder if the poll states that, if work begins again then FORS would be against it, even if a new developer was building it?

      Delete
    4. as you would have received an invitation to the meeting at the Kings I would have presumed you had visited the page. On the page is a 5 question poll asking what peoples preference for the site. no one who voted wanted the current development and I presume here you took the opportunity to vote

      Delete
    5. Looks like FORS are having the same problem as SMA and Margate Town Team in that "leaders" have let the power go to their head and they're completely ignoring what anyone else wants. It will end in tears.

      Delete
    6. Barry a very misleading ballot, you cant even see where to vote for the original plan until you click on load more, then all is says is "flats and 60 room hotel" nothing about the shops
      You have said this in your comment above
      ". There is however a large groundswell of people in Ramsgate that feel disenfranchised by the local govt as they had never been consulted about what was to be built on the site"
      How you can call 70 people voting in 3 category's a large groundswell is beyond me.
      I will be sending my findings to TDC later, as they will think that is the view of the 2400 members of FORS and of cause its not its only the view of a hand full who want 3 different things.

      Delete
    7. good luck Andy I'm so pleased you have been involved with this from the beginning and can feel able to speak for everyone on a FB page. For your information how many actually voted for Houses and a hotel out of the 70 odd who voted and what percentage want leisure related activities?

      Delete
    8. Barry I did not know this was FORS aim to stop this development.

      Delete
    9. It was never FORS aim to stop the development just remove the current developer (or non developer) however when you go back to 2003/2004 and look at the lack of residential involvement and what has occurred since and look at what people have said at every petition (3) and what was told to RTC by over 300 people who attended the discussion at Chatham house, which sadly you hadnt got involved, you would more easily understand the depth of feeling about the current offering.
      We have yet to be convinced that this current offer by Cardy hasn't been manipulated by the current owners of SFP Ventures (UK) Ltd.
      When TDC clutch at straws because their backs are up against it then FORS will examine every aspect of this to ensure Shaun Keegan et al will NOT benefit from their immoral behaviour.
      Come down to Kandy's Cafe and put your point of view instead of conducting some sort of witch hunt online

      Delete
    10. Barry I could not give a s*** about the old developer all I want is it built so Ramsgate can get on with its regeneration. I thought that's what we were fighting for?

      Delete
    11. so andy you dont have a problem if this becomes yet another game for the developer. I thought you said you wanted it built. So someone not telling the truth doesn't matter to you. Please stop being so naive. We have been there in 2002, 2006, 2009, 2012 and now 2014. FORS or nimbys haven't stopped the build nor has there been money issues and the man behind this has a fortune of at least £300M. so was in Michaels blog that stopped them?

      Delete
    12. Ok chaps a complex issue here, I don’t think getting no development there is really a viable option, I think the council has backed itself into the position where it has said that the site is viable for development and that the council guarantee the site against cliff collapse and storm damage for the life of the development.

      What I mean here is I don’t think the council can now easily say that building on the site with its current infrastructure just isn’t on.

      The sea defence is probably something that the council could get out of assuming they handed it to the environment agency and the environment agency were prepared to take it over. If this happens my guess would be that the environment agency would build it to a standard it would need to be if the sand beach wasn’t there.

      Now any new sea defence would need a considerable amount of planning in conjunction with what could be built behind the sea defence. Both the height of the top of the sea defence and the distance behind the sea defence the building could be built are factors that are interrelated. Often the building behind the sea defence has to be raised up on some sort of platform, Turner Contemporary is a good and realistic example of what happens if you play this one by the rules.

      The cliff is another matter altogether, the main calculation here would be how close can you safely build to it combined with how wide a gap do you need between the building and the cliff to allow for cliff façade maintenance for the life of the building.

      Now the normal approach here would be to build a new cliff façade that you would expect to last for the life of the building, once again look at Turner Contemporary, not much of a cliff but look at the thickness of the concrete.

