The Mankover all action Thread.

The GT will need more money

“The actual cost of the build has gone up to around £1.4 million. All these monies are being funded by the Green Taverners and our investors.

“Through building and running this project ourselves, we think we are going to save around £300,000, which brings our overall cost down to £1.1m.

“Of that £1.1m, we have had £250,000 of non-investment pledges, which is monies and materials from local companies.

“Some we will have to pay back at the end of the project. Some we won’t have to pay back at all. We will see where we are in five or six years.

“That would leave us having to raise around £850,000 to see the project through.

“Those monies are paid back on a return of five per cent to our investors over a five, seven-year period.

“We have raised £600,000 of that so we are in a very good position.

“We have got another £250,000, maybe £300,000, still to raise but we made a conscious decision that until we were in the ground we wouldn’t take any other investment on.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So basically they will be paying £1000 a week net in interest alone without any capital paid back at all
They'll need to be open 7 days a week

who the fek will want to sit in a Ships container on a shitty Thursday afternoon jizzing over Sky Sports News ?

#SHITARTIST wrote:

who the fek will want to sit in a Ships container on a shitty Thursday afternoon jizzing over Sky Sports News ?

That costs money.

Maybe Freeview, or at a push Eurosport?

Maybe someone could create some bespoke Argyle content to show on the big screen?

harvetheslayer wrote:

So basically they will be paying £1000 a week net in interest alone without any capital paid back at all
They'll need to be open 7 days a week

By my rough estimations, at a five year payback they need to make roughly £3,400 a week just to break even, and at a seven year payback £2,451.

That's a lot of money considering after five years the GT's are left with nothing as the building becomes Argyles.

...and if there's so much money to be made why wouldn't Argyle just fund it themselves and have the GT's voluntarily staff it?

Something just doesn't add up...

Rickler wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

So basically they will be paying £1000 a week net in interest alone without any capital paid back at all
They'll need to be open 7 days a week

By my rough estimations, at a five year payback they need to make roughly £3,400 a week just to break even, and at a seven year payback £2,451.

That's a lot of money considering after five years the GT's are left with nothing as the building becomes Argyles.

...and if there's so much money to be made why wouldn't Argyle just fund it themselves and have the GT's voluntarily staff it?

Something just doesn't add up...

Theatre of schemes init

Lucky that Lord James did all in his power to "assist" the Teverners. Without his help only the Lord himself knows when the build might have started.

get the buckets a ratlling

So as it stands they’ve started a build but are currently hundreds of thousands of £££’s short in terms of being able to finish it?

Czarcasm wrote:

So as it stands they’ve started a build but are currently hundreds of thousands of £££’s short in terms of being able to finish it?

Yes and even more amusing and once again it goes against everything McGuire and Bungo said previously in that the shipping container simply doesnt have planning permission signed off yet
Even McGuire now acknowledges it. Supposed to be open a year after originally touted.

I'd be asking for any investors monies back promptly

Czarcasm wrote:

So as it stands they’ve started a build but are currently hundreds of thousands of £££’s short in terms of being able to finish it?

Hope the Trust haven't "invested" any more of their cash in the nonsense.

Rickler wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

So basically they will be paying £1000 a week net in interest alone without any capital paid back at all
They'll need to be open 7 days a week

...and if there's so much money to be made why wouldn't Argyle just fund it themselves and have the GT's voluntarily staff it?

Something just doesn't add up...

Bingo Rickler bingo...... this will crash and burn
God help the fella who put in £50,000

All going well according to the daily Rag July 19 completion date - looks great.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

With this GT thing running into millions, just how secure are these cash pledges? Never actually been to one of the shindigs but certainly seem to fill the place with wide eyed people, akin to a cult - all very strange up there in the park!!

Bandwagon wrote:

With this GT thing running into millions, just how secure are these cash pledges? Never actually been to one of the shindigs but certainly seem to fill the place with wide eyed people, akin to a cult - all very strange up there in the park!!

Yes one day a fortnight on average. They now need to be taking monies over the bar 7 days a week

McGuire wrote

"It’s important to say that we have got full planning consent up to DPC level, so we still have some bits and pieces to put forward to Plymouth City Council."

Is DPC meaning damp course level or something else ??

harvetheslayer wrote:

McGuire wrote

"It’s important to say that we have got full planning consent up to DPC level, so we still have some bits and pieces to put forward to Plymouth City Council."

Is DPC meaning damp course level or something else ??

Generally, damp proofing keeps moisture out of a building where vapor barriers keep interior moisture from getting into walls. ... A damp-proof course (DPC) is a barrier through the structure designed to prevent moisture rising by capillary action such as through a phenomenon known as rising damp

Tgwu wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

McGuire wrote

"It’s important to say that we have got full planning consent up to DPC level, so we still have some bits and pieces to put forward to Plymouth City Council."

Is DPC meaning damp course level or something else ??

Generally, damp proofing keeps moisture out of a building where vapor barriers keep interior moisture from getting into walls. ... A damp-proof course (DPC) is a barrier through the structure designed to prevent moisture rising by capillary action such as through a phenomenon known as rising damp

Yes so in fact foundations only and not a brick above ground level is authorised at the moment
What was that Bungo was shouting from the rooftops a month ago namely all systems go

Lying toad Jon Back..

harvetheslayer wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

McGuire wrote

"It’s important to say that we have got full planning consent up to DPC level, so we still have some bits and pieces to put forward to Plymouth City Council."

Is DPC meaning damp course level or something else ??

Generally, damp proofing keeps moisture out of a building where vapor barriers keep interior moisture from getting into walls. ... A damp-proof course (DPC) is a barrier through the structure designed to prevent moisture rising by capillary action such as through a phenomenon known as rising damp

Yes so in fact foundations only and not a brick above ground level is authorised at the moment
What was that Bungo was shouting from the rooftops a month ago namely all systems go

Lying toad Jon Back..

I thought the building was clad angle iron & tin, not so many bricks - get the point though, no full planning is very worrying especially for those who raided their rainy day funds. Nothing is ever simple up there!!

A building built up to DPC (damp proof course) is the groundwork and floor slab.

So if they have permission to DPC level but subsequently don't get permission above, does that mean we are left with something resembling a unearthed Roman ruins??

argyl3 wrote:

So if they have permission to DPC level but subsequently don't get permission above, does that mean we are left with something resembling a unearthed Roman ruins??

Earwegoagain wrote:

A building built up to DPC (damp proof course) is the groundwork and floor slab.

Ahh, I see - it's an open air bar!!