October 24, 2019, 11:50:12 AM

Author Topic: [News]Bramley Moore Dock update  (Read 475481 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

July 07, 2019, 03:21:53 PM
Reply #4545
Offline

Toddacelli


https://twitter.com/mrsrosney/status/1146311472047362048

The 'How about the rest of us?' and 'How about the jobs in tourism?' parts are particularly odious.

No-one who has looked at the plan for BMD is under any illusion that this will not create jobs, in tourism and other areas, for the rest of us. It will regenerate the area for the rest of us. It will breathe new life into a derelict part of the city for the rest of us. That amount of totally new jobs in an area with unemployment will give a lot of new people opportunities which will boost the economy for the rest of us.

Unless I missed the bit about only employing Evertonians in all the new buildings and businesses that this creates?
    

I'm only here for the cladding/Bramley Moore Dock updates


July 07, 2019, 04:46:37 PM
Reply #4546
Offline

Trowel


www.footballitk.com | Football news from those In The Know

Latest Everton transfer news

July 07, 2019, 05:03:08 PM
Reply #4547
Offline

Smithers


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/articles/liverpool-waters-world-heritage-status/amp/

Not sure if already been posted, but worth a read, this. Interested in this bit:

'Only one location has lost its World Heritage status since 1972, when the concept was established: the German city of Dresden. That decision was made after the construction of a controversial £156m bridge across the Elbe in 2013.

Itís very hard to judge the impact it had on tourism, given the myriad factors involved, but Dresden did report a five per cent fall in domestic tourism in 2015. Evidence suggested overseas visits, however, remained stable.'



Even if that 5% drop in domestic tourism in 2015 was directly caused by the status loss, a quick Google search suggests that Dresden's been doing very well since then:

https://www.tourism-review.com/tourism-in-dresden-had-successful-season-news10607

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but even if you can provide a quick example to the 'uhhhh what about tourism' trolls, it's worth a go trying to beat them with logic. Some of it might even stick.


July 07, 2019, 06:10:53 PM
Reply #4548
Offline

sirblue57


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/articles/liverpool-waters-world-heritage-status/amp/

Not sure if already been posted, but worth a read, this. Interested in this bit:

'Only one location has lost its World Heritage status since 1972, when the concept was established: the German city of Dresden. That decision was made after the construction of a controversial £156m bridge across the Elbe in 2013.

Itís very hard to judge the impact it had on tourism, given the myriad factors involved, but Dresden did report a five per cent fall in domestic tourism in 2015. Evidence suggested overseas visits, however, remained stable.'



Even if that 5% drop in domestic tourism in 2015 was directly caused by the status loss, a quick Google search suggests that Dresden's been doing very well since then:

https://www.tourism-review.com/tourism-in-dresden-had-successful-season-news10607

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but even if you can provide a quick example to the 'uhhhh what about tourism' trolls, it's worth a go trying to beat them with logic. Some of it might even stick.

Cant we just beat them with the stick?
I'm the "trophy husband" from the game my wife regrets playing.

July 07, 2019, 06:54:36 PM
Reply #4549
Offline

Alanvideo


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/articles/liverpool-waters-world-heritage-status/amp/

Not sure if already been posted, but worth a read, this. Interested in this bit:

'Only one location has lost its World Heritage status since 1972, when the concept was established: the German city of Dresden. That decision was made after the construction of a controversial £156m bridge across the Elbe in 2013.

Itís very hard to judge the impact it had on tourism, given the myriad factors involved, but Dresden did report a five per cent fall in domestic tourism in 2015. Evidence suggested overseas visits, however, remained stable.'



Even if that 5% drop in domestic tourism in 2015 was directly caused by the status loss, a quick Google search suggests that Dresden's been doing very well since then:

https://www.tourism-review.com/tourism-in-dresden-had-successful-season-news10607

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but even if you can provide a quick example to the 'uhhhh what about tourism' trolls, it's worth a go trying to beat them with logic. Some of it might even stick.

......................is it really necessary to describe anyone who mentions tourism as a 'troll ' ?

I don't think anyone has said Liverpool would lose out if the WHO listing was removed and we all know by now that UNESCO aren't the planning authority ,they can only comment on planning applications. 
Reading between the lines it seems as if LCC are quite prepared to risk losing the status.
We are special ,we are Everton.

July 07, 2019, 07:10:32 PM
Reply #4550
Offline

Smithers


......................is it really necessary to describe anyone who mentions tourism as a 'troll ' ?

I don't think anyone has said Liverpool would lose out if the WHO listing was removed and we all know by now that UNESCO aren't the planning authority ,they can only comment on planning applications. 
Reading between the lines it seems as if LCC are quite prepared to risk losing the status.

No Alan, not at all. I was referring to a few of the examples over the previous months that appear on social and local media where people are, on the surface, defending the world heritage site, but in reality it's safe to argue they're Liverpool fans with an agenda. (See: trolls).

If there is a legitimate counter argument for benefits of the docks having heritage status, then, as I alluded to in my previous massively overblown post, I'm genuinely interested in learning about them. Personally I'm interested in hearing as much as I can about this and gathering an opinion that's not just good for Everton, but for the city as a whole.

But twitter rants and Roger Phillips phone ins seem to have produced some trolls this year, yeah.


July 07, 2019, 07:15:37 PM
Reply #4551
Offline

Escla

NSNO Subscriber
......................is it really necessary to describe anyone who mentions tourism as a 'troll ' ?

I don't think anyone has said Liverpool would lose out if the WHO listing was removed and we all know by now that UNESCO aren't the planning authority ,they can only comment on planning applications. 
Reading between the lines it seems as if LCC are quite prepared to risk losing the status.

