[Sean_A]

Sean,

So according to you, everyone, at every step along the way was...... duped.

Wouldn't that cause you to question the intelligence of every elected, appointed and career official that had a hand in the approval process ?

And if you elected these officials who were so easily duped, doesn't that speak to your stupidity, your inability to choose intelligent individuals to represent you ?

Pat

I already told I have a natural and healthy degree of distrust in people which has served me well.  It is easy to question the intelligence of Scottish and all politicians.  Though I suspect in this case (which I had no say in elections), the Trump development has been a case of politicians over-reaching to achieve something.  I am sure all parents tell their children that if a deal looks too good to be true, then it probably isn't true.  Sometimes common sense is the best sense and my common sense told me Trump couldn't deliver.  It would have been swell if the government would have performed due diligence on this proposal.  I am willing to bet that if the same info were in the hands of independent experienced developers, that their opinion would have been the numbers don't stack up. 

Ciao

[Mark Chaplin]

Pat - Scotland have different elected politicians, your previous statement makes you sound like a hickville yank. It's like me calling you thick for banning foie gras.

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean,

So according to you, everyone, at every step along the way was...... duped.

Wouldn't that cause you to question the intelligence of every elected, appointed and career official that had a hand in the approval process ?

Patrick,

not everyone in the planning process was in favour. Indeed, the most important local committee involved in the planning turned the application down. This was over ruled by the main government in Edinburgh. It emerged afterwards that Trump representatives had been visiting offices of the SNP though they could not explain for what reason.

I suspect were this process to be started over again it would be rejected by pretty much everyone.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

So according to you, everyone, at every step along the way was...... duped.

Wouldn't that cause you to question the intelligence of every elected, appointed and career official that had a hand in the approval process ?

Patrick,

not everyone in the planning process was in favour.


Jon,

I'm aware of that, but, Sean made the inference that everyone who voted in favor of the project was duped.

Indeed, the most important local committee involved in the planning turned the application down. This was over ruled by the main government in Edinburgh. It emerged afterwards that Trump representatives had been visiting offices of the SNP though they could not explain for what reason.

I suspect were this process to be started over again it would be rejected by pretty much everyone.

Easy for you and others to say, but, what you're not taking into consideration is the state of the economy at the genesis of the project and today.

Had the economy remained robust, perhaps expectations and outcome would have been far more favorable.

As I indicated, I hope the golf course is extremely well received, leading to the completion of the remaining phases of the project.

Time will tell.

[Brian_Ewen]

Mr Mucci
And what "economy" are we talking about here ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mr Mucci
And what "economy" are we talking about here ?

Brian,

You probably haven't noticed it, but, I was referencing the WORLD economy.

Are you that isolated from Europe and the U.S., which would provide the golfers the resort desires/needs ?

[Brian_Ewen]

Are you that isolated from Europe and the U.S., which would provide the golfers the resort desires/needs ?[/b][/size][/color]

Yes.

[Jon Wiggett]

Had the economy remained robust, perhaps expectations and outcome would have been far more favorable.

[/b][/size][/color]

Patrick,

could you explain exactly what you mean by the above comment in relation to the Scottish economy?

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jon,

If I have to explain it to you, Ran should probably revoke your access

[Sean_A]

Sean,

So according to you, everyone, at every step along the way was...... duped.

Wouldn't that cause you to question the intelligence of every elected, appointed and career official that had a hand in the approval process ?

Patrick,

not everyone in the planning process was in favour.


Jon,

I'm aware of that, but, Sean made the inference that everyone who voted in favor of the project was duped.

Indeed, the most important local committee involved in the planning turned the application down. This was over ruled by the main government in Edinburgh. It emerged afterwards that Trump representatives had been visiting offices of the SNP though they could not explain for what reason.

I suspect were this process to be started over again it would be rejected by pretty much everyone.

Easy for you and others to say, but, what you're not taking into consideration is the state of the economy at the genesis of the project and today.

Had the economy remained robust, perhaps expectations and outcome would have been far more favorable.

As I indicated, I hope the golf course is extremely well received, leading to the completion of the remaining phases of the project.

Time will tell.

Pat

Maybe Trump and Scottish ministers were on Mars during the "negotiation" of Trump Aberdeen.  It was plainly clear by September 2008 that Trump couldn't possibly move forward with his development in anything like the manner that was promised.  Yet, decision-making based on dodgy figures even in rosy times was happening. 

