Final nail in the coffin

for someone in the business of finding leasees, he isnt half crap at it

but then, slowly slowly catchy monkey..

Sounds just like Dan's Drake'sIsland project.....

green_genie wrote:

Never mind do we need another Cinema, with a number of restaurants in Sutton Harbour closing how are 13 more going to survive in Bretonside? The whole Millbay Boulevard scheme is planned to include umpteen more. They might as well close the entire western side of the City Centre now.

Meanwhile Akkeron's delays in starting Oldway Mansion in Torbay (18 months and counting) are also down to getting leases signed and won't be affected by Akkeron Hotels' restructuring.  

'bay 'erald link

Surely the council in Torbay will be getting uneasy.

Gotta love the corporate bullshit speak. Companies going tits up & into administration is now "restructuring". Is anyone still fooled by him ?
A silver spooned Kevin Heaney !

FY 310 wrote:

Gotta love the corporate bullshit speak. Companies going tits up & into administration is now "restructuring". Is anyone still fooled by him ?
A silver spooned Kevin Heaney !

Who knows how to play the janners.

green_genie wrote:

Never mind do we need another Cinema, with a number of restaurants in Sutton Harbour closing how are 13 more going to survive in Bretonside? The whole Millbay Boulevard scheme is planned to include umpteen more. They might as well close the entire western side of the City Centre now.

Meanwhile Akkeron's delays in starting Oldway Mansion in Torbay (18 months and counting) are also down to getting leases signed and won't be affected by Akkeron Hotels' restructuring.  

'bay 'erald link

"The debt was sold on and another company used the debt to acquire the assets."

How can that happen? Surely a contract is a contract and stands as long as it is honoured?

A mortgager cannot just assume control of a property if the mortgagee is up to date with payments.

Or have I got this wrong?

FY 310 wrote:

Gotta love the corporate bullshit speak. Companies going tits up & into administration is now "restructuring". Is anyone still fooled by him ?
A silver spooned Kevin Heaney !

No that can't be right. He had no money, his empire was built on debts he couldn't honour and he only wanted to build a cinema in Central Park.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

green_genie wrote:

Never mind do we need another Cinema, with a number of restaurants in Sutton Harbour closing how are 13 more going to survive in Bretonside? The whole Millbay Boulevard scheme is planned to include umpteen more. They might as well close the entire western side of the City Centre now.

Meanwhile Akkeron's delays in starting Oldway Mansion in Torbay (18 months and counting) are also down to getting leases signed and won't be affected by Akkeron Hotels' restructuring.  

'bay 'erald link

"The debt was sold on and another company used the debt to acquire the assets."

How can that happen? Surely a contract is a contract and stands as long as it is honoured?

A mortgager cannot just assume control of a property if the mortgagee is up to date with payments.

Or have I got this wrong?

Any lender can sell its debt onto any other lender without the consent of the original borrower. It is a standard clause in loan agreements. A bank can also call in its debt at any time notwithstanding repayment of the loan being up to date. Another standard clause in most loan agreements. If you think about it that is what happened in the banking crisis when Lloyds took responsibility for the Halifax/ RBOS debt and has since sold some of that debt onto to third parties. It's called the banking industry!

I don't doubt that it can be sold on. I'm sure it happens all the time.

But surely the purchaser has to honour the original agreement?

They can't just foreclose because they feel like it, can they? Or had Brent defaulted rendering original agreement void?

I see that the cluster feck is gaining momentum despite a massive opposing view. Can anyone belive that PCC are actually giving this guy a set of keys?

Brent's PR

Quote :

The deal included a £2million dowry from the council, which had been subsidising the Pavilions to the tune of £1.5million a year.

That £2m "dowry"... Is it payable upfront and in cash?

Quote :

Theatre Royal Plymouth commercial director Paul James said: “Plymouth Pavilions has grown from strength to strength over the years and is now the South West’s premier leisure and entertainment centre.”

And yet it is losing £1.5m per year despite:

Quote :

...a stellar line-up of top entertainers. In recent years Pink, Green Day, Alice Cooper, Oasis, Arctic Monkeys, Gary Barlow and One Direction have all played the Pavilions stage.

The Pavilions is a key venue on the touring circuit for top comedians, with Lee Evans, Michael McIntyre, John Bishop and Billy Connolly all performing to sell-out audiences.

The arena is also home to one of the UK’s premier basketball teams, Plymouth Raiders.

How long before The Pavillions goes into administration?

Wonder how much of the losses were down to the swimming pool that's now closed?

Pretty substantial part of overall energy costs and staffing I'd have thought.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I don't doubt that it can be sold on. I'm sure it happens all the time.

But surely the purchaser has to honour the original agreement?

They can't just foreclose because they feel like it, can they? Or had Brent defaulted rendering original agreement void?

The new owners of the former Lloyds Bank debt and now of the former Akkeron hotels took the assets rather than seek payment of the debt from Akkeron. Hence the residual of James Brent's hotel business (8 hotels I think) is left virtually debt free with profitable hotels (his words). He has publicly referred to this many times recently He has also made it clear that the restructured hotel business has no direct connection to PAFC Ltd as they are financed separately

As for the Pavilions in the last Five Direction Ltd accounts it was valued at £4.5m and that is before any development potential is identified and realised. So why would it go into administration? I understood that the £2m payment was a dowry payable over 10 years to assist with annual running costs. The Council had a £1.5m liability (and rising) to rid themselves of when they sold the Pavilions for £1 together with a £200,000 annual payment to the new owner.

Whilst work on Oldway Mansions Listed Building itself has not started, because the leases remain under negotiation, part of the agreed enabling work to finance the overall project was for McCarthy & Stone to build over 50 apartments on the site. They are advertising that work has commenced on site with a show apartment open in June this year.

Strange, I thought the cost of a concrete block had gone up, not down.

My information is that the property experts who have passed the slide rule over Harry Potter's plans are unanimous that the numbers don't even begin to add up.

Looks as if he is way out of his depth.

Hoof Hearted wrote:

My information is that the property experts who have passed the slide rule over Harry Potter's plans are unanimous that the numbers don't even begin to add up.

Looks as if he is way out of his depth.

Good - hope he slings his hook!!

Ditto.

Stick your HHP plans up your arse Brent, SIDEWAYS!!

It seems to me the only developments Brent wants to take a crack at are straight forward residential appartment stuff... open goals to anyone in this country with a pick and shovel and enough credit to buy some blocks.  I find it almost impossible to imagine this man managing/building any public facility/lesiure  entity, and make a continuing profit out of them. I reckon he'll just pick the profitable bits and sit on the rest till the padlocks rust. If he doesn't get on with something pretty soon, it will all begin to take on a dodgy slant. Surely, he can't just sit on HHP / Pavillions for years and do nothing ? Surely not offering grandstand season tickets means he will be starting HHP tout suite.
His hotel thing to date always seemed to be nothing more than acquiring and moving on assets.
No actual wealth creation, just playing the market with today's relatively cheap money, and banking the margin. Makes you wonder why councils up and down the country aren't allowed to do exactly the same thing.

Been dealing with an employee of British land today. I touched on the new development. His words were it will 100% happen. "When they get the go ahead, they don't mess around"

He then went on to describe the Central Park development as "pie in the sky from a man who doesn't have the money or backing "

Winter Green wrote:

It seems to me the only developments Brent wants to take a crack at are straight forward residential appartment stuff... open goals to anyone in this country with a pick and shovel and enough credit to buy some blocks.  I find it almost impossible to imagine this man managing/building any public facility/lesiure  entity, and make a continuing profit out of them. I reckon he'll just pick the profitable bits and sit on the rest till the padlocks rust. If he doesn't get on with something pretty soon, it will all begin to take on a dodgy slant. Surely, he can't just sit on HHP / Pavillions for years and do nothing ? Surely not offering grandstand season tickets means he will be starting HHP tout suite.
His hotel thing to date always seemed to be nothing more than acquiring and moving on assets.
No actual wealth creation, just playing the market with today's relatively cheap money, and banking the margin. Makes you wonder why councils up and down the country aren't allowed to do exactly the same thing.

Although not offering Grandstand season tickets they are apparently offering the executive boxes underneath so I have heard.
Can't work that one out myself unless three sided grounds are the way forward.

HHP will never happen because nobody in their right mind will trust Brent with the finance.

Quote :

The new owners of the former Lloyds Bank debt and now of the former Akkeron hotels took the assets rather than seek payment of the debt from Akkeron

How can that be the whole story? Whilst I can understand debt being bought and sold how can they effectively seize the freehold if the payment terms are being met. Why doesn't ever lender just do the same thing? I sitting in a home probably worth 5 or 6 times the mortgage on it. How would the mortgage company be able to sell my debt and then the new lender be able to take my property just because I couldn't settle the whole outstanding sum there and then.

In Akkeron case how thick must the new debt holder be taking on a property/business that Brent asserts is worth less than the debt. And if it is worth less than the debt than surely the business was genuinely in trouble anyway and doesn't say much for his running of those hotels.

Dougie wrote:

Quote :

The new owners of the former Lloyds Bank debt and now of the former Akkeron hotels took the assets rather than seek payment of the debt from Akkeron

How can that be the whole story?  Whilst I can understand debt being bought and sold how can they effectively seize the freehold if the payment terms are being met.  Why doesn't ever lender just do the same thing?  I sitting in a home probably worth 5 or 6 times the mortgage on it.  How would the mortgage company be able to sell my debt and then the new lender be able to take my property just because I couldn't settle the whole outstanding sum there and then.

I think the crucial words here are "seek payment". I think that's what bailiffs do. They "seek payment" when money is owed on a deal of some sort. So it would appear, if I am reading this right, that the Lloyds Bank loan has effectively been written off by whoever bought it from them and they have called in the hotels themselves which were, presumably, used as security.

Graham Clark wrote:

As for the Pavilions in the last Five Direction Ltd accounts it was valued at £4.5m and that is before any development potential is identified and realised. So why would it go into administration? I understood that the £2m payment was a dowry payable over 10 years to assist with annual running costs. The Council had a £1.5m liability (and rising) to rid themselves of when they sold the Pavilions for £1 together with a £200,000 annual payment to the new owner.

I was thinking a business losing £1.5m per year, with such a stunningly strong list of acts filling it, is going to munch a £2m dowry pretty quickly but as Green Genie says if it was the pool which was losing all the money then closing it makes The Pavillions a very different animal.

The use of the word "dowry" is interesting.

Quote :

dowry
noun: dowry; plural noun: dowries

an amount of property or money brought by a bride to her husband on their marriage.

It looks rather more like a subsidy to me because there's no wedding or bride anywhere.

I'd best add dowry to the list of words that has been redefined lately ("incentive", "consultation" and "magnificent" immediately spring to mind).