The fall in domestic tourism since 2014 is entirely down to the rise of the far right Nazi party  Pegida in this city,  it disgusts the average German, why would they go there.

July 09, 2019, 06:24:13 PM
Reply #4552
Offline

dangermouse


The recent UNESCO statement is exactly why Everton have planned out their whole approach for dealing with the planning process. Not worried in the slightest.
Everton Programmes Books & DVD's

http://www.facebook.com/evertonprogrammes

July 09, 2019, 07:18:32 PM
Reply #4553
Offline

Gary1878

NSNO Subscriber
If Liverpool loses it's World Heritage Status, will the history of it's football clubs, 800 year maritime legend or the Beatles disappear? No, it won't.

Do tourists care about the World Heritage Status when they think about visiting? No, not really, as all of the above are still there, and will always be there. You go somewhere because they are nice places to visit, and have a great history, not because some organisation says it has a great history.

July 09, 2019, 07:24:41 PM
Reply #4554
Offline

Bluebridge


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/articles/liverpool-waters-world-heritage-status/amp/

Not sure if already been posted, but worth a read, this. Interested in this bit:

'Only one location has lost its World Heritage status since 1972, when the concept was established: the German city of Dresden. That decision was made after the construction of a controversial £156m bridge across the Elbe in 2013.

It's very hard to judge the impact it had on tourism, given the myriad factors involved, but Dresden did report a five per cent fall in domestic tourism in 2015. Evidence suggested overseas visits, however, remained stable.'



Even if that 5% drop in domestic tourism in 2015 was directly caused by the status loss, a quick Google search suggests that Dresden's been doing very well since then:

https://www.tourism-review.com/tourism-in-dresden-had-successful-season-news10607

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but even if you can provide a quick example to the 'uhhhh what about tourism' trolls, it's worth a go trying to beat them with logic. Some of it might even stick.
Iíve been to Dresden four times in the past 12 months, so fiddle to the heritage status, and the bridge looks good

July 09, 2019, 07:47:51 PM
Reply #4555
Offline

Shropshire Blue

NSNO Subscriber
Interesting how our views are formed because we have a vested interest.
UNESCO ridiculed, everything brought down to money through tourism and regeneration etc.
Where's the concern about preserving the city's / country's history?
Both sides of the argument are important so why not more discussion about how history is balanced with the needs of modern life? This thread rather reinforces the view many people, have of PL football clubs - selfish, greedy and a f**k you attitude to anything that we don't like.
One of the things that lifts our club above so many others is our commitment to 'community'  - it's a shame it isn't reflected more by our fans in threads like this
The Himalayas has the Yeti, Norway has Trolls, America has Hillbillies. You, good people, are blessed with Shropshire.

July 09, 2019, 07:59:52 PM
Reply #4556
Offline

Mick 1995

NSNO Subscriber
Interesting how our views are formed because we have a vested interest.
UNESCO ridiculed, everything brought down to money through tourism and regeneration etc.
Where's the concern about preserving the city's / country's history?
Both sides of the argument are important so why not more discussion about how history is balanced with the needs of modern life? This thread rather reinforces the view many people, have of PL football clubs - selfish, greedy and a f**k you attitude to anything that we don't like.
One of the things that lifts our club above so many others is our commitment to 'community'  - it's a shame it isn't reflected more by our fans in threads like this

I've been calling for heritage bodies to go fuck themselves since Alsop and his cloud. (Pic of the cloud included)

If they had been about 112 years ago they would have campaigned about proposals for the Liver building and done their best to stop that being built on the historically important Pier Head.

Today's progress is tomorrows heritage and regeneration should not be stifled due non-unique, hidden-from-view infrastructure.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2019, 08:00:54 PM by Mick 1995 »

July 09, 2019, 08:18:56 PM
Reply #4557
Offline

Shropshire Blue

NSNO Subscriber
I've been calling for heritage bodies to go fuck themselves since Alsop and his cloud. (Pic of the cloud included)

If they had been about 112 years ago they would have campaigned about proposals for the Liver building and done their best to stop that being built on the historically important Pier Head.

Today's progress is tomorrows heritage and regeneration should not be stifled due non-unique, hidden-from-view infrastructure.
So,  as I said, I wonder why we don't look at how it's balanced rather than just dismissing the other side of the argument. History is important, so is progress.
The Himalayas has the Yeti, Norway has Trolls, America has Hillbillies. You, good people, are blessed with Shropshire.

July 09, 2019, 08:19:21 PM
Reply #4558
Offline

dangermouse


Interesting how our views are formed because we have a vested interest.
UNESCO ridiculed, everything brought down to money through tourism and regeneration etc.
Where's the concern about preserving the city's / country's history?
Both sides of the argument are important so why not more discussion about how history is balanced with the needs of modern life? This thread rather reinforces the view many people, have of PL football clubs - selfish, greedy and a f**k you attitude to anything that we don't like.
One of the things that lifts our club above so many others is our commitment to 'community'  - it's a shame it isn't reflected more by our fans in threads like this

I feel it's important that their view is always represented and that's it. I'm not all for development companies doing what they want but in this particular case, I believe Peel Group and Everton have already done more than enough compromising. Before Everton were involved Peel Group had already downsized many of the developments partly due to objections put forward by UNESCO.
Everton Programmes Books & DVD's

http://www.facebook.com/evertonprogrammes

July 09, 2019, 08:24:18 PM
Reply #4559
Offline

Mick 1995

NSNO Subscriber
So,  as I said, I wonder why we don't look at how it's balanced rather than just dismissing the other side of the argument. History is important, so is progress.

Or, maybe, people have looked at the other side of the argument, decided it's nonsense and posted their thoughts about it on this football forum without having a detailed attachment to show their "working out"?