York owed thousands from wheel operator collapse (From York Press)

Not a Wheel of Fortune then.....!

If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it.

Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors.

It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal.

Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures.

These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

I can remember all those people who were saying the wheel was needed to boost tourism in the city...... I knew that the company running it would do a runner as soon as they had the cash.

Good job then that the Council backed away from allowing the Wheel to be sited on land that they owned at North Street and that they were forced to think again about allowing it to go behind the Art Gallery.

Both were barmy ideas.

Council Taxpayers could have been around £150,000 out of pocket, instead of £50,000.

Then there was the Councillor on the Planning committee last year who claimed that "the economic benefits would be very strong"!!!

Let's hear it for the bats at the Museum Gardens!

Basically you might as well have let a funfair set up and give them £150,000 on credit for ground rent, general supplies and electricity.

The whole thing smacks of the Grotto fiasco but seval times worse, the so called directors of these scams should be made accountable and if found to be paying themselves large salaries with no intention of paying suppliers should be charged with fraud.

York Council is owed £50k. They've ended up with nothing.

If the wheel hadn't have been situated there, the business rates for this plot of land would have been...nothing.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

mjr119 wrote:
York Council is owed £50k. They've ended up with nothing.

If the wheel hadn't have been situated there, the business rates for this plot of land would have been...nothing.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

You've missed an important point. The wheel WAS situated there and there can be no doubt the City of York Council spent a lot of money reaching such an agreement.

Our money. Which is presumably in the pockets of the profiteers.

I was all in favour of the wheel returning to York.

Certainly got that one wrong.

It was obvious from the start.
They were so persistent, they wouldn't let it lie, they didn't give up.
It was forced upon us.
We were assaulted, abused and violated.

Buzz Light-year wrote:
It was obvious from the start. They were so persistent, they wouldn't let it lie, they didn't give up. It was forced upon us. We were assaulted, abused and violated.

Well said Buzz - but lets not forget mugged!!

....................
..did anyone really expect any other outcome !...................
...........York is not London......

So The Royal York and CYC are owed £128K. The wheel is still there - why not keep it in lieu of debt?
I wonder how much a wheel fetches on the second-hand market?

Jim wrote:
So The Royal York and CYC are owed £128K. The wheel is still there - why not keep it in lieu of debt?
I wonder how much a wheel fetches on the second-hand market?

Because it has been sold to the "new" company run by the same directors by the old company. Scandalous, dishonest and unethical but perfectly legal.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:
If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant

Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

"The Royal York Hotel, which hosts the wheel in its grounds, is owed £77,727, City of York Council is owed £50,300 and Visit York is also owed £1,794 by Great City Attractions Global (GCAG).

A number of smaller York businesses are also owed between £280 and £600 after GCAG, which operated sightseeing wheels in Liverpool, Plymouth and York, collapsed"

In answer to your question YorkPatrol, read the above quote from the Press - it didn't specify the small businesses - it is a very safe assumption, however, that small or local businesses (which is what I said) in the other areas where these wheels were sited have also suffered losses.

Oh, and just in case you were going to try and be clever with my posting, the reference to owing millions also includes the monies owed to local Councils - I accept I could have been a little clearer in my "rant" earlier.

As a matter of interest, are you trying to look for a way to defend their business practices?

It's not often that I agree wholeheartedly with the comments of a certain gentleman in the bricklaying trade. However, the bare details available regarding the ownership saga of the "Wheel", tend to suggest that we may have what is referred to as a "Phoenix Company" or companies, scenario in this case.

HMRC, and other government agencies, are very interested in such companies.

Fat Harry wrote:
I was all in favour of the wheel returning to York.

Certainly got that one wrong.

Big up for admitting it. It would nice to have a database so we could see exactly what other people said.
BTW the Railfest in July lost £200,000.

Pete the Brickie wrote:

Jim wrote:
So The Royal York and CYC are owed £128K. The wheel is still there - why not keep it in lieu of debt?
I wonder how much a wheel fetches on the second-hand market?

Because it has been sold to the "new" company run by the same directors by the old company. Scandalous, dishonest and unethical but perfectly legal.

As a matter of interest surely the Royal York have to give access across their land to allow the public to use the wheel?
Would they be legally entitled to prevent access?

nearlyman wrote:
....................

