Jonti
what the dormouse said
Oh, very much in favour thanks. Except, of course, with the wrong sort
There's no especial link with Brixton BID
Pop Brixton (formerly Grow Brixton) Pope's Road development
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
There's no especial link with Brixton BID
aka
Brixton Hill
Teutcher's so old he uses an actual telegraph, daily.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Just to expand on this, in Brixton all payers of commercial rates are automatically members of the Brixton BID, by way of a levy on the business rates they pay. The BMTF CIC doesn't have any commercial property, but has been made a member anyway, to represent street traders. Stuart the Watchman is a member of both boards.
editor
hiraethified
An interesting snippet about the business interests of theoffshore-registered Kricket who were given space at Pop Brixton. You know, the place for local start ups.
editor
hiraethified
And here's the multi-million pound property empire bloke behind The Collective. Spawned from a super rich background and educated at the Merchant Taylors private school, he's currently looking to “assess investor appetite and prove out the strength of the investment market for this emerging asset class”.
Previous connections with Brixton = zero.
The Fabulous Life Of Reza Merchant - CEO at The Collective – DealMakerz
Previous connections with Brixton = zero.
The Fabulous Life Of Reza Merchant - CEO at The Collective – DealMakerz
aka
Brixton Hill
On the flip side, the council have invested (risked) fuck all - bar reputation, opportunity cost of not using the space for other stuff etc. I reckon someone is going to take a bath on this project, and there will be much hand wringing and bullshit negotiations come 2020 as the investors try to get some cash back out.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I'm not making allegations, but it seems very odd to me they can' t make money when they got the land basically free. One wonders if a company in a profit-sharing deal where they didn't want to share profits might make a successful company look loss-making using sub-contracting and accounting methods.
editor
hiraethified
Quite how they managed to blow nearly TWO MILLION quid setting up a pile of tatty old containers on free land is something worth looking closer at. It was miles over their original estimate, so what happened? Incompetence? Dodginess?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I don't know, but it seems to me it would be very easy, for instance, for the director of the company to contract out the design and development process to a company owned by, say, their partner, which then massively overcharges. As far as I know there's nothing even illegal about that sort of thing - though happy to be corrected if others know differently.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
A fair number of Capitalist business go on for years at a loss. So Turner isn't that exceptional. Capitalism isn't about morality. My argument is with the New Labour/ Progress Council.
These New Labour types have very naïve view of Capitalism. They really believed that Turner would fall over himself to give Lambeth Council a whacking great profit share. It's not how it works.
The main fault is the Council who ideologically believe enterprise ( and Nu Labour share this with Thatcherites) is a good thing in itself.
Pop is example of how they see the "enabling" Coop Council. Enabling Turner to end up with Peckham levels. His business solid base due to the active support of Council.
Contrast this with the group of volunteers trying to re open Grove Adventure Playground. Volunteers who won't be remunerated. Much Council officer dragging of feet.
editor
hiraethified
They do, but not many are gifted a large chunk of juicy prime land for fuck all with the supposed strict understanding that it was only going to be around for a few years. So the cloth should have been cut accordingly. Blowing nearly £2m on a temporary site and then paying themselves millions in admin costs is unforgivable.
They've taken us all for mugs and there should be an independent investigation into who's been trousering the lolly.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I was trying to look at the bigger picture.
On Pop. At recent meeting I attended local businessman asked what Pop paid for site. As he just assumed this temporary use was bringing in income for the Council. The officers looked at the floor so I had to explain that it was a profit share but Pop didn't make a profit. Businessman looked incredulous that Council had done a deal like that.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
On another note. Council have decided to keep International House. ( The red brick building behind Rec) for five years whilst they work up plans for the land they own in central Brixton.
Council are going to look for a provider/ business to manage the building. Idea is for affordable workspace.
Ive heard that Meanwhile Space who also operate in LJ arches have expressed interest. I don't know if Turners outfit have.
Hopefully Council will learn from mistakes of Pop project.
Looking even further into future I am concerned about what will happen to this large Council owned site in future.
Its Pop site, International House, Brixton Rec and market traders car park off Brixton Station road.
Whilst Rec is Grade two listed this isn't total protection.
There is still danger Regen officers may look at whole site as a redevelopment opportunity.
Council are going to look for a provider/ business to manage the building. Idea is for affordable workspace.
Ive heard that Meanwhile Space who also operate in LJ arches have expressed interest. I don't know if Turners outfit have.
Hopefully Council will learn from mistakes of Pop project.
Looking even further into future I am concerned about what will happen to this large Council owned site in future.
Its Pop site, International House, Brixton Rec and market traders car park off Brixton Station road.
Whilst Rec is Grade two listed this isn't total protection.
There is still danger Regen officers may look at whole site as a redevelopment opportunity.
editor
hiraethified
One for Tricky Skills !
Tricky Skills
Well-Known Member
I assume pop is all about time softening up people so that most people forget that they’ve knocked down an ice rink and then sold the site to lexadon.
Alex
aka
Brixton Hill
Tesco (via the council) put (paid for) a temporary ice rink on a car park as a sop for the massive redevelopment in Streatham, whilst the ice rink in Streatham got re-built.
aka
Brixton Hill
Inexperience mostly. If you've not done a thing before, then there is a high % chance of fucking stuff up - which costs money.
Then the council should never have awarded them the contract or invited ruthless capitalists The Collective to get involved. Funnily enough, The Collective seem to be absolutely raking it in everywhere else...
No one knows they are inexperienced - it’s normally bitter experience which teaches you.
Alex
editor
hiraethified
Not sure why local taxpayers should be funding these risky ventures.
So the council should sell the land to experienced people like lexadon ?
The council has some land and needs money what should they do with it ?
Alex
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
Perhaps a preferential profits deal? The first - however much - of the profits go to Lambeth before management can draw
Anything down. They are getting the land for
free so a massive part of their start up risk is being covered by the council.
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
And an upfront agreed transparent procurement process for any payments over a certain level
But there aren’t any profits, because “management costs” ( aka Hollywood accounting ).
Alex
Last edited:
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
Sorry that should read an agree ./. Of takings are dispersed to the council as a priority before any ‘management costs’. Not an impossible model to manage