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Thanks.

[Niall C]

Patrick

I take a slightly different view than Sean regarding this development and what other developers would or would not do. Firstly, the numbers are comical (£1 billion for goodness sake, and how many jobs ?) but despite that Trump will make a fair bit of money at the end of the day as would most other experienced developers. The difference is that none of the others would have even bothered to try for planning as it should have been a stick on refusal. The fact that Trump did and not only that but managed to bounce this administration into giving him planning based on a slick, relatively expensive PR campaign based on his noteriety speaks ill of the decision makers. I suspect Wee Eck is ruing that decision.

As for your comments on the economy, they remind me of your comments on a previous thread regarding the offshore wind turbines where you attempted to compare Aberdeen to some upmarket beach resort. FYI - Aberdeen is the oil capital of Europe and one of the few places in the UK that are still economically vibrant.

Niall 

[Garland Bayley]

What I think they are saying Patrick is that if you haven't played in the Aberdeen economy, then you are not qualified to comment on the economics.

[Brian_Ewen]

Sean
Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Mr Mucci
If I have to explain it to you, Ran should probably revoke your access.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon,

If I have to explain it to you, Ran should probably revoke your access

Patrick,

I take it that you are unable to answer as the above sentence seems to imply. If you are not able to maybe you should revoke your own access

Garland,

no, that is not what I am saying. I just wondered where Patrick got his point of view from.

Jon

[Brian_Ewen]

Well it looks like its going to be a typical Aberdeen summers day tomorrow, for opening day 

A couple of weeks until I get to see it first hand.

Anyone else got plans to play it ?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean
Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Mr Mucci
If I have to explain it to you, Ran should probably revoke your access.

Brian,

I asked for the specific figures, not an explaination.  I don't need an explanation.

But, I'm glad to see that you have all of the figures at your disposal for us to analyze.

Would you please provide them for our review.

If you don't have them, and if you don't have access to them, how can you make any judgements absent those facts ?

[Tony_Muldoon]

Sean if I understand your position you seem to be suggesting that the rest of the plans will never come to fruition and that you doubt they were ever more than a Trojan horse to get planning for the golf course through?


If I'm correct is this based on anything more than a hunch? My feelings have always been the opposite.  That although Trump clearly loves his golf courses, he loves a big real estate deal more than anything else.  I still expect to see other development on the land he bought, even if like most property developers these days he’s revising his original plans.

[Kalen Braley]

Pat,

I've been sitting on the sidelines for this thread for the most part.....and this is a classic re-direction on your part.

The Donald is the one making the claims, not visa versa.

The onus is on HIM and or you to show the numbers of the where, when, and how much as it concerns the benefits to the area of having the course.  Its not up to others to disprove his spurious claims....

The floor is yours.

[David_Tepper]

Some figures from an 8 December 2007 article in The Scotsman:

"EVER since he announced plans for a 1 billion (pound) resort - "the greatest golf course in the world" - in Aberdeenshire, he has faced opposition from environmentalists and other local campaigners.

The Trump International Links scheme included two championship golf courses and 1,500 homes and would create an estimated 6,000 jobs.

The US billionaire claimed he needed to build the houses to pay for the development, which he wants to construct over the next five years across 1,400 acres at the Menie Estate, near Balmedie beach."

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

As usual, you're misguided and wrong.
I'm not the one claiming that ALL those that voted in favor of the project were duped.
That Trump presented bogus numbers.

I don't know that he did or didn't, but, when others claim the numbers were bogus, the onus is on them to prove it.

David Tepper,

I agree, Trump is about "grand" plans, the "grander" the more profitable.

Creating a world class golf course is a goal of his.
Creating a world class golf course and a profitable enterprise to go along with it is a better, more desirable goal for him.
Successful enterprises are his goal and the bigger the better.

I recall similar opposition to Atlantic and Friars Head.
If I'm not mistaken, I think Friars Head was zoned for a considerable number of homes, perhaps a few hundred or more.

Ask yourself this question, if you went to build a golf course, spending considerable sums on the course and ancillary facilities and you ran into strong environmental opposition, might you say to the opposition, FU, I'll build the homes, how do you like them apples ?

Or, OK, you gave me such a hard time on phase I, and continue to do so, so I'm going to hold off on the subsequent phases ?

And, if Trump doesn't complete the project as originally intended, isn't that what a good deal of the opposition wanted in the first place ?
Shouldn't they be happy instead of complaining ?

