The Argusi360 boss speaks exclusively about her confidence in the seafront tower (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

i360 boss speaks exclusively about her confidence in the seafront tower

The Argus: i360 boss speaks exclusively about her confidence in the seafront tower i360 boss speaks exclusively about her confidence in the seafront tower

Yesterday morning £36.2 million landed in the bank account of Brighton i360 Ltd.

Where it came from and what it will be used for has become a cause of great debate in Brighton and Hove. Today, Eleanor Harris exclusively tells The Argus about her confidence in the scheme as she attempts to dispel myths and alleviate concerns about the viability of the 162 metre tall tower. ADRIAN IMMS reports.

TWO years from now the i360 will be standing on the seafront of Brighton and Hove.

Eight years ago it was a mere twinkle in the eye of David Marks and Julia Barfield when they recruited Eleanor Harris as a consultant to turn the idea into a reality.

Along the way, critics have baulked at the sums of public money mentioned, which escalated from an initial £14.8 million in a July 2012 report to £36.2 million, as reported in The Argus in March.

Ms Harris, 42, who is now the chief executive of Brighton i360 Ltd, said: “We could have got private investment but the council wanted to make the money for Brighton.”

She said the project would not offer investors a quick return. She said they are more interested in putting money into property.

She said: “The council is taking a longer-term view. This gives them an income stream they wouldn’t get.”

Ms Harris is so confident in the project that she has invested an undisclosed six-figure sum of her own money into it.

It’s money she won’t see again until she retires.

She said: “This is more of a pension plan than a get-rich-quick plan.

“We are backing the project because we think it will be a fantastic success.

“That’s why I’m putting my own money in.

“We get repaid after the council. I probably won’t see a dividend for 18 years.”

A main concern for taxpayers has been the possible failure of the scheme.

Ms Harris said: “There is some risk, it is possible, but you have got to take risk on balance.

“There is a 40% buffer between our visitor projections and the point at which we can’t repay the loan.

“They would have to fall by nearly 60% before the council can’t repay the Government loan. That’s the point at which it would potentially have to dip into council taxpayers’ money.”

The loan from the Government is from the Public Works Loan Board, which is not council tax money. It was set up for local authorities to fund projects with commercial returns.

The i360 estimate 739,000 visitors a year over the next ten years, with adults paying £15 a head.

Ms Harris said: “We didn’t just pluck £15 out of the air. It has been very carefully tested.”

All the projections have been independently put together by a specialist company and verified by consultant David Camp, who successfully projected visitor numbers for the London Eye.

While the i360 is being compared to the much-lauded capital’s wheel (London Eye gets 4.2 million visitors a year but the i360 will be the highest observation tower outside London) critics have pointed out a key difference between the two: 180 degrees of the i360 will look out to sea.

Ms Harris responded: “The sea itself is kind of beautiful to look at.”

She conceded that viewers would need a telescope to see France on a clear day but was excited at the prospect of the Rampion windfarm providing focal interest out to sea, should it go ahead.

There is also the consideration of weather.

She said: “Any visitor attraction is weather-dependent.

“In my experience the views are better on a grey day.”

She added: “The i360 is much more than just about the view. In the evening it becomes the Sky Bar and we will be able to host live entertainment. We will also have a whole suite of hospitality rooms, exhibition space, installations, a shop and a 400-cover restaurant.”

The company anticipates that 68% of its revenue will come from ticket admission, with the rest coming from the above extras. There are plans for colour-coded, lit-up events such as Pride.

Works have already begun on the site on King’s Road, with the removal of the West Pier columns due to be completed this month.

Ms Harris said “there are absolutely no plans” to take down the West Pier.

She said: “Our scheme will restore one of the 19th-century toll booths and lovingly restore the other one, which has been in storage.”

Jason Kitcat, the leader of Brighton and Hove City Council said, “We are delighted to confirm our funding agreement with the Brighton i360. It will be a spectacular observation attraction and is the cornerstone to funding the regeneration of Brighton’s seafront.”

The priority for the project is to pay back the council’s £36.2 million and the local enterprise partnership’s £4.1 million loan.

Like Ms Harris’s sum, the £6.1 million being put forward by David Marks and Julia Barfield may not be seen again by them for 18 years.

Ms Harris is so confident the tower will open on time there are financial penalties for the contractors if they run a day late during the project.

If they work ahead of schedule, there will be a bonus.

On getting the deal sealed after eight years’ work, she said: “More than 100 contracts got signed. It took hours. It was a great relief to see the money.