      I suppose it may be reasonable to explain ways that I would approach this as an engineer given a competently free hand. One way would be to say the cliff is 20 metres high so cutting away the cliff to about a third of the height and building a concrete support structure 7 metres thick and 20 metres high would support the cliff, this structure wouldn’t need to be solid and could be cast concrete arches. A limiting factor here would be the condition of the chalk underneath i.e. would it be able support the weight of the concrete? Another way of doing this would be to slope the chalk cliff to an angle of about 45 degrees, perhaps in a series of steps and then integrate the new development with the steps. The best option though would be to cut off the old cliff façade and build the new development against the cliff making the building double as a cliff support structure.

      Of course all of these option are massive civil engineering projects, none of them would be likely to produce an economically viable development, but they are ways you could approach developing this site.

      Delete
    13. Lets hope TDC do their due diligence on this one then, by the looks of it, it would be a first. I don't think there is any point in arguing about it I still think that Cardy's reputation is beyond all of this, but I'll probably be corrected.
      The good thing about living on a coast that has shallow water with a chalk bed rock is that, if we need more seafront all you have to do is reclaim it. We do have a few miles we are not using.

      Delete
  22. Perhaps have a petition instead, formal or informal, so that can be attacked in the same way as any that are pro-airport are? By all accounts it isn't hard according to lots of those against the airport, who also fail to realise how many locals actually signed it, but carry on with the fallacy of it being all non-locals and no-one from Ramsgate, etc. Oh, but I forgot that TDC accepted it and it achieved what it needed to, but we just can't seem to move on from that.

    If all these action groups that actually want change for the better locally, and who don't want more years of inaction and a Council shrouded behind a veil of distrust, actually could find some common ground, they could achieve so much more. However, when some that are meant to be representing local groups like FORS come out and attack others, I wonder if they truly realise how many possible supporters they are turning against their own goals.

    Perhaps a thought for another post Michael, of how far elected representatives of groups should go in attacking others, or if they should concentrate on their own goals and constitution, to prevent alienating others?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who elected Barry James as our FORS spokesman? I certainly wasn't asked, yet I'm a member of the FB group.

      Delete
    2. anon you seem to be in a bit of a pickle here, just being on a FB page means you are on a FB page. There is a constituted group which puts out the press releases. Now if you want to join the constituted group and attend the committee meeting then you are free to have your say. Being an anon on here is just hot air blowing.

      Delete
    3. Anon 11:03 pm If you had bothered to attend the AGM in June to elect the Committee members for FORS you could have had your say. If you have a problem with it I suggest you post on FORS Facebook page to discuss about Barry James being ' Selected as Spokesman' for FORS.

      Delete
  23. FORS hasn't achieved anything. It has failed to stop an inappropriate development from taking place on the seafront and it has failed to prevent the seafront from being a wasteland for more than ten years. It's just a glorified talking shop. Earlier in the year there was the briefest glimmer of home when we thought that TDC was going to repossess the site. Now, with Cardy something or the other saying that they will step in, we are back to the prospect of further years of blight. We need TDC to repossess the site and we need new plans which include a significant recreational element. The last thing we need are posh apartments for spoilt, overpaid footballers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Spoilt overpaid footballers with plenty of money to spend, not such a bad thing for the town!

      Delete
  24. 9:37
    Yeah that's right, let's have social housing on the site. Lets not have any rich people in Ramsgate throwing their money around

    ReplyDelete
  25. So you are a socialist at heart, Purple Om, and how right you are about recycling benefit money rather than importing wealthy patrons who might vote Tory. That, of course, is part of the trouble with FORS, being mainly liberal retirees with comfortable pensions. Well meaning but devoid of hunger. STOP PRESS - If next week's vote is 'Yes' lots of wealthy Scots will be looking for bolt holes down south so bring on the luxury apartments Mr Cardy!

    ReplyDelete
  26. 9;42
    Perhaps my comment was unclear,I was being sarcastic. I am a labour supporter but that does not mean I am anti rich, as those flats are hardly a fortune to buy and if you wanted a cheaper hotel Ramsgate offers a wide range of prices to suit most pockets.
    If I could have anything I wanted for the pleasurerama site I would want Disney world or a state of the art water park but the size of the site is to small and a water park would only be good on hot summer days. So if we are not going to get some spectacular attraction the next best thing would be what's planned. If anybody has a better idea for the site then I would be happy to hear.

