Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:26 am  

My Uncle Harry wrote:

All fair points, and there's no doubt at all that all parties are at fault.

What I would say is that one individual that's accumulated a large wealth by his own endeavors has the freedom to behave that way, someone elected to represent the people of Hull (not dictate to) should show respect. They should also not act unilaterally and put investors off before the true authorities have had the opportunity to negotiate. It hasn't been a Council decision as such, more the attitude of one individual seems to have lost the City potential investors at a time when finances are tight.

You keep baging on about one individual councillor taking unilateral action to prevent Allam's (pipe) dream ever growing wings. This is despite the fact that the only man who has publicly stated the situation is closed, is Allam himself. The councillors (see the use of the plural there), involved in the meeting have publicly stated that the door is still open to a SENSIBLE proposal.

I also find your assertion that because Allam has a few bob, Hull CC should be in thrall to the man, is crass in the extreme. Councillors are elected by the voting public, they have a legal duty to husband the council's wealth and assets in a proper manner. I have seen nothing in this case that suggests otherwise.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:48 am  

cod'ead wrote:

You keep baging on about one individual councillor taking unilateral action to prevent Allam's (pipe) dream ever growing wings. This is despite the fact that the only man who has publicly stated the situation is closed, is Allam himself. The councillors (see the use of the plural there), involved in the meeting have publicly stated that the door is still open to a SENSIBLE proposal.

I also find your assertion that because Allam has a few bob, Hull CC should be in thrall to the man, is crass in the extreme. Councillors are elected by the voting public, they have a legal duty to husband the council's wealth and assets in a proper manner. I have seen nothing in this case that suggests otherwise.

If you think deterring investors is good finance and democratic, there's little point discussing it with you. I've not said we should be in thrall to Mr Allam due to his wealth or for any other reason. To suggest it is the crass statement and another reason I tend to pay little credence to your posts.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:54 am  

My Uncle Harry wrote:

If you think deterring investors is good finance and democratic, there's little point discussing it with you. I've not said we should be in thrall to Mr Allam due to his wealth or for any other reason. To suggest it is the crass statement and another reason I tend to pay little credence to your posts.

right, answer me this,

a man walks into your home and says "give me your car, for free, in return I will get a loan against it and buy a trailer, you wont own the trailer, but you can pay me to borrow it, but you'll also have to find yourself a car to tow it, as your car will belong to me, and by the way, your daughter can remain using it because I know you agreed to let her, but I might change my mind on a whim if she doesn't so as I say, or maybe just increase the cost"

how the f'k is he an INVESTOR?

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:55 am  

Standee wrote:

right, answer me this,

a man walks into your home and says "give me your car, for free, in return I will get a loan against it and buy a trailer, you wont own the trailer, but you can pay me to borrow it, but you'll also have to find yourself a car to tow it, as your car will belong to me, and by the way, your daughter can remain using it because I know you agreed to let her, but I might change my mind on a whim if she doesn't so as I say, or maybe just increase the cost"

how the f'k is he an INVESTOR?

And round we go again.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:34 am  

My Uncle Harry wrote:

And round we go again.

To be honest, you've not shown why he's wrong. Put us out of our misery and tell us why.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:52 am  

Chris28 wrote:

To be honest, you've not shown why he's wrong. Put us out of our misery and tell us why.

he can't Chris, because he's a fool.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 10:54 am  

Chris28 wrote:

To be honest, you've not shown why he's wrong. Put us out of our misery and tell us why.

Apart from it being a nonsense of a hypothetical scenario?

Someone suggests they want your friend to be involved on a £150 million development. You have some responsibility to making sure your friends finances are well cared for and have free access to good legal, marketing and financial advice should you bother asking for it.

They suggest your friend would need to contribute something to buy his share. One option involves a building he inherited from his gran. It cost nothing, is unlikely to ever grown in value and is going to need a huge chunk spent on it very soon. They assign a value to it of at least twice its market value and the overall investment will benefit him financially and please his neighbours, as well as encouraging others to invest in his area.

Would you say, 'go away you idiot he like his grans place' and then misrepresent the offer to anyone that will listen without asking your friend, suggesting that, despite the assurances of the trusted agent who says it's nonsense, one of the tenants will be evicted or would you mention it to your friend, suggesting he asks people with experience in these things for advice and to see if their are alternative ways of brokering the deal?

If you were the property owner, would you thank your trusted friend for chasing off these potential investors before you'd seen the options and damaging the relationships with future investors before they've even cropped up?

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:00 am  

My Uncle Harry wrote:

Apart from it being a nonsense of a hypothetical scenario?

Someone suggests they want your friend to be involved on a £150 million development. You have some responsibility to making sure your friends finances are well cared for and have free access to good legal, marketing and financial advice should you bother asking for it.

They suggest your friend would need to contribute something to buy his share. One option involves a building he inherited from his gran. It cost nothing, is unlikely to ever grown in value and is going to need a huge chunk spent on it very soon. They assign a value to it of at least twice its market value and the overall investment will benefit him financially and please his neighbours, as well as encouraging others to invest in his area.

Would you say, 'go away you idiot he like his grans place' and then misrepresent the offer to anyone that will listen without asking your friend, suggesting that, despite the assurances of the trusted agent who says it's nonsense, one of the tenants will be evicted or would you mention it to your friend, suggesting he asks people with experience in these things for advice and to see if their are alternative ways of brokering the deal?

If you were the property owner, would you thank your trusted friend for chasing off these potential investors before you'd seen the options and damaging the relationships with future investors before they've even cropped up?

still no way it's an investment, there is no return for the original owner of his grans house, keep trying.

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:06 am  

Standee wrote:

still no way it's an investment, there is no return for the original owner of his grans house, keep trying.

You seem to be stuck in one small minded loop. There are ways of generating a return, although a Council's roll is to provide cost effective services, not make a profit.


What you keep missing is that discussions could open up other options and scenarios that your peculiar scenario just doesn't have. If these discussions find no suitable agreement, then fine, we move on. But to not have these discussions is foolish and reckless.

[Kosh]

Re: O/T - Allam the terrible ! : Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:10 am  

My Uncle Harry wrote:

What you keep missing is that discussions could open up other options and scenarios that your peculiar scenario just doesn't have. If these discussions find no suitable agreement, then fine, we move on. But to not have these discussions is foolish and reckless.

And once again, in the vain hope that it might sink in with you, the Council are still open to discussions. It's Allam that's taken his ball home in a sulky fit.