“My husband always jokes that the i360 is my third baby.”

And what does Ms Harris say to those who are still not convinced?

“I will hope to prove them wrong when we open.

“It will be a really beautiful, iconic structure and hopefully a fantastic and inspiring visitor attraction.”

i360 BY NUMBERS

  • 200 people can stand side by side, lining the circumference of the pod, meaning the pod can accommodate at least 200 people.
  • 20 minute ride, three rides per hour l Structure is 162 meters tall, the tallest in Brighton and Hove.
  • Pod rises to 138 meters l By contrast the London Eye is 135m high, rising to 132m, and Sussex Heights, currently Brighton and Hove’s highest building, is 102 meters tall.
  • 440 jobs for the city, according to an independent economic impact study, 169 jobs at the tower l More than 300,000 new visitors to the city l 49,000 additional overnight stays

 

WORK TIMELINE

Now: removal of the root end (road end) of the old West Pier.

July 2014: First spade in the ground event.

Autumn 2014: Foundation work and Victorian sewer diversion.

May/June 2015: Two boats land on Brighton beach with the structure in pieces on it.

June-September 2015: Tower to be built from the bottom up.

Winter 2015: Building and fitting out.

Spring 2016: Pod installation.

June 2016: The i360 opens.

SPEND BREAKDOWN

Construction £37.8 million Finance costs and interest £4.7 million Pre-opening and operational expenditure £2.1 million Contingency and working capital reserve account £1.8 million PRODUCTION The viewing pod and drive system to hoist it up the tower are being made by a ski lift manufacturer in France.

The steel is being made in Holland by the country’s largest steelwork supplier which also built the capsules for the London Eye.

OTHER FIGURES

1% of ticket revenue goes to the council for ever.

The Brighton i360 believes 68% of its revenue will come from ticket sales. The rest will come from functions, sponsorship, catering and retail.

Between £13 million and £25 million forecast in tourist revenue.

As a soft benefit, every state school child, at some point in their education, will get to use the i360 for free.

TICKET PRICES

Adult 16 and over, £15 Children 5-15 - £7.50 Under-5s free

 

THE MONEY

Brighton and Hove City Council loan from the Government through its Public Works Loan Board: £36.2 million (paid back over at least 18 years, up to 27 years, depending on revenue) Coast to Capital local enterprise partnership: £4.1 million (paid back within seven years) David Marks, Julia Barfield and associates: £6.1 million (repayable after public loans) Total: £46.4 million Other members of the project, including Eleanor Harris, are putting in six-figure sums, undisclosed (repayable after public loans)

Comments (33)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:34am Fri 20 Jun 14

Uncle Ruckus (No Relation) says...

Everybody except the incapable and incompetent Green Council realises that a) the i360 will not be finished on schedule, b) it's construction will run hugely over-budget and c) it won't attract any where near the amount of visitors that the Greens claim that it will.

What a fitting monument to Green Party incompetence and incapability; a huge butt-plug erected on Brighton seafront.
Everybody except the incapable and incompetent Green Council realises that a) the i360 will not be finished on schedule, b) it's construction will run hugely over-budget and c) it won't attract any where near the amount of visitors that the Greens claim that it will. What a fitting monument to Green Party incompetence and incapability; a huge butt-plug erected on Brighton seafront. Uncle Ruckus (No Relation)
  • Score: 24

6:38am Fri 20 Jun 14

whatone says...

"She...was excited at the prospect of the Rampion windfarm providing focal interest out to sea, should it go ahead. "


'Ride the i360 to spot an eyesore'?
"She...was excited at the prospect of the Rampion windfarm providing focal interest out to sea, should it go ahead. " 'Ride the i360 to spot an eyesore'? whatone
  • Score: 18

6:51am Fri 20 Jun 14

paul6391 says...

Go Away you old bag and take that green party debt ridden I sore with..
Go Away you old bag and take that green party debt ridden I sore with.. paul6391
  • Score: 10

6:54am Fri 20 Jun 14

rogerthefish says...