They can't have it both ways.

[David_Tepper]

From the 13 December 2007 issue of The Scotsman:

'Government mired in "sleaze row" over Trump development'

http://www.scotsman.com/news/government-mired-in-sleaze-row-over-trump-development-1-703808  

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Thanks.

Pat

I will let you sift through newspapers to come up with the info. There isn't much point in me doing because you obviously don't believe me.  You seem to insist the politicians weren't duped when four years after gaining planning permission Trump has only just managed to open a golf course.  Now we have Trump using windmills as a an excuse not to carry his plan forward.  The guy was obviously selling a plan and politicians bought it.  Why not?  A guy claims he will jack up the economy and the government basically doesn't have to do anything - its a dream come true.  All that is required is to over-turn local decision-making, and ride rough shod over the very reasons the land was designated SSSI.  Governments have done far worse for less grandiose promises.  I am of the opinion that the government's handling of this situation was at least as much about putting out the message that Scotland is open for business as it was about this particular project.

Spangles

No, I am sure Trump will continue to add bits and pieces to his resort.  What I don't and never did believe, is that his project will have anything close to the economic impact originally claimed on anything remotely close to the original time line.  Its was pie in the sky then and its pie in the sky now.  I have said all along that I would have loved to see the government publish (if a study was conducted) independent figures of what Trump's project could produce.  I do recall one economist in Scotland saying it was a load of bunk, but I don't know if he was independent. 

Ciao     

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Thanks.

Pat

I will let you sift through newspapers to come up with the info.

Now you're contending that newspaper articles are the authority, the ultimate, accurate source ?

There isn't much point in me doing because you obviously don't believe me. 

You indicated that you don't trust dogs and humans, but, you want me to trust you when all of your information isn't source material, but, third party hearsay ? ?  ?

You seem to insist the politicians weren't duped when four years after gaining planning permission Trump has only just managed to open a golf course. 

Doesn't anyone read with a modicum of comprehension anymore ?
YOU indicated that every politician who approved the project was duped.
That they were so dumb, or that Trump was so clever that they had no clue with respect to the fact base, the concept and the ability to reason.
Do you really believe that ? 

Now we have Trump using windmills as a an excuse not to carry his plan forward. 

What's wrong with that as a negotiating tactic ?

The guy was obviously selling a plan and politicians bought it.  Why not?  A guy claims he will jack up the economy and the government basically doesn't have to do anything - its a dream come true. 

So, a developer just says things, without any supporting documentation/studies and everyone votes for the project ?

That's not the way it works in my neighborhood.

All that is required is to over-turn local decision-making, and ride rough shod over the very reasons the land was designated SSSI.

Was Trump's project the only project to ever go through this process ?

If not, how did the others turn out ? 

Governments have done far worse for less grandiose promises.  I am of the opinion that the government's handling of this situation was at least as much about putting out the message that Scotland is open for business as it was about this particular project.

So, developers just have to make promises and their projects get approved ?

That's an unusual approval process by any stretch.

What other developers submitted projects, made promises and got the approvals ?
Which developers were rejected ?

Spangles

No, I am sure Trump will continue to add bits and pieces to his resort.  What I don't and never did believe, is that his project will have anything close to the economic impact originally claimed on anything remotely close to the original time line.  Its was pie in the sky then and its pie in the sky now.  I have said all along that I would have loved to see the government publish (if a study was conducted) independent figures of what Trump's project could produce.  I do recall one economist in Scotland saying it was a load of bunk, but I don't know if he was independent. 

Before making any judgement, shouldn't you wait until Brian produces the figures Trump submitted in the approval process ?
Shouldn't you have the facts before rendering judgement ?
   

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean
Could you, Brian or Jon provide us with those figures such that we could determine, in our own minds, the merits or flaws in those dodgy figures.

Mr Mucci
If I have to explain it to you, Ran should probably revoke your access.

Brian,

I asked for the specific figures, not an explaination.  I don't need an explanation.

But, I'm glad to see that you have all of the figures at your disposal for us to analyze.

Would you please provide them for our review.

If you don't have them, and if you don't have access to them, how can you make any judgements absent those facts ?

Patrick,

before you go demanding answers from anyone else maybe you should answer the very simple and direct question I put to you.

As for the figures in the The Scotsman they came from the Trump organisation so I am sure they are what they claim to be.

Jon

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()