..did anyone really expect any other outcome !...................

...........York is not London......

and thank ***k it isn't aswell.

I love Wheels, they taste like Chicken.

If I were the owner or one of the Royal York, I would refuse access to the public and directors and staff of the wheel. Pay door staff to police this.
Then put out to tender, “one wheel to dismantle and scrap offers please!”
I am sure enough money would be made to pay everyone that has been scammed.
Unfortunately our law protects these people, and in most cases walk away with wads of cash whilst the innocent suffer.

I think the wheel was an assett to York but cannot understand how the city iof York Council are owed money?
What is this for?
it cannot be rent as the hotel own the land; Its not electric/gas etc as they are not owned by CoYC so what is it for?
If they were involved financialy in some way.... How could they act as independent in planning terms?
WE should be told as it does seem very odd when this is a private enterprise that somehow we the taxpayer end up losing money

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

"The Royal York Hotel, which hosts the wheel in its grounds, is owed £77,727, City of York Council is owed £50,300 and Visit York is also owed £1,794 by Great City Attractions Global (GCAG). A number of smaller York businesses are also owed between £280 and £600 after GCAG, which operated sightseeing wheels in Liverpool, Plymouth and York, collapsed" In answer to your question YorkPatrol, read the above quote from the Press - it didn't specify the small businesses - it is a very safe assumption, however, that small or local businesses (which is what I said) in the other areas where these wheels were sited have also suffered losses. Oh, and just in case you were going to try and be clever with my posting, the reference to owing millions also includes the monies owed to local Councils - I accept I could have been a little clearer in my "rant" earlier. As a matter of interest, are you trying to look for a way to defend their business practices?

I'll make this easier - No small businesses were or are effected.

I am not trying to defend their business practises but am surprised how many people know the these in great detail given the comments… unless of course these are based on pure speculation, assumptions and melodramatic hype. For example, “owed millions of pounds” became just over 120k…

I remember a associate of mine, paying for his daughters wedding at the Royal York Hotel, he'd paid his deposit and a couple of weeks before the wedding paid the balance, a day or 2 after that, the hotel went 'bust', he had to pay the whole amount again, deposit plus the balance or there would be no wedding - and now the same thing has happened to the hotel - life can be like a turning wheel, what goes around comes around!

i can hardly type because i m shaking with laughter and have got tears in my eyes.the councillors and business people who pushed for the installation of this monstrosity are about as audible as the friends of jimmy savile.

thecat1964 wrote:
I remember a associate of mine, paying for his daughters wedding at the Royal York Hotel, he'd paid his deposit and a couple of weeks before the wedding paid the balance, a day or 2 after that, the hotel went 'bust', he had to pay the whole amount again, deposit plus the balance or there would be no wedding - and now the same thing has happened to the hotel - life can be like a turning wheel, what goes around comes around!

If what you are saying is correct, or which I have no reason to dispute, I totally agree with you, excellent result. Meme has a valid point or which needs an answer I think.

I think the wheel is an asset, but securities are essential - either upfront payment, or Director guarantees etc.

I got done by Dillons some years ago when they went bust and then reappeared as a different company.

Yes Messers Hall and Shipley are or have been directors of the past and present wheel operators and lots of other limited companies. A quick company check by YCC or any other person doing business with one of these companies would have raised serious concerns regarding their viability.

roskoboskovic wrote:
i can hardly type because i m shaking with laughter and have got tears in my eyes.the councillors and business people who pushed for the installation of this monstrosity are about as audible as the friends of jimmy savile.

so its guilty until proven innocent is it ?

Got to say I thought this was a good idea at the time. Wrongo.
Still don't think its a monstrosity, mind you.

Even AndyD wrote:
Got to say I thought this was a good idea at the time. Wrongo.
Still don't think its a monstrosity, mind you.

You would..Will you be going to see if you can get it 'listed' ?

AngryandFrustrated wrote:
If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it.

Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors.

It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal.

Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures.

These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Well said,common sense at last .

RingoStarr wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:
Got to say I thought this was a good idea at the time. Wrongo.
Still don't think its a monstrosity, mind you.

You would..Will you be going to see if you can get it 'listed' ?

