The New Moor Market

[taxman]

I read it cost c£16/18m.

 

A bloke down the old Castle market told me it cost £650,000 billion. So it must be true.

[rossyrooney]

The interest brings it up to 60 million .

 

---------- Post added 27-07-2015 at 15:10 ----------

 

Where is there a shop big enough for Wilco's on the Moor.?

 

Wilkinsons stated last year that they will no longer be opening big stores, figures show that they make far more money by concentrating on the convenience store sized stores and that they are the way that they intend go in the future.

 

---------- Post added 27-07-2015 at 21:43 ----------

 

 

 

A bloke down the old Castle market told me it cost £650,000 billion. So it must be true.

 

And worth every penny to rid the city centre of the stigma it created in its later years.

 

BTW Taxman, it's not you who prepared my tax bill for last year is it? he talked in outlandish numbers too.:hihi:

Edited July 27, 2015 by rossyrooney

[apelike]

I read it cost c£16/18m.

 

Here you go..

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/what-s-on/out-about/163-63m-bill-for-sheffield-s-new-moor-market-1-1832138

[hackey lad]

Here you go..

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/what-s-on/out-about/163-63m-bill-for-sheffield-s-new-moor-market-1-1832138

 

some people will not believe that , fancy our great council putting us in debt

[cuttsie]

Here you go..

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/what-s-on/out-about/163-63m-bill-for-sheffield-s-new-moor-market-1-1832138

Thanks apelike, I don't know how to do links,

Perhaps the pithe takers from down the pub will apologise but as usual they will just ignore the truth.

 

---------- Post added 28-07-2015 at 05:50 ----------

 

Show us a source please Cuttsie, otherwise you are not going to get anyone to believe that claim.

See post 2659.

[*Wallace*]

Thanks apelike, I don't know how to do links,

Perhaps the pithe takers from down the pub will apologise but as usual they will just ignore the truth.

 

---------- Post added 28-07-2015 at 05:50 ----------

 

See post 2659.

 

Highlight address bar at top of page right click and select all,then press copy,on your post here right click press paste job done.

[BoroB]

Wilkinsons stated last year that they will no longer be opening big stores, figures show that they make far more money by concentrating on the convenience store sized stores and that they are the way that they intend go in the future.

 

---------- Post added 27-07-2015 at 21:43 ----------

 

 

 

 

And worth every penny to rid the city centre of the stigma it created in its later years.

 

BTW Taxman, it's not you who prepared my tax bill for last year is it? he talked in outlandish numbers too.:hihi:

 

Can you explain why you feel it is worth lumbering the city's council tax payers with a £1m plus yearly bill for an under performing building?

[tzijlstra]

Thanks apelike, I don't know how to do links,

Perhaps the pithe takers from down the pub will apologise but as usual they will just ignore the truth.

 

---------- Post added 28-07-2015 at 05:50 ----------

 

See post 2659.

 

Right, so let's analyse that article because it has been written in typical non-knowledgeable Star style. What it says is that they got the land leasefree of Scottish Widows, took a loan to build the market and OVER THE LIFETIME of the market that bill could go up to 63 million. If the market performed well though the annual loss would be 110K rather than the 461K that Castle market lost. Over 60 years) the running time of the loan, that 350K difference would amount to 21 million.

 

It is a very high interest rate, I agree, but it doesn't have to cost that much and it certainly isn't 80 million like you claimed earlier. Also, if you take the 21 million into account we are talking about 42 million, which is half of what you claimed.

 

The market is failing though (what is the occupancy rate now?) so it is a clanger, but they couldn't know that before and it is certainly an upgrade over the Castle Market.

[cuttsie]

Right, so let's analyse that article because it has been written in typical non-knowledgeable Star style. What it says is that they got the land leasefree of Scottish Widows, took a loan to build the market and OVER THE LIFETIME of the market that bill could go up to 63 million. If the market performed well though the annual loss would be 110K rather than the 461K that Castle market lost. Over 60 years) the running time of the loan, that 350K difference would amount to 21 million.

 

It is a very high interest rate, I agree, but it doesn't have to cost that much and it certainly isn't 80 million like you claimed earlier. Also, if you take the 21 million into account we are talking about 42 million, which is half of what you claimed.

 

The market is failing though (what is the occupancy rate now?) so it is a clanger, but they couldn't know that before and it is certainly an upgrade over the Castle Market.

Where have I ever stated 80 million.

 

Other news papers as well as the Star have stated the cost as over 60 million.

 

Some folk on here will still argue that black is in fact white even though the facts are set in stone .

By the way now that the grand Market move is in tatters who is in fact going to pay back the 60 ODD MILLION to the money lenders as well as the Don Valley money's still out standing,I suppose the council can sack a few home helps or road sweepers to help with the cost ,one thing is certain the planners and chief executives will not be at risk they are un touchable..

[tzijlstra]

Where have I ever stated 80 million.

 

Other news papers as well as the Star have stated the cost as over 60 million.

 

Some folk on here will still argue that black is in fact white even though the facts are set in stone .

By the way now that the grand Market move is in tatters who is in fact going to pay back the 60 ODD MILLION to the money lenders as well as the Don Valley money's still out standing,I suppose the council can sack a few home helps or road sweepers to help with the cost ,one thing is certain the planners and chief executives will not be at risk they are un touchable..

 

You are correct re bib. Apologies.