Cinema owner weighs options (From York Press)

"Former glory" - love it. When was that then?

He wasn't to know it but he really couldn’t have picked a worse time to buy, hope something is done soon. As for the alleyway at the side, I'm afraid people having using it "inappropriately" since time immemorial and pretty much comes as part of the lease…!

Been to the Odeon hundreds of times over the years and until looking at the picture here, never actually realised what an ugly building it is.

Why should the council have to spend tax payers money on removing graffiti from this building?

Mr. Suri has just found out what those of us who worked in the cinema business (which I did for just under 10 years) already knew: that although those 1930s picture palaces look pretty impressive, most of them were thrown together in a hurry at the height of the cinema boom from 1931-38, are very high maintenance buildings and cost a hell of a lot to keep warm and safe. Recent H & S legislation and the DDA will have pushed that cost up even further relative to operating a new build cinema. And as if that wasn't enough, a 1,500 seat house that's been twinned or tripled is never going to be able to compete on sightlines, projection or sound quality with a purpose-built auditorium.

He wasn't to know it but he really couldn’t have picked a worse time to buy...

Actually the cinema traditionally tends to do quite well in a recession. It's the same syndrome as people abandoning Waitrose and M & S and heading off to Aldi and Lidl - you get customers downsizing from a meal out or the theatre. I worked in a south London Odeon from 1990-92 (the trough years of the last bust) and the manager never stopped remarking that he'd never known the box office to be taking so much. Though of course that was before the DVD, home cinema and other forms of electronic entertainment. In the same way that pubs are losing trade to home drinking, I guess the cinemas could be more vulnerable this time round.

Guy Fawkes wrote:
Mr. Suri has just found out what those of us who worked in the cinema business (which I did for just under 10 years) already knew: that although those 1930s picture palaces look pretty impressive, most of them were thrown together in a hurry at the height of the cinema boom from 1931-38, are very high maintenance buildings and cost a hell of a lot to keep warm and safe. Recent H & S legislation and the DDA will have pushed that cost up even further relative to operating a new build cinema. And as if that wasn't enough, a 1,500 seat house that's been twinned or tripled is never going to be able to compete on sightlines, projection or sound quality with a purpose-built auditorium.

He wasn't to know it but he really couldn’t have picked a worse time to buy...

Actually the cinema traditionally tends to do quite well in a recession. It's the same syndrome as people abandoning Waitrose and M & S and heading off to Aldi and Lidl - you get customers downsizing from a meal out or the theatre. I worked in a south London Odeon from 1990-92 (the trough years of the last bust) and the manager never stopped remarking that he'd never known the box office to be taking so much. Though of course that was before the DVD, home cinema and other forms of electronic entertainment. In the same way that pubs are losing trade to home drinking, I guess the cinemas could be more vulnerable this time round.

Interesting stuff - thanks for taking time to post this.

squat it!!!!

If it does re-open, I hope they do something about those dreadful seats. You can't help but slope down your seat until your knees fix into the delve between the arched backs of the seats in front. So you can't move your legs..at all. I tell you, after 3 hours of return-of-the-king I could barely get to the top of the stairs to exit the place.

maybe they could pour some bleach down the side alley. At the moment the stench of p*ss is almost as bad as York public toilets.

Thanks Jassy

I was wondering where to go when caught short in York. "Official" loos are even less inviting

Somehow I just can't imagine this place ever opening up as a cinema again.

Coun Sandy Fraser said graffiti vandals had again targeted the former picturehouse, and he would be asking the council to take steps to remove the graffiti.
Ok none of you seem to have picked up this fact, the council removes graffiti, but to do so costs money, they have stated any public property they will remove out of their own budgets. This is a business owned property, which should be that business's responsibility to remove the graffiti. So our tax money is being spent on a company that is too lazy to look after it's own property. I'm sorry but this sets a precedent that the council should then remove all business owned properties graffiti free of charge. Yet they do charge us if it is on our own homes. Now I don't know about the rest of you but I'd be ecstatic if my house got graffiti removed from it for free out of my council taxes but not if a company that could afford to buy a cinema, had it removed for free whilst I had to pay. Seriously this councillor has gotten his priorities on backwards. Businesses earn money, houses are for us to live in. Let a business lose a few quid on getting rid of the crap and for us residents have free graffiti removal. The man's has his priorities on backward he should be asking the council to remove it from people's houses in that area not a lazy business. Thank god I don't live in that ward I can't see how anyone in that area voted for someone who put money before people in a public service position.

Silver wrote:
Coun Sandy Fraser said graffiti vandals had again targeted the former picturehouse, and he would be asking the council to take steps to remove the graffiti. Ok none of you seem to have picked up this fact, the council removes graffiti, but to do so costs money, they have stated any public property they will remove out of their own budgets. This is a business owned property, which should be that business's responsibility to remove the graffiti. So our tax money is being spent on a company that is too lazy to look after it's own property. I'm sorry but this sets a precedent that the council should then remove all business owned properties graffiti free of charge. Yet they do charge us if it is on our own homes. Now I don't know about the rest of you but I'd be ecstatic if my house got graffiti removed from it for free out of my council taxes but not if a company that could afford to buy a cinema, had it removed for free whilst I had to pay. Seriously this councillor has gotten his priorities on backwards. Businesses earn money, houses are for us to live in. Let a business lose a few quid on getting rid of the crap and for us residents have free graffiti removal. The man's has his priorities on backward he should be asking the council to remove it from people's houses in that area not a lazy business. Thank god I don't live in that ward I can't see how anyone in that area voted for someone who put money before people in a public service position.

You missed one other thing and that is there is business rate relief payable while the building is empty so it cost the Council Tax payer any way