    ReplyDelete
  27. What gets me about all of this is, everybody is complaining about disused and neglected buildings, land banking, shops that cant be rented because they are in the wrong part of town, all over a 10 year period, a long time but nobody has asked themselves why.

    Well I'll put my thoughts why, Lack of investment, why because of the flightpath. What investor would put their hard earn't into a place that may or may not prosper. Investors hate uncertainty it is the one thing that will send them running for the hills.

    What I cant see is why the people of Ramsgate are so smitten with the airport, it has run YOUR town into the ground but still some people love it (stockholm syndrome) Is it because your afraid of their supporters or because you really think that Ramsgate will be better off? I'll give you an example of why I think the flightpath has ruined Ramsgate. Lets look at the buildings, the pavilion a beautiful building right on the beach just imagine how much money that has lost in the time its been closed why because no one wanted to take the risk. Would it be such a good investment if it had over 100 planes thundering over the people trying to have a cup of coffee? People don't come to Ramsgate as much for two reasons first being the flightpath but the main one being, its so run down why? lack of investment why? its on a flightpath

    Its the same with the shops in town if the seafront was thriving with holidaymakers every retail business would clambering to rent the shops and we would not have TDC buying shops and turning them into social housing.

    Now take the housing stock, we have beautiful buildings and so cheap Why because its quite run down Why the flightpath.

    Everything that has wound you up over many years can be traced back to being on a flightpath I said this to Sir Roger 5 years ago in a letter. The price paid by Ramsgate being on a flightpath far superseded the benefit to Thanet, he disagreed.

    ReplyDelete
  28. There's plenty of rotting and empty buildings in Margate and Cliftonville too, yet that's not under the flight path. So bang goes that theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pleased to see you are using the apostrophe Purple Om, just not in the right places. Anon @ 8:36 am is spot on. Take a walk along Northdown Road in Cliftonville, or the High Street in Margate. The problem is almost Thanet wide. Birchington and Westgate seem to prosper, but even Birchington has at least one empty shop, namely Ferris Pharmacy and Post Offfice. Sainsbury is supposed to be taking over, and they have applied for a licence to sell alcohol, but the shop is still empty?????

      Long ago, when Manston was home to the USAF, Thunderjets and Super Sabres screamed, yes screamed across the skies of Thanet, not just on a flightpath, and sometimes fell out of the sky, yet the seaside towns prospered. Then along came cheap flights to Spain etc. and that was the end of tourism in Thanet as we knew it. The flightpaths in Spain brought prosperity there instead, along with Euro cash.

      Delete
    2. The problem with Margate is lots of HMO's . Thanet did have a real slump in tourism with cheap package holidays but now we need to focus on tourism once more. As tourism in the UK has had a come back. Another problem with Margate is lots of people rent and don't have the same care about where they live and if it gets to bad they just rent somewhere else.
      Peoples views have changed towards aircraft since the 70-80s once seen as the future and exciting now seen as polluting and a nuisance.

      Delete
    3. "polluting and a nuisance"... except when they want to travel on them or buy imported products. Ramsgate / Manston was once one of the gateways to Europe with it's planes, ferries and hovercrafts, now it's just a bleak end of the line. This is the real reason why few people want to live or invest in the area. Margate is slightly different in that it was always more of a place for holiday makers than as a travel hub for Europe.

      Delete
    4. 3;42
      We need rubbish dumps but I don't want to live next to one.
      As for a travel hub (Ha Ha) has that not already been tried? and failed badly.
      Ramsgate needs to portray an idyllic beautiful town with no visible industry or large industrial shipping.

      Delete
    5. Purple Om,

      You really do talk utter nonsense, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

      Delete
    6. We can't live in ivory towers Purple Om. Somebody has to live next to a rubbish dump but you wouldn't buy a house if you knew it was there.

      Delete
    7. "Failed badly"? Ramsgate had very successful ferry services for decades, a successful hovercraft service for 15 years and a successful airport in the 1930's. You obviously want to rebrand Ramsgate as something that it isn't, in the same way that some newbys want to rebrand Margate. If you want "an idyllic beautiful town with no visible industry or large industrial shipping" then move to Deal or Hythe.

