Jump to content

Pinewood...more Govt Propaganda


Recommended Posts

I wasn't talking about which company invested in films, but the fact that it shouldn't be being gambled on the film industry in the first place.

 

Instead e.g. £25M to kick of the construction industry, starting a 1000 house build programme, with another, say, £10M for training/retraining, £15million being put into infrastructure to be able to house at least one or two major employers (>500 staff) e-gaming most likely at moment.

 

That's real jobs, and proper investment. And the money would be returned to the coffers over time in terms of Tax, NIC, and not spent on benefits.

 

Let me state my point more simply: This is redirected reserve funds. Those reserve funds weren't invested in local companies or infrastructure. Why should they be now (in the context of an argument about filums).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

We are so fortunate on the Isle of Man having a Government that is brave enough, even heroically courageous, to take risks with the public’s money in the way it has, and does. We are especially fortun

4. KEY ISSUES OF CONCERN (1): GOVERNANCE ISSUES TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY “4.2 When, in 2007, the arrangements with CinemaNX were being set up, no consideration appears to have been given t

IoMG took a punt. A desperate, £50M punt. They didn't have a mandate to do it. They've lost @ 2/3rds of the stake.   Tales of unquantifiable benefits and making £2.5M back are just trying to bury th

Posted Images

Slim - I don't subscribe to the government is shit argument in all cases. I'm questioning what you said. The fund was managed from here for over 10 year, and apparently they still employ those people who managed it here as advisers so why the new manager can't have an office here confuses me. Why should the Manx tax payer pay to employ someone who pays UK tax and UK NI is my argument when they are managing Manx assets on behalf of the Manx taxpayer. That's exactly the same logic Treasury use for mandates on all the other reserve funds: they won't give a tender if there is no Manx subsidiary and no Manx investment license. As I said I suspect that because of whatever tax structure they have set up the MDF fund as to get UK grants and UK tax breaks they can't do that here. It does look odd when we say in the press that our film industry is so great but yet can't get anyone with the right expertise to manage it from here.

 

I don't see how this one or two staff locally vs employing Pinewood makes a difference. It's a minimal loss vs the gain of a whole specialised company vs a little office of dabblers. I'm not sure about much of this deal, but I think if you are committed to investing in films, Pinewood as a manager is a sound horse to back vs Cinemanx.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wasn't talking about which company invested in films, but the fact that it shouldn't be being gambled on the film industry in the first place.

 

Instead e.g. £25M to kick of the construction industry, starting a 1000 house build programme, with another, say, £10M for training/retraining, £15million being put into infrastructure to be able to house at least one or two major employers (>500 staff) e-gaming most likely at moment.

 

That's real jobs, and proper investment. And the money would be returned to the coffers over time in terms of Tax, NIC, and not spent on benefits.

 

Let me state my point more simply: This is redirected reserve funds. Those reserve funds weren't invested in local companies or infrastructure. Why should they be now (in the context of an argument about filums).

Because we have to think about the condition of our economy and how it, and what it can provide for IOM residents, will be substantially changing over the next ten years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because we have to think about the condition of our economy and how it, and what it can provide for IOM residents, will be substantially changing over the next ten years.

 

But why's that appropriate for this topic? I could understand if you were saying something like 10% of reserves should be spent on economic development, but to object specifically to the Pinewood thing seems odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm not sure about much of this deal, but I think if you are committed to investing in films, Pinewood as a manager is a sound horse to back vs Cinemanx".

 

I hate to burst your balloon but Pinewood Film Advisors is but Cinemanx in a new coat, with same people from Cinemanx now in Pinewood in control of the MDF and with the same old schtick too. May I suggest that you take a little time to inform yourself on the facts?

 

Pinewood has at best a remote history of investing in film, in fact up to very recently it has no history of film investment for over fifty years!

 

Yes it makes much of the block-buster projects that have been filmed in the Pinewood studios, but do remember that the producers of those projects only rented space, they do not share the profits of those projects with Pinewood Shepperton Plc.

 

If you hold the opinion that Cinemanx was a failure as a means of generating a return on investment for the taxpayers of the Isle of Man, then I rather think you have little hope of Pinewood doing any better with the Media Development Fund.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Because we have to think about the condition of our economy and how it, and what it can provide for IOM residents, will be substantially changing over the next ten years.

 

But why's that appropriate for this topic? I could understand if you were saying something like 10% of reserves should be spent on economic development, but to object specifically to the Pinewood thing seems odd.

Because it should be that particular chunk of money invested here, and not in some gamble that hasn't even been put through due dilligence properly, which is all run by a bunch of people who previously made a small fortune from the previous large fortune we started them off with. Particularly when severe cuts are now in place here, unemployment and benefit costs are rising, and few new local jobs are being created.

 

How hard is that to understand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Newsnight, I think I'm up on the facts thanks.

 

 

How hard is that to understand?

 

Quite hard, as you don't have the same sentiment for the bulk remainder of the reserves. Do you know who's managing them, what their track record is? What the performance has been like?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Newsnight, I think I'm up on the facts thanks.

 

 

How hard is that to understand?

 

Quite hard, as you don't have the same sentiment for the bulk remainder of the reserves. Do you know who's managing them, what their track record is? What the performance has been like?

I do have some concerns. But generally those monies are with professionally managed and regulated firms. They are also professionally audited regularly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you own ~10% of Pinewood the place to be is Pinewood.

 

Isn't Steve Christian now an executive director of Pinewood?

 

They would have probably appointed Buster Lewin on a nice fat salary if we had requested. After all we were taking a load of shares off there hands at a price they could almost certainly not have off loaded on the the open market at anywhere near that price. We have given the current catalogue to manage for which they will earn/take a fee and a wedge load of cash which if they decide to "invest" in a film they will probably get nice fat producers fees on, studio, facility hire etc Taking Mr Christain may knock a bit off the profit on the deal but I expect they are still well up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

since the end of Feb 2013 through to Wednesday 17 April the mid-market share price was pretty much flat at 274p -

 

then by Tuesday 23 April it had risen to 280p

 

the following Monday 29th April there was a Stock Exchange announcement

http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=PWS&ArticleCode=sz1bciiu&ArticleHeadline=US_Joint_Venture_Agreement_and_Trading_Update

 

the price has since come off and is now 277.5

 

why would it have risen like that just before an announcement and since then fallen back?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh oh....from the Guardian ermm.gif

Pinewood studios, the official home of the 007 films, requires major injection of funds to keep UK film industry afloat


The James Bond film franchise could be forced to move its base from the UK after more than 50 years, unless the greenlight is given for a dramatic increase in studio facilities in the space-starved movie industry, the head of Pinewood Shepperton has warned.

Pinewood Studios is the official home of the 007 spy franchise – of the 23 Bond films shot since Dr No debuted in 1962 only Moonraker and License to Kill have not been based there – and enjoys a close association with the Broccoli family that produces the films.

The 100-acre site in south Buckinghamshire is littered with reminders including the famous 007 stage, the location of the M16 bunker and tube disaster scene in Skyfall, a Goldfinger Avenue and a road named after late Bond producer Cubby Broccoli.

On Wednesday Pinewood will be told by the South Buckinghamshire District Council whether it has been granted planning permission for the £200m development of 100 acres of greenbelt land it owns.

The company said that the development, which would double the size of the complex over the next 10 years, is necessary if the UK film industry is to continue to compete with Hollywood and emerging markets as the base for blockbuster films and major TV productions.

"We're at capacity, the UK is at capacity, something has to give," said Ivan Dunleavy, chief executive of Pinewood. "If we as a sector don't respond to the growing demand then someone else will. [The producers of the Bond films] have to be financially responsible. If they get a better proposal elsewhere than the UK can mount then they have to look after their business as well."

Dunleavy added that with the UK government introducing tax relief for high-end TV productions – Pinewood is the third largest provider of facilities for television shows in the country – saying no to expansion is not an option.

"The kind of TV they are talking about is Band of Brothers and Game of Thrones and those are made in an almost identical way to a feature film," he said. "In that sense it is another reason why the UK needs to think quite a lot about capacity, both in terms of physical infrastructure and skills."

Sam Mendes, the director of Skyfall, warned that the strong bond between the studio and the film franchise cannot be taken for granted.

"Pinewood is the spiritual home of James Bond and the two franchises have enjoyed a long-standing relationship," he said. "Tradition, however, is not enough on its own. I am convinced of the need for Pinewood to keep on expanding to offer filmmakers the best facilities possible."

Dunleavy has faced years of resistance in attempting to push through plans for the ambitious, and controversial, expansion.

The original plan submitted in 2006 proposed creating 16 streetscapes – including a permanent Venice canal, Parisian square and brownstone New York apartments - accompanied by a residential development of up to 1,400 apartments and houses.

The housing element sparked huge local resistance, spawning a Stop Project Pinewood campaigning group. Communities minister Eric Pickles eventually blocked the original plan last January.

"What we failed to convince people about was the idea that [the streetscapes] should be linked with residential," Dunleavy said. "There is no residential in the new application. In that sense I think it is conceptually easier to understand. We hope the local planners will see our arguments."

He highlighted financial incentives including 3,000 new jobs ("that means quite a lot in today's economy") and a predicted £150m-a-year boost to the UK economy.

Dunleavy's plan, which has cost the company almost £8m from 2006 to mid-2011 without a spade breaking earth, involves developing greenbelt land and he has launched a charm offensive to win over local opposition.

"We took a long time to have consultations with local parties that are interested and take on board their views," he said. "Our argument is about creating jobs and capacity for an industry that wants to grow and hasn't got the ability to grow at the moment. The fact you can build on green belt with permission is lost in the nuance of [the opposition] argument."

South Buckinghamshire District Council is understood to have received more than 450 letters about the submission, with significantly more in support and fewer objecting than last time.

On Wednesday the council will deliver its verdict with three possible outcomes. It can greenlight the planning application, vote against it, or decide that it needs to be ruled on at a national government level.

There is already significant opposition in Buckinghamshire to the proposed HS2 high-speed train route, which would pass to the north of the Pinewood studios site and cut a swath through greenbelt land in the Chilterns.

Pinewood is in the constituency of Dominic Grieve, the Conservative MP for Beaconsfield and the attorney-general.

Edited by Sentience
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...