No mention of the failure of Weymouth's eye which opened a couple of years ago and is run by Merlin Entertainments the worlds second largest leisure company after Disney (sealife centres, Madame Tussaud's Sydney bridge climbers.) they are struggling with numbers, so what numbers are they expecting to pay the £36m back? Because it's gonna fail!
No mention of the failure of Weymouth's eye which opened a couple of years ago and is run by Merlin Entertainments the worlds second largest leisure company after Disney (sealife centres, Madame Tussaud's Sydney bridge climbers.) they are struggling with numbers, so what numbers are they expecting to pay the £36m back? Because it's gonna fail! rogerthefish
  • Score: 29

6:59am Fri 20 Jun 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Open by 2016 when the damaged arch above the fortune of war pub is still being repaired almost two months after the issue arose. The work on the seafront near opposite the metropole is still underway almost two years after it started.
Nothing in this town moves quickly.
Open by 2016 when the damaged arch above the fortune of war pub is still being repaired almost two months after the issue arose. The work on the seafront near opposite the metropole is still underway almost two years after it started. Nothing in this town moves quickly. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 28

7:05am Fri 20 Jun 14

IsaJ says...

"June-September 2015: Tower to be built from the bottom up."
Eheh... Radical...
"June-September 2015: Tower to be built from the bottom up." Eheh... Radical... IsaJ
  • Score: 28

7:16am Fri 20 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

So what exactly are the 'myths' that have been 'dispelled' by this article?!?

All it does is confirm that Council tax payers will be left to pick up the bill if the wildly optimistic visitor numbers aren't achieved.
So what exactly are the 'myths' that have been 'dispelled' by this article?!? All it does is confirm that Council tax payers will be left to pick up the bill if the wildly optimistic visitor numbers aren't achieved. Quiterie
  • Score: 27

7:32am Fri 20 Jun 14

Baffled of Brighton says...

At least with the tower in Portsmouth there is something to look at, with the Forts, Isle of Wight and busy shipping lane. I am sure they are laughing all the way to the bank.
At least with the tower in Portsmouth there is something to look at, with the Forts, Isle of Wight and busy shipping lane. I am sure they are laughing all the way to the bank. Baffled of Brighton
  • Score: 19

7:33am Fri 20 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

IsaJ wrote:
"June-September 2015: Tower to be built from the bottom up."
Eheh... Radical...
These guys have obviously done their homework. You can tell we're dealing with professionals......
[quote][p][bold]IsaJ[/bold] wrote: "June-September 2015: Tower to be built from the bottom up." Eheh... Radical...[/p][/quote]These guys have obviously done their homework. You can tell we're dealing with professionals...... Quiterie
  • Score: 22

9:00am Fri 20 Jun 14

Hotfoot says...

Twice this year (outwith the strikes) we have had bin collections missed. On one occasion it was missed twice, and Portland Rd near Sackville Road looked like a rubbish tip The issue is bad enough at the best of times, as no bins are provided for residents above shops, and the bag collection service results in what we all know is inevitable in Brighton.
What I want to know is; Why does the council see fit to gamble £40M of residents council tax money on a speculative return investment, and prioritise this ahead of provision of basic services for its residents?
I for one will certainly not be voting this inept bunch of greasy-palmed, contractor-loving punt takers in next time around, and I urge others to join me.
Twice this year (outwith the strikes) we have had bin collections missed. On one occasion it was missed twice, and Portland Rd near Sackville Road looked like a rubbish tip The issue is bad enough at the best of times, as no bins are provided for residents above shops, and the bag collection service results in what we all know is inevitable in Brighton. What I want to know is; Why does the council see fit to gamble £40M of residents council tax money on a speculative return investment, and prioritise this ahead of provision of basic services for its residents? I for one will certainly not be voting this inept bunch of greasy-palmed, contractor-loving punt takers in next time around, and I urge others to join me. Hotfoot
  • Score: 20

9:18am Fri 20 Jun 14

Dave in Hastings says...

Jeez! With you bunch of negative, whining lot, it's a wonder anyone visits Brighton. Best wishes to all working on the i360; it will be a great attraction for Brighton.
Jeez! With you bunch of negative, whining lot, it's a wonder anyone visits Brighton. Best wishes to all working on the i360; it will be a great attraction for Brighton. Dave in Hastings
  • Score: -17

9:25am Fri 20 Jun 14

Morpheus says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Open by 2016 when the damaged arch above the fortune of war pub is still being repaired almost two months after the issue arose. The work on the seafront near opposite the metropole is still underway almost two years after it started.
Nothing in this town moves quickly.
... especially the traffic.
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Open by 2016 when the damaged arch above the fortune of war pub is still being repaired almost two months after the issue arose. The work on the seafront near opposite the metropole is still underway almost two years after it started. Nothing in this town moves quickly.[/p][/quote]... especially the traffic. Morpheus
  • Score: 10

9:44am Fri 20 Jun 14

Phani Tikkala says...