      Delete
    8. 1) Andy
      What's your point?
      2) SEMBOB
      I have answered this point many times, this will be the last time. Just because you have a road outside your house it does not make it acceptable for them to make it into a motorway.
      3) 7:26
      What benefit does a ferry have to Ramsgate, if all the cars drive off to other places and there are no foot passengers?
      So you remember the successful airport in the 1930's do you? Well what you need to do is look at what happened since then and ask yourself, Is my argument a good one if I have to go back 80+ years.

      Delete
    9. Purple Om,

      My point is that you talk nonsense, most of it in pointless slogans.

      Delete
    10. Thank goodness for that Purple Om. If you answer this then you are a liar.

      Now I know that there will be no motorway outside my house because when I bought it a search was made to discover any plans that would affect the property. Surprise surprise, an airport, I hope it isn't used by dirty smelly aeroplanes. And once upon a time you could buy flights round the island from a stall on Margate seafront near Dreamland. And drive your car onto an aeroplane and be flown to France. This was in the 1960s.

      A ferry terminal will bring jobs, but we can't have dirty smelly lorries cluttering up the roads can we, oh dear me no.

      I have never found Ramsgate as a whole particularly attractive, nor Margate for that matter, though there are good features in both. What is needed is plenty of light industry and a working ferry port and airport to bring much needed jobs to the area.

      Delete
    11. That is your view, of a town you don't even live in. why don't you campaign for TDC to build a port and airport where you live and leave Ramsgate alone to prosper. We have had a port and an airport and it has done us no good what more evidence do you need that your argument is flawed??????????

      Delete
    12. Sembob how much public money should be used to fund your 1950s industrial fantasy. I presume you are in your 60s or 70s so can explain how wonderful it was when you were a boy

      Delete
    13. Anon @4:28 pm. I was not aware that I was fantasising. Thanet needs jobs. A ferry port and an airport would go some way to providing them. And who says it has to be public money, Ann Gloag for one spends her own money, though that might be up for debate given the subsidies for running buses. And anyway, isn't that what public money is for. And it wasn't wonderful when I was a boy leaving school with no proper jobs in Thanet in the 50s. Unless deck chair attendants and beach photography count as proper jobs. Most of my contemporaries did as I did and left Thanet for greener pastures.

      Purple Om, As somebody who can trace his family history back to the landlord of two Ramsgate pubs back in the 19th century, one of which is still up and running, and under the flight path to Manston, who can trace ancestors across Thanet, and who was born in Broadstairs, lived in Cliftonville, schooled in Margate and Canterbury, and now living in Birchington, I am better qualified than some to pass comments about Thanet.

      Delete
    14. You are an elderly fantasist Sembob as the airport and ferry have failed to provide jobs - even in your youth. While your pub history simply shows Thanet businesses were here before the airport. And now after it although you are stuck in the past.

      Delete
    15. Way past your bedtime anon @ 9:41 pm. What a stupid comment about Thanet businesses. Of course there were businesses here before the airport, but the airport was here before most of the houses under the flightpath. I note that while a ship is attempting to carry out a legitimate trade through the port there are those who seek to stop it. What does the ship do, move to another port. And I think you need to look up the meaning of the word fantasist. If explaining what it was like many years ago is fantasy then you are living in a dream world. The airport supported 150 jobs directly and many more jobs depended in part on the airport. The ferry terminal was thriving in the days of Sally line but there was no ferry terminal in my youth so it could hardly fail, and the airport was with USAF and RAF when I was in my youth, so not a failure, and the air shows in the 50s and 60s were well supported.

      If I am stuck in the past then please come up with some better ideas about Thanet. Dreamland is being revived with old rides, stuck in the past, Thanet is stuck in the past because it cannot move forward. Pleasurama is stuck in the past. Ten years at least with no movement, and who's fault is that? Councillors stuck in the past.

      At least I want to see Manston working with modern jet aircraft, so if that is stuck in the fantastic past then so be it.

