Joyland Books

At a time when Margate Council cannot see the wood for the trees, plans are afoot in Birmingham to build a theme park in the air to address the expected boom in the industry...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west ... 840984.stm

Our 'not connected to Waterbridge' Waterbridge spokesman won't be impressed!

Vince.

We've got an answer to suit everybody now - let Bob build his leisure and shopping complex, then put the new Dreamland on top!

<cough>Bob's an idiot<cough>

The real point in posting the link to the news item was this...

It points out AGAIN that the 'theme parks are not viable' statement is rubbish. The news item backs up the forecast that the UK market is picking up and new attractions are being built, when we are being told that the existing ones are best dropped.

Vince.

marky.com wrote:We've got an answer to suit everybody now - let Bob build his leisure and shopping complex, then put the new Dreamland on top!

Is one assuming that Bob has given up? or has he been sectioned by the local health authority!!

Gary

Attractive well maintained parks are a sure bet.
Dreamland could be both of those things.

Many thanks for that Vince, from a coaster enthusiastes perspective this is a very interessting project and as I doubt many people will have heard of the Statosphere Tower as far as most people will be concerned a world exclusive.

Just think, this could be the Arlington House of the 21st Century.

Again further evidence that the industry is booming, but it seems that the Council aren't interessted in a piece of this pie.

It's a bit like Waterbridge saying that these days most people go abroad for their holiday's, yet Alton Towers have two hotels and Blackpool Pleasure beach, Legoland and Camelot also have a hotel. Alton Towers seems to be planning an extension to one of their exisiting hotels and Chessington, Drayton Manor and Guillivers Land are also planning hotels. Nevertheless the people with power still hang onto the line that people aren't interessted in holidaying in this Country for theme parks.

Hi Neil,

I hear what you say about Waterbridge, but all we have actually heard is what Bob has posted, and now we have it from Toby Hunter that Bob is not one of his guys, then this infomation is void.

Unless he can show otherwise I now believe Bob is in the same category as James, a wind-up merchant who doesn't really know anything. Using Nick's logic for James I think Bob should also be banned.

So what do we have from Waterbridge? A few public statements, but nothing really, until plans are published, we don't really know what they want to do.

Vince.

vince69619 wrote:Hi Neil,

I hear what you say about Waterbridge, but all we have actually heard is what Bob has posted, and now we have it from Toby Hunter that Bob is not one of his guys, then this infomation is void.

Unless he can show otherwise I now believe Bob is in