Someone from the council (in fact all of them) should have read this

http://www.dorsetech
o.co.uk/news/1014016
7._Disappointing__vi
sitor_figures_on_Wey
mouth_Tower_could_ha
ve_bearing_on_future
/

First, their tower cost £3.5m; second, even with the Olympics they struggled with visitor numbers; and finally, tickets in advance £5.67 or £8 on the door.

All you need to know about whether the i360 is going to work or not (it's not)
Someone from the council (in fact all of them) should have read this http://www.dorsetech o.co.uk/news/1014016 7._Disappointing__vi sitor_figures_on_Wey mouth_Tower_could_ha ve_bearing_on_future / First, their tower cost £3.5m; second, even with the Olympics they struggled with visitor numbers; and finally, tickets in advance £5.67 or £8 on the door. All you need to know about whether the i360 is going to work or not (it's not) Phani Tikkala
  • Score: 9

9:46am Fri 20 Jun 14

Hotfoot says...

Dave in Hastings wrote:
Jeez! With you bunch of negative, whining lot, it's a wonder anyone visits Brighton. Best wishes to all working on the i360; it will be a great attraction for Brighton.
David, I'd like to see you clap with joy if you were knee deep in rotting food and used sanitary products, while your council spent your tax money on lavish projects.

Councils are there to provide services, primarily. Brighton council are failing in this respect. I am all for new developments, subject to their merits; But not at the expense of very basic services, like refuse collection. Surely this is not unreasonable?
[quote][p][bold]Dave in Hastings[/bold] wrote: Jeez! With you bunch of negative, whining lot, it's a wonder anyone visits Brighton. Best wishes to all working on the i360; it will be a great attraction for Brighton.[/p][/quote]David, I'd like to see you clap with joy if you were knee deep in rotting food and used sanitary products, while your council spent your tax money on lavish projects. Councils are there to provide services, primarily. Brighton council are failing in this respect. I am all for new developments, subject to their merits; But not at the expense of very basic services, like refuse collection. Surely this is not unreasonable? Hotfoot
  • Score: 13

9:50am Fri 20 Jun 14

Valerie Paynter says...

Errata: Eight years ago the i360 already had planning consent so it was no mere "twinkle" in anyone's eye!

And lack of private finance was why BHCC agreed in 2012 to top up ehat they had managed to co ble together. Shartly after, that agreement, the private finance WITHDREW. And nothing came along to replace it.

That we had to listen in council mtgs to David Marks and his cowed mea cpa on that and stalling excuses is something this CEO was clearly not briefed about before brazenly spinning their plight to look like something it isn't.

This £36m is Full-on BAILOUT! And BHCC did it because they bought the consultant guff that they would make a £1m on borrowing cheaper than they have lent it to this bunch of hustlers
Errata: Eight years ago the i360 already had planning consent so it was no mere "twinkle" in anyone's eye! And lack of private finance was why BHCC agreed in 2012 to top up ehat they had managed to co ble together. Shartly after, that agreement, the private finance WITHDREW. And nothing came along to replace it. That we had to listen in council mtgs to David Marks and his cowed mea cpa on that and stalling excuses is something this CEO was clearly not briefed about before brazenly spinning their plight to look like something it isn't. This £36m is Full-on BAILOUT! And BHCC did it because they bought the consultant guff that they would make a £1m on borrowing cheaper than they have lent it to this bunch of hustlers Valerie Paynter
  • Score: 14

9:53am Fri 20 Jun 14

2000man says...

This is a tremendous gamble. It may end up working financially (I assume not, but who knows?). Even if it does, I suspect the building itself will still be viewed as a bizarre white elephant towering over a town with no other structures anywhere near its size (and no reason to have any). There are many problems facing Brighton at the minute. Lack of tourism is not one of them.
This is a tremendous gamble. It may end up working financially (I assume not, but who knows?). Even if it does, I suspect the building itself will still be viewed as a bizarre white elephant towering over a town with no other structures anywhere near its size (and no reason to have any). There are many problems facing Brighton at the minute. Lack of tourism is not one of them. 2000man
  • Score: 16

10:19am Fri 20 Jun 14

rolivan says...

Why is there never any mention of how much rent is being paid to The West Pier Trust and where is it going?
Why is there never any mention of how much rent is being paid to The West Pier Trust and where is it going? rolivan
  • Score: 13

10:20am Fri 20 Jun 14

Btn4all says...