      Delete
    16. SEMBOB
      I don't believe you. Please give me some proof.

      Delete
    17. Tell me what bit you don't believe Purple Om and I will provide proof, provided it does not concern my ancestry, which is personal to me.

      Delete
    18. SEMBOB your remark about Pleasurama "Pleasurama is stuck in the past. Ten years at least with no movement, and who's fault is that? Councillors stuck in the past." if I understand you right is somewhat incorrect. If you view the video put out by ITWT it clearly shows 3 Tory Councillors finally admitting what myself and others have been saying for a long time. SFP Ventures (UK) Ltd are Landbankers. Shaun Keegan deliberately puts out via his brief excuse after excuse as to why no building and finally we hear that these were just excuses and the real reason is to extract money from the taxpayer for doing nothing. That is the worst sort of immorality and the Ramsgate people who complained about Keggan were right all along.

      Delete
    19. Oh dear Purple Om. There was me thinking you were after some serious information, and all you have done is jump on a throw away remark rather than something serious. Of course Pleasurama is stuck in the past. Nothing has happened to improve the site for years, ergo it is stuck in the past. Whatever the politics of it, at the end of the day, after all is said and done, or not done, nothing has changed. This is my final word on the subject.

      What is ITWT? Is that a bit like TW3?

      Delete
    20. Sembob you do seem stuck in the past.

      The airport was here before the towns?

      150 jobs at the airport - and not funded by public money?

      The airport is bust and been for years and many of its elderly supporters will not see it operatonal again.

      Indeed nor will the rest of us.

      Delete
    21. Purple Om,

      You really do talk the most arrant nonsense.

      Delete
    22. Anon @ 4:58pm. Why do you put interpretations on my comments that are not valid. I did not say that the airport was there before the town. What I did say was that the airport was there before most of the houses under the flightpath. Not the same thing. And were Manston staff paid from public money? I think not. After all, it was Ann Gloag who gave them notice and threw them out of work.

      This elderly person, though I don't recognise that in myself, is entitled to a point of view, even if it is diametrically opposed to yours.

      Delete
    23. SEMBOB did you even read who posted the remarks at 12:27

      In Touch with Thanet its on facebook

      Delete
    24. Sembob how can Manston have been in place before Ramsgate? Many if not most of the town dates from 1880 and before. You agree Manston is not viable with private sector funding yet avoid the public sector funds required to prop it up previoudly. You do indeed have an opinion although it is idiotic and old fashioned

      Delete
    25. Carried away by the fluency of my own verbosity.

      Delete
    26. Sorry Barry, because you managed to spell Keegan two different ways I thought it was an entry from Purple Om, from whom I am still waiting to find out what proof he wants. And 3 and 4 letter abbreviations need to be spelt out for those of us who can't work it out.

      Delete
    27. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    28. Anon @ September 15, 11:29 pm. I believe you are deliberately misinterpreting my comments. Of course Ramsgate was there before Manston. My Great Grandfather ran two pubs, at separate times, in the 19th century. What I am saying is that many houses immediately under the flight path were built later than Manston airfield. I am old enough, surprise surprise, to see many of them being built and thought at the time that they were rather close to the threshfold. And surely most residents knew there was an airfield nearby. And why do you continue to place interpretations on my comments that are inconsistent with what I have said, and in some cases not said.. I have neither agreed nor disagreed that Manston is not viable in the private sector, I have an open mind on that. You remind me of the YES campaign in Scotland who don't have an argument but shout down those who try to present an alternative view. The use of the word idiotic is the verbal equivalent of throwing eggs. I have come across your strategy before. Make a statement which is not true about a comment then wait for the originator to trip themselves up. But thank you for bothering to reply.

      Delete
    29. I trust that is another typo Purple Om. You really are clutching at straws Purple Om. I never said my family was born here, only that I can trace my great grandfather back to two pubs in the 19th century, and you will just have to take my word for it.. How far can you trace your Thanet history?. Once again we have an interpretation placed on a comment which can only be a product of your imagination, something that seems typical on blog land.

      You might note Purple Om that the name of this blog is THANETONLINE, not RAMSGATEONLINE. The whole of Thanet pays council tax, or at least some of us do, and therefore we should all be allowed to comment on how our taxes are spent, wherever we live in Thanet.

      In future Purple Om, please address all remarks to me by my full screen name and not an acronym, or not at all.

      Delete
    30. I really don't understand the relevance of when houses were built. If you're talking about Nethercourt, it was built when the airfield was an RAF base. There were no plans to turn it into a civilian airport. In essence, you can't have it both ways. Houses were given planning permission because there wasn't excessive noise and there were no plans to expand the airport to the extent that there would be excessive noise. You can't now say that those people who bought houses should have known. How could they know? TDC didn't. The whole problem has arisen because TDC tried to avoid the planning process when privatising the airport. If the new owners had been required to apply for planning permission there would have been a requirement for the nature and scale of the airport to be specified and there would have been a legal requirement to estimate the noise levels. Right now, everyone is arguing about Riveroaks plans but nobody has any data. The pro-airport campaigners claim that it won't be noisy, but they have no data to support their claims.

      Delete
    31. The Walmer Castle, Adelaide Gardens, now a private house. Plus one other, still open in Pegwell, rhymes with Hilton Tavern.

      Delete
    32. Does it matter how far you can trace your family back? NO
      The very fact is Birchington is where you live and I live in Ramsgate I would never argue with you about a issue that you faced locally I may have an opinion but I don't live there so it does not really matter to me.

      Delete
    33. Purple Om,

      You go on about Council Tax even though you do not pay it.

      Delete
    34. 6:40 I do pay council tax on a 4 bed house. Who are you to say I don't? Stop making assumptions about me.

      Delete
    35. Yes Nethercourt was built when Manston was a RAF base... and Ramsgate had it's own passenger airport which was even closer!

      Delete
    36. And both airports were closed!

      Delete
    37. Ramsgate was closed because of the immense damage (with loss of lives) that it received in bombing raids during WW2, fortunately Manston survived eh?

      Delete
    38. And now Manston is closed eh?

      Delete
    39. Sorry anon Ramsgate airport on the Pysons was finally closed in 1968

      Delete
  29. Does anyone know if business has improved in Ramsgate during the summer? There's been no flights, and there's new attractions (tunnels, steps), so I'm curious if these have made any difference.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I sell ice cream in ramsgate and I can confirm that sales are indeed down over last year.

      Interesting to see the latest blog post by Ian Driver where he claims that Labour don't really support the cpo but won't publicly admit it as they feel they'd lose votes.

      Delete
  30. 12:54, I personally haven't noticed any difference either way, though as I only visit Ramsgate occassionally I suspect Michael, Barry and Purple could tell you more. Of course it's too early for investors to make any significant changes, but pretty much every visitor and potential visitor must be aware that Manston has closed. So I expected to see some difference this summer if daytime flights really puts people off from visiting Ramsgate.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 6;25
    As I have said the main reason for Ramsgate having a problem is the lack of investment. Things wont change until the airport is closed for good, then investors will come and invest. Only after that has happened will Ramsgate see a good return in tourist numbers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But you said in earlier posts that money was already flooding in since it had shut? Until you started back attacking the airport on this post, I almost found myself agreeing with some of what you were saying for once. It was pretty scary!

      Delete
  32. Actually, Ramsgate is doing rather well. I think the key to its success is that the council has been focussed on Margate, which has had lots of money spent on it but continues to decline. The last thing we need is for TDC to get involved with their crackpot ideas of how to improve our town. For a start, they need to stop trying to reopen the airport. It didn't make a blind bit of difference to the employment figures when it shut and the town is a far more pleasant place now it's gone.

    ReplyDelete
  33. If it's such a pleasant place now, then why are Ramsgate visitor figures down for this summer when the "declining" Margate had more visitors than any summer over the past decade?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Craig Mackinlay just tweeted:

    ‏@cmackinlay 1m

    @SaveManston #supportmanston Great news Grant Shapps MP is coming to Manston after my briefings to him that govt should take up the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Riveroak say they have £20million to spend on the airport, everyone is excited..... £20million probably isn't anywhere near enough to buy the land alone !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Read or listen to it properly - he said to 'recapitalise'

      Delete
    2. strange words don't you have to have the money to buy it 1st before you recapitalise something?

      Delete
    3. Thanks for plugging today's meeting Barry, we all appreciate it. Did you manage to come along? Might have missed you in the crowd.

      Delete
  36. Grant Shapps MP is due at Manston at 1:30 pm tomorrow, so please all supporters show up if you can and give him a warm welcome! Also can everyone spread the word? Barry, perhaps you can mention it on your FORS page?

    THANK YOU!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No doubt the campaigners will be hoping their megaphone man in the hat will be there, shouting the inventions and half-truths he has been using to cajole the ignorant into signing his worthless petition. Please Mr Shapps, look at the facts and don't encourage Thanet Council to pursue its CPO land grab.

      Delete
    2. Anon 9:02,

      I am sure that Mr Grant Shapps will be hanging on your every word.

      Delete
    3. Good to see you back John with your informative and entertaining comments.

      Delete
  37. Additionally Riveroak are meeting TDC today, so lots of positive news!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Will Mr Shapps drop it like every other politician including Gale?

    Useful to know Craig supports Manston that's my vote lost unless the accountant carpet bagger can explain why....

    ReplyDelete
  39. Worrying River oak are wasting taxpayers civil servants time for such a flimsy business plan.
    .. Iris will be keen to release the minutes though?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you know all about a confidential business plan then? You must be an anon Councillor?

      Delete
  40. We're still waiting for the minutes of her meeting with Ann Gloag!

    ReplyDelete
  41. Looks like the government are giving official backing to the Manston CPO process, and Manston will very likely be a fully functioning cargo airport by 2016. Excellent news for Thanet.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Word has it that Ian Driver has made another U-Turn today, therefore supporting the Tories! Only in Thanet...

    ReplyDelete
  43. Is this true 11:44? He was certainly conspicuous by his silence yesterday, neither posting on twitter or publishing comments on his blog.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Manston is a dead duck full stop. The government has said before, and now it is no different, they will give what help they can BUT they will not be using any public funds nor will they be using policy to encourage new business to the airport. What help can they provide????
    The major thing making Manston a dead duck is the price RiverOak think that they can purchase the site using a CPO for £20m or less this is just unbelievable all airports are classified as brownfield sites, so the land will be worth £100s of millions. TDC need a partner with all the money up front to go to court and show a judge that they have the financial means to carry out their obligations.


    Michael it would be good if you can give us your thoughts on the price of the Manston site

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone's obviously wasting their time consulting industry experts and lawyers, they should've just asked you instead!

      Delete
    2. Yes, obviously a expert on everything, with the exception of: CPOs; the part Government plays in them and re-opening airports; what figures RiverOak are anticipating for the purchase (not the figure they quoted for re-capitalisation); and the valuation of brownfield sites. Oh, pretty spot on with Pleasurama too.

      Delete
  45. What happened with the manston auction is anything left

    ReplyDelete
  46. Riveroak bought most of it.

    ReplyDelete

Please note comments that may be libellous, comments that may be construed as offensive, anonymous derogatory comments about real people, comments baiting internet trolls, comments saying that an anonymous comment was made by a named real person, boring comments and spam comments, comments in CAPs will be deleted. Playground stuff like calling real people by their time stamp or surname alone, referring to groups as gangs, old duffers and so on will result in deletion. Comment that may be construed as offensive to minority groups is not allowed here either, so think before you write it, remember that the internet is a public place, that it is very difficult to be truly anonymous and that everyone who uses it leaves a trail of some sort. Also note the facility to leave anonymous comment will be turned of during periods when I am unable to monitor comment, this will not affect people commenting who are signed on to their blogger accounts. When things are particularly difficult on the commercial spam front I may turn comment moderation on for periods.

If you feel that someone has left a comment that is offensive and directed at you personally please email me (link on the sidebar) asking to have it removed, you will need to tell which post and the date and timestamp of the offending comment. Please do not reply to the offending comment as I will assume you continuing the dialogue as meaning that you want the comments left there.