Nope - no idea what you mean there, although it seems to be some sort of personal dig. I just don't think it looks bad, personally. Some do, others don't. Is personal opinion not allowed? Explain?

Could have been worse CofYC could also have paid 4x that sum to consultants to determine what benefit it would bring the city..... You didn't need to be an economist to know that the operating company would go insolvent. The new company may go the same way, and the same 'local' businesses will be out of pocket again. Third time lucky?

Ichabod76 wrote:

roskoboskovic wrote:
i can hardly type because i m shaking with laughter and have got tears in my eyes.the councillors and business people who pushed for the installation of this monstrosity are about as audible as the friends of jimmy savile.

so its guilty until proven innocent is it ?

*OFF TOPIC*
Now then, Now then.
Can't prove Jim legally guilty or legally innocent because he's dead - but if he wasn't and these rumours came out, would you let him babysit?

Exactly.

It could be used for a giant bike sculpture eg the front end of a penny farthing....!

dsom73 wrote:

Ichabod76 wrote:

roskoboskovic wrote:
i can hardly type because i m shaking with laughter and have got tears in my eyes.the councillors and business people who pushed for the installation of this monstrosity are about as audible as the friends of jimmy savile.

so its guilty until proven innocent is it ?

*OFF TOPIC*
Now then, Now then.
Can't prove Jim legally guilty or legally innocent because he's dead - but if he wasn't and these rumours came out, would you let him babysit?

Exactly.

As for Jimmy Savile the more interesting subject is "what names are about to be revealed?". I've heard one famous DJ mentioned and I really hope it isn't true.

No wonder the hotel wanted it. Charging all that rent for just a couple of months!

Usual thing. Some rich barsteward decides to put a bit of money into something, take a lot out and then do a runner when the local businesses have paid into it and lost money. Set of greedy Bankers comes to mind. Did I put a B instead of a W.Maybe a surety up front should be demanded and the company running the thing should not be allowed to incur costs above that surety value. If that means nobody would invest then so be it, at least nobody would lose money. Speculate to accumulate? Ha bloody ha!

Well done to Fat Harry and Andy D for coming clean over getting it wrong over the monstrosity.
Now Andy, will you come clean over the other monstrosity, Yes, York Councils Wind turbine that is no more!

Buzz Light-year wrote:
It was obvious from the start. They were so persistent, they wouldn't let it lie, they didn't give up. It was forced upon us. We were assaulted, abused and violated.

You'll blame Jimmy Saville next !

Scarlet Pimpernel wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote: It was obvious from the start. They were so persistent, they wouldn't let it lie, they didn't give up. It was forced upon us. We were assaulted, abused and violated.

You'll blame Jimmy Saville next !

Buzz is mastering the art of understatement !

Let's set an example and Nationalize the York Wheel. York's Labour party could use it as an example for the soon coming re Nationalized Railways and run it by council paid staff. Who will put all the profits back into the York coffers.

Greedy Bankers, Railway Franchise and Wheel operators aren't to be trusted.

ColdAsChristmas wrote:
Well done to Fat Harry and Andy D for coming clean over getting it wrong over the monstrosity.
Now Andy, will you come clean over the other monstrosity, Yes, York Councils Wind turbine that is no more!

No idea what you mean.
All I can offer is that I know someone who is pretty knowledgeable about wind turbine technology and he reckons it is a million miles away from being efficient. Problems with harnessing the energy. He is very keen on sea/wave versions tho.
Hope that helps! :-)

I'm sure that Mr Floyd was trying to say that he was appalled that taxpayers may not get the money that is owed to them.

Makes no difference whether the money is owed via local or national government.

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

"The Royal York Hotel, which hosts the wheel in its grounds, is owed £77,727, City of York Council is owed £50,300 and Visit York is also owed £1,794 by Great City Attractions Global (GCAG). A number of smaller York businesses are also owed between £280 and £600 after GCAG, which operated sightseeing wheels in Liverpool, Plymouth and York, collapsed" In answer to your question YorkPatrol, read the above quote from the Press - it didn't specify the small businesses - it is a very safe assumption, however, that small or local businesses (which is what I said) in the other areas where these wheels were sited have also suffered losses. Oh, and just in case you were going to try and be clever with my posting, the reference to owing millions also includes the monies owed to local Councils - I accept I could have been a little clearer in my "rant" earlier. As a matter of interest, are you trying to look for a way to defend their business practices?