A 400cover restaurant wont increase visitors using surrounding restaurants as per the 'regeneration' claim it will compete against them. This will be the money maker - hotels already compete for conference business and its just got another competitor. Personally the idea of a new attraction is good but everyone smelt a rat and this is it. The council has set up a huge new competitor not invested in the regeneration. Jason kitkat steps down from local politics but one wonders if he gets involved in this commercially in the future
A 400cover restaurant wont increase visitors using surrounding restaurants as per the 'regeneration' claim it will compete against them. This will be the money maker - hotels already compete for conference business and its just got another competitor. Personally the idea of a new attraction is good but everyone smelt a rat and this is it. The council has set up a huge new competitor not invested in the regeneration. Jason kitkat steps down from local politics but one wonders if he gets involved in this commercially in the future Btn4all
  • Score: 14

10:36am Fri 20 Jun 14

DGee says...

To make sure this venture will make money I suggest pole dancers be employed whilst the pod is not in motion
To make sure this venture will make money I suggest pole dancers be employed whilst the pod is not in motion DGee
  • Score: 6

11:07am Fri 20 Jun 14

Take it Personally says...

"Eleanor Harris" -why do I have a feeling we will come to loathe this name, along with this stupid and unwanted i-sore project
"Eleanor Harris" -why do I have a feeling we will come to loathe this name, along with this stupid and unwanted i-sore project Take it Personally
  • Score: 7

11:16am Fri 20 Jun 14

Roundbill says...

Wouldn't it be a strange coincidence Eugenius Kitcat was nowhere to be found when this whole project turned out to be a scam?
Wouldn't it be a strange coincidence Eugenius Kitcat was nowhere to be found when this whole project turned out to be a scam? Roundbill
  • Score: 10

11:31am Fri 20 Jun 14

stevo!! says...

Basically, it will be a monument to the soon-to-be-gone Green Party......paid for by us.
Basically, it will be a monument to the soon-to-be-gone Green Party......paid for by us. stevo!!
  • Score: 13

11:39am Fri 20 Jun 14

TonyTony says...

""Ms Harris, 42, who is now the chief executive of Brighton i360 Ltd, said: “We could have got private investment but the council wanted to make the money for Brighton.”" Blatant lies. Nobody was interested
""Ms Harris, 42, who is now the chief executive of Brighton i360 Ltd, said: “We could have got private investment but the council wanted to make the money for Brighton.”" Blatant lies. Nobody was interested TonyTony
  • Score: 18

11:59am Fri 20 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

This idea that "projections have been independently put together by a specialist company" is garbage.

That company has been paid to produce projections that justify this tower. There is no way they can be described as 'independent'. The tower is expected to attract more than double the visitors to the Royal Pavilion, which is more central, charges less and which doesn't depend on the weather.

The projections are wildly optimistic.
This idea that "projections have been independently put together by a specialist company" is garbage. That company has been paid to produce projections that justify this tower. There is no way they can be described as 'independent'. The tower is expected to attract more than double the visitors to the Royal Pavilion, which is more central, charges less and which doesn't depend on the weather. The projections are wildly optimistic. Quiterie
  • Score: 11

1:40pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Hovite says...

It will be hilarious if the costs of the project increases and they have to make it shorter.
It will be hilarious if the costs of the project increases and they have to make it shorter. Hovite
  • Score: 5

2:13pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Roundbill says...

Hovite wrote:
It will be hilarious if the costs of the project increases and they have to make it shorter.
In that case, it's lucky they've decided to take the radical step of building it "from the bottom up". They're not fools.
[quote][p][bold]Hovite[/bold] wrote: It will be hilarious if the costs of the project increases and they have to make it shorter.[/p][/quote]In that case, it's lucky they've decided to take the radical step of building it "from the bottom up". They're not fools. Roundbill
  • Score: 7

3:06pm Fri 20 Jun 14

P.Dant says...

The PR lady accidentally said something real: “The sea itself is kind of beautiful to look at.” And we can look for free.Nature is the best attraction.
The PR lady accidentally said something real: “The sea itself is kind of beautiful to look at.” And we can look for free.Nature is the best attraction. P.Dant
  • Score: 6

3:34pm Fri 20 Jun 14

Royal_Recruit says...

So we finance something all private investors thought was a stupid idea, that the locals think is a stupid idea and pay a company in Holland to do it?! At least use a British company so a bit comes back.
So we finance something all private investors thought was a stupid idea, that the locals think is a stupid idea and pay a company in Holland to do it?! At least use a British company so a bit comes back. Royal_Recruit
  • Score: 5

4:41pm Fri 20 Jun 14

We love Red Billy says...

This was voted though by the Greens and Conservatives as a poison chalice for Labour when they run the city from next May. Mr Kitcat may be running away but he will remain liable. Lets get our money back. He can borrow it off his rich toff dad.
This was voted though by the Greens and Conservatives as a poison chalice for Labour when they run the city from next May. Mr Kitcat may be running away but he will remain liable. Lets get our money back. He can borrow it off his rich toff dad. We love Red Billy
  • Score: 0

1:32am Sat 21 Jun 14

davida2020 says...

I had an open mind in this....until I read all the projections. 739,000 visitors a year compared to 4.2M for the London Eye! A better comparison would be the Brighton Eye. I would love to be proved wrong but I don't think they have a prayer of reaching 50% of their projections - which means council tax payers picking up the cost. If the Greens want to invest in a city infrastructure project that will bring visitors and revenue..... The King Alfred is waiting!
I had an open mind in this....until I read all the projections. 739,000 visitors a year compared to 4.2M for the London Eye! A better comparison would be the Brighton Eye. I would love to be proved wrong but I don't think they have a prayer of reaching 50% of their projections - which means council tax payers picking up the cost. If the Greens want to invest in a city infrastructure project that will bring visitors and revenue..... The King Alfred is waiting! davida2020
  • Score: 4

1:16pm Sun 22 Jun 14

The Heretic says...

rolivan wrote:
Why is there never any mention of how much rent is being paid to The West Pier Trust and where is it going?
Thanks rolivan, I thought I was the only one still under the impression that this folly was being funded by taxpayers' money (without ANY reference to said taxpayers) to underwrite efforts by the near invisible (except when they've got the begging bowl out) West Pier Trust.

Could anyone PLEASE clarify for we lesser mortals whether the putative returns from this project are to be directed towards any part of the West Pier other than the one ticket booth mentioned?

I still think that this sort of sum would have been better spent on the well known issues surrounding the arches and ironwork of the seafront to the benefit of those existing (rate paying) businesses on which the tourist economy is based. One fairground ride doth not a seaside resort make...

The taxpayer funded fiasco of the bathing machines comes to mind. So does the story of Esau's birth-right. Let's hope this mess of potage is worth it .
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: Why is there never any mention of how much rent is being paid to The West Pier Trust and where is it going?[/p][/quote]Thanks rolivan, I thought I was the only one still under the impression that this folly was being funded by taxpayers' money (without ANY reference to said taxpayers) to underwrite efforts by the near invisible (except when they've got the begging bowl out) West Pier Trust. Could anyone PLEASE clarify for we lesser mortals whether the putative returns from this project are to be directed towards any part of the West Pier other than the one ticket booth mentioned? I still think that this sort of sum would have been better spent on the well known issues surrounding the arches and ironwork of the seafront to the benefit of those existing (rate paying) businesses on which the tourist economy is based. One fairground ride doth not a seaside resort make... The taxpayer funded fiasco of the bathing machines comes to mind. So does the story of Esau's birth-right. Let's hope this mess of potage is worth it . The Heretic
  • Score: 1

6:26pm Sun 22 Jun 14

Roundbill says...

I've notice that the Argus always removes any comments which ask what the West Pier Trust has put all the money. Presumably someone from the Trust is monitoring these stories and has a guilty conscience. Never the less, I'll try asking on here again, and see if I get censored for daring to ask: why do so many people in Brighton believe that the West Pier Trust has acted corruptly with so many thousands of pounds, and if there has been no criminal activity, why won't they tell us all what has happened to the money?
I've notice that the Argus always removes any comments which ask what the West Pier Trust has put all the money. Presumably someone from the Trust is monitoring these stories and has a guilty conscience. Never the less, I'll try asking on here again, and see if I get censored for daring to ask: why do so many people in Brighton believe that the West Pier Trust has acted corruptly with so many thousands of pounds, and if there has been no criminal activity, why won't they tell us all what has happened to the money? Roundbill
  • Score: 2

10:45pm Thu 26 Jun 14

SussexLass says...

Imagine living on the seafront watching the polo go up and down while the visitors watch you while they go up and down. And what about the shadow? i-sore is a good name.
Imagine living on the seafront watching the polo go up and down while the visitors watch you while they go up and down. And what about the shadow? i-sore is a good name. SussexLass
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree