Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
ans

Sports Direct IOM

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, notwell said:

Not really.  

Neil Down asked why units were closed if footfall was good.

I've answered.  Rents and service charge were very high. Driven by the debt position of the owner.  Businesses have been successful in there and it has been busy.  Had the rents and service charges been 30% lower more businesses would have done well in there as several other's did over twenty years.

In the end it's a vicious circle.  Footfall has to drop if units empty increase.  That place will be very busy with footfall once again when SD etc opens.

Previous owner to SD was cash buyer, no debt. Another nottie fake fact.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Footfall arguments aside, I'm not so sure that Ashley (or his advisors if he's too pissed) haven't pulled a blinder here, timing-wise.

"Killing to be made. Island-full of newly and increasingly skint chavs require new outlet for trackies".

Look at Dealz. It's the way much of the Island's economy is going?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, notwell said:

We could also have a common sense day where those who've lived here a little while use their common sense about what has been in the Strand over the years and who has been successful.

Give Ashley a shout about the footfall.  

Does that additional bit of baseless mumbo jumbo in anyway detract from the fact that you dont seem to have a clue what you're talking about? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Previous owner to SD was cash buyer, no debt. Another nottie fake fact.

Who bought it out of administration that went under with debt John as you know. Another fake fact eh? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

Footfall arguments aside, I'm not so sure that Ashley (or his advisors if he's too pissed) haven't pulled a blinder here, timing-wise.

"Killing to be made. Island-full of newly and increasingly skint chavs require new outlet for trackies".

Look at Dealz. It's the way much of the Island's economy is going?

It's the way all the UK economies are going or have gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Does that additional bit of baseless mumbo jumbo in anyway detract from the fact that you dont seem to have a clue what you're talking about? 

Lol. As LC would often say - I'm not falling for what you are doing:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, notwell said:

Lol. As LC would often say - I'm not falling for what you are doing:rolleyes:

What am I doing? And who is LC? To be honest I'm getting bored of reading your constant arguing that you are right and everyone else has to be wrong. Even John Wright has pulled you up twice now for lack of substance and still you bang on. I'm glad I'm going out later as I don't want to read the constant diatribe that will no doubt ensure for the next 6 hours until everyone else backs down and you can claim some sort of weird victory by wearing them all down. The footfall isn't good and an independent report supports that. The last owner bought the place for cash so had no debt. The owner before that went bust. John has pointed both out to you and he is perfectly correct. Can't you both just agree to disagree? 

Edited by thesultanofsheight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thesultanofsheight said:

What am I doing? To be honest I'm getting bored of reading your constant arguing that you are right and everyone else has to be wrong. Even John's Wright has pulled you up on it twice and still you bang on. I'm glad I'm going out later as I don't want to read the constant diatribe that will no doubt ensure for the next 6 hours until everyone else backs down and you can claim some sort of weird victory by wearing them all down. The footfall isn't good and an independent report supports that. The last owner bought the place for cash so had no debt. John has pointed both out to you and he is perfectly correct. Can't you both just agree to disagree? 

Given that JW did some legal work in relation to the place, I'm inclined to agree with his comments. So far Nottie you have not explained anything fully

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what you are doing .....

The Strand went bust and into administration.   The guy who bought it for cash bought the residue of that business. I.e the existing tenants and failed empty units that were empty because of the rent and service costs of the PREVIOUS debt laden owners.

As I said, go and tell Mike Ashley there's no footfall there and that's the way it's always been. You know,  because it has and all that. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever. It must feel great to constantly be right about everything despite presenting nothing of substance at all to prove it. As I said I'm bored and can't even be bothered trying as John's Wright has set out his case very clearly (as you would expect from a lawyer). This is clearly just going to be another 15 pages of you persistently slagging off anyone who doesn't agree with you until they log off. 

Edited by thesultanofsheight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

Given that JW did some legal work in relation to the place, I'm inclined to agree with his comments. So far Nottie you have not explained anything fully

Yes I have Neil. Read what I've said.

John conveniently tried to intimate that the Strand shopping centre was debt free.  It was of course but he knows that the seller to SD bought the Strand off the receivers as it went under due to debt. 

It was that debt service cost that stopped any reasonable sort of rent levels and service charges. Which ultimately led to the downfall.  

The original comment from you was around how could it fail if the footfall was decent . I've explained. There's not much I can do to help you of you are not interested in seeing how things actually were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, thesultanofsheight said:

Whatever. It must feel great to constantly be right about everything despite presenting nothing of substance at all to prove it. As I said I'm bored and can't even be bothered trying as John's Wright has set out his case very clearly (as you would expect from a lawyer) 

Or the alternative is you simply don't want to acknowledge it simply isn't clear cut around there being a shit footfall.   You've provided no explanation as to how businesses traded successfully from there for over twenty years.

You'd simply rather focus on abusing me (which you're poor at too).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, notwell said:

Or the alternative is you simply don't want to acknowledge it simply isn't clear cut around there being a shit footfall.   You've provided no explanation as to how businesses traded successfully from there for over twenty years.

You'd simply rather focus on abusing me (which you're poor at too).

FFS man grow up. How is pointing out that you're wrong in anyway abusing you? 

I need a beer. Carry on. I couldn't give a rats ass to be honest.

Edited by thesultanofsheight

Share this post


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...