I'll make this easier - No small businesses were or are effected. I am not trying to defend their business practises but am surprised how many people know the these in great detail given the comments… unless of course these are based on pure speculation, assumptions and melodramatic hype. For example, “owed millions of pounds” became just over 120k…

No doubt you will be contacting the Press then and complaining about the fact that for the 2nd day running they have a story which contradicts your assertion that no small businesses are owed money.

Oh, and for the record, I am not being melodramatic. I did not say that people have lost £millions in York alone - I was talking about the combination of WTA going bust and the carnage they left around the country and also the other sites in the UK that GCA owe money to. I note that GCA owe over £6million - is that enough for you? They must owe it to someone!!!

The fact is, as this updated story has confirmed today, we are now on the 3rd incarnation of the same company being run by the same people and going bust. Clearly either the wheels make no money at all and therefore should be consigned to history or the companies are being run by inept directors who are making enough money to keep "giving it another go".

Another fact, as those who know about these things will confirm, is that the NRM couldn't wait to get rid of the last one. By the time it went, it was barely breaking even, something confirmed to me by Michael Woodward of YMT.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

"The Royal York Hotel, which hosts the wheel in its grounds, is owed £77,727, City of York Council is owed £50,300 and Visit York is also owed £1,794 by Great City Attractions Global (GCAG). A number of smaller York businesses are also owed between £280 and £600 after GCAG, which operated sightseeing wheels in Liverpool, Plymouth and York, collapsed" In answer to your question YorkPatrol, read the above quote from the Press - it didn't specify the small businesses - it is a very safe assumption, however, that small or local businesses (which is what I said) in the other areas where these wheels were sited have also suffered losses. Oh, and just in case you were going to try and be clever with my posting, the reference to owing millions also includes the monies owed to local Councils - I accept I could have been a little clearer in my "rant" earlier. As a matter of interest, are you trying to look for a way to defend their business practices?

I'll make this easier - No small businesses were or are effected. I am not trying to defend their business practises but am surprised how many people know the these in great detail given the comments… unless of course these are based on pure speculation, assumptions and melodramatic hype. For example, “owed millions of pounds” became just over 120k…

No doubt you will be contacting the Press then and complaining about the fact that for the 2nd day running they have a story which contradicts your assertion that no small businesses are owed money. Oh, and for the record, I am not being melodramatic. I did not say that people have lost £millions in York alone - I was talking about the combination of WTA going bust and the carnage they left around the country and also the other sites in the UK that GCA owe money to. I note that GCA owe over £6million - is that enough for you? They must owe it to someone!!! The fact is, as this updated story has confirmed today, we are now on the 3rd incarnation of the same company being run by the same people and going bust. Clearly either the wheels make no money at all and therefore should be consigned to history or the companies are being run by inept directors who are making enough money to keep "giving it another go". Another fact, as those who know about these things will confirm, is that the NRM couldn't wait to get rid of the last one. By the time it went, it was barely breaking even, something confirmed to me by Michael Woodward of YMT.

It’s load of hyped up rubbish, all of it

People need to stop getting so worked up over a wheel and a misinformed, factual incorrect report

Even if these “facts” were true, surly there’s more important things for people to worry about

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

YorkPatrol wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: If ever a reason was needed as to why these white monstrosities shiould never be allowed in York again, this is it. Since the application to site the Big Wheel at the Art Gallery was made, that wheel has had 3 owners, 2 of which have gone bust owing millions of pounds to local and small businesses in the areas in which the big wheels are sited. God alone knows how many owners the wheel had had before this time. Every time they go bust, a new company is formed, with the same staff and directors. It strikes me that these directors are using the corporate veil to take as much profit from the business at the expense of running the business in a financially secure way. In running the business this way, they are paying scant attention to their creditors whom they know can't touch them legally for the monies owed. If a high street retailer were to trade in this manner, there would be headlines over every national paper, akin to the FayrePack scandal. Before a wheel is allowed to be sited in York again, CofYC should take a surety in advance so as to protect the tax payer (and yes it will be us that pick up the tab) from any future losses. I just thank God that YMT saw sense and withdrew their appliction for it to be sited at the Art Gallery because part of the deal was that this shower were to pay to landscape the land after the Wheel had gone - in those circumstances, the bill to the tax payers of York would have been well into 6 figures. These wheel operators are sharks, plain and simple, out to make maximun profits with minimum expenditure on creditors, and Cruddas et all should stop simpering on about how much York needs them.

Very nice rant Just to I can sleep a little easier tonight – Could you confirm which “small” businesses were owed millions from the wheel people?

"The Royal York Hotel, which hosts the wheel in its grounds, is owed £77,727, City of York Council is owed £50,300 and Visit York is also owed £1,794 by Great City Attractions Global (GCAG). A number of smaller York businesses are also owed between £280 and £600 after GCAG, which operated sightseeing wheels in Liverpool, Plymouth and York, collapsed" In answer to your question YorkPatrol, read the above quote from the Press - it didn't specify the small businesses - it is a very safe assumption, however, that small or local businesses (which is what I said) in the other areas where these wheels were sited have also suffered losses. Oh, and just in case you were going to try and be clever with my posting, the reference to owing millions also includes the monies owed to local Councils - I accept I could have been a little clearer in my "rant" earlier. As a matter of interest, are you trying to look for a way to defend their business practices?

I'll make this easier - No small businesses were or are effected. I am not trying to defend their business practises but am surprised how many people know the these in great detail given the comments… unless of course these are based on pure speculation, assumptions and melodramatic hype. For example, “owed millions of pounds” became just over 120k…

No doubt you will be contacting the Press then and complaining about the fact that for the 2nd day running they have a story which contradicts your assertion that no small businesses are owed money. Oh, and for the record, I am not being melodramatic. I did not say that people have lost £millions in York alone - I was talking about the combination of WTA going bust and the carnage they left around the country and also the other sites in the UK that GCA owe money to. I note that GCA owe over £6million - is that enough for you? They must owe it to someone!!! The fact is, as this updated story has confirmed today, we are now on the 3rd incarnation of the same company being run by the same people and going bust. Clearly either the wheels make no money at all and therefore should be consigned to history or the companies are being run by inept directors who are making enough money to keep "giving it another go". Another fact, as those who know about these things will confirm, is that the NRM couldn't wait to get rid of the last one. By the time it went, it was barely breaking even, something confirmed to me by Michael Woodward of YMT.

It’s load of hyped up rubbish, all of it People need to stop getting so worked up over a wheel and a misinformed, factual incorrect report Even if these “facts” were true, surly there’s more important things for people to worry about

Well, at the risky of stating the bleeding obvious, if it is such a nonsense story about nothing, stop reading it and posting on the forum - you clearly have far better and loftier things to do with your precious time than interact with idiots like me who are misinformed and melodramatic! In the meantime, I will watch with interest for defamation proceedings to be issued by GCA over the Press' false reporting.

To some of us, the environment we live in, is one of the most important things, and having crossed swords with the Council over the bat issue and the siting of the wheel, this is a story close to my heart just as affordable housing is close to the hearts of others.

Hoofarted wrote:
Let's set an example and Nationalize the York Wheel. York's Labour party could use it as an example for the soon coming re Nationalized Railways and run it by council paid staff. Who will put all the profits back into the York coffers.

Greedy Bankers, Railway Franchise and Wheel operators aren't to be trusted.

I do hope you're serious. This is exactly what should happen now. If we retain a wheel the council should run it for the benefit of the city, not a set of crooked capitalists hell bent on ripping off local authorities and others. The age of unfettered free-market capitalism is coming to an end. York can jump the gun. Buy the wheel, and reap the benefits for us all.

MouseHouse wrote:

Hoofarted wrote:
Let's set an example and Nationalize the York Wheel. York's Labour party could use it as an example for the soon coming re Nationalized Railways and run it by council paid staff. Who will put all the profits back into the York coffers.

Greedy Bankers, Railway Franchise and Wheel operators aren't to be trusted.

I do hope you're serious. This is exactly what should happen now. If we retain a wheel the council should run it for the benefit of the city, not a set of crooked capitalists hell bent on ripping off local authorities and others. The age of unfettered free-market capitalism is coming to an end. York can jump the gun. Buy the wheel, and reap the benefits for us all.

COYC have ideal qualifications to run the wheel. They've been spinning around in circles going nowhere for years and their feet rarely touch the ground.

The wheel returned to the city in December after City of York Council gave permission for the 53-metre high, 42-pod wheel to be located in the gardens of the Royal York Hotel until January 2013.

Well YCC could tell the operators that they are not going to renew there permission for them to operate in
YORK unless they pay up in advance £50,000 for every year they want permission to operate in York

Taking in to account that all the companies that have run Wheel operations in York have collapsed

meme wrote:
I think the wheel was an assett to York but cannot understand how the city iof York Council are owed money?
What is this for?
it cannot be rent as the hotel own the land; Its not electric/gas etc as they are not owned by CoYC so what is it for?
If they were involved financialy in some way.... How could they act as independent in planning terms?
WE should be told as it does seem very odd when this is a private enterprise that somehow we the taxpayer end up losing money

business rates which York City Council collets on behalf of the government that is taken in to account on what the government pays in council tax support to the council

If it is unpaid rates someone who is responsible for collecting them needs to be sacked
I frankly doubt its rates and would love an answer form someone who really knows

just because Royal York are owed money,, there is nothing to suggest that they have still made a healthy amount of money out of the wheel

A sad story of lambs dealing with wolves financially with the obvious result,regular readers of the York Press will have read about and be aware of the many fraudsters,money launderers and conmen working and residing locally over the last few years,maybe it is time to employ some of these crafty rascals to work alongside some of the more gullible members of York council in order to save them from further financial loss,these rascals can smell a con months in advance and would no doubt be delighted with a bonus for such detective work,,as the saying goes,,set a thief to catch a thief.

meme wrote:
If it is unpaid rates someone who is responsible for collecting them needs to be sacked
I frankly doubt its rates and would love an answer form someone who really knows

Good to see you frothing at the mouth again, Meme.

However, I suspect that your usual antipathy to COYC may well be a bit over the top on this occasion. (in passing, you never worked at COYC did you?)

As to York Patrol and his/her extremist attitudes to what many would regard as a significant fraud, could this be a staffer at the Press (Y ork P atrol) hoping to stimulate excessive views from Mr. Angry of Poppleton?

PinzaC55 wrote:

dsom73 wrote:

Ichabod76 wrote:

roskoboskovic wrote:
i can hardly type because i m shaking with laughter and have got tears in my eyes.the councillors and business people who pushed for the installation of this monstrosity are about as audible as the friends of jimmy savile.

so its guilty until proven innocent is it ?

*OFF TOPIC*
Now then, Now then.
Can't prove Jim legally guilty or legally innocent because he's dead - but if he wasn't and these rumours came out, would you let him babysit?

Exactly.

As for Jimmy Savile the more interesting subject is "what names are about to be revealed?". I've heard one famous DJ mentioned and I really hope it isn't true.

When will tese Jimmy Savile allegations ever end?

Police are now saying that Jeremy Beadle may have had a small hand in it

I dont hate CoYC. I just get mad when I realise that they field a bunch of ecomnomic incompetents in any deal they try to do which ends up costing us money as ratepayers we dont have.
If people are payed to collect rates they should do their job properly and be held to account if they don't.
If they are employing consultants they should get best value for money
If selling land/assetts ditto
It seems they dont..Why I dont know Is it leadership/quality of staff or more likely an ingrained attitude of 'what does it matter' that leads to this desperate position
if people who pay their bills and wages dont make noises when they feel its all going wrong we may as well give up as they are supposedly accountable to us
When they do a good job I am first to say so but it does seem the instances of good decision making are becoming fewer and fewer
Everything they do at present seems to go wrong. we all know they have to make savings which makes it all the more important they make the most of what they have.....but they dont

Irrespective of whom is owed what.Mr Elliott's business practices are somewhat doubtful. I find it hard to understand how he is still allowed to be a company director after 3 failed companies using the same capital assets? Surely the insolvency agency should be questioning his capabilities and the practice of putting a company into administration and restarting another on it's heels using the previous companies assets? I seem to remember that being a criminal offence in the past, if done to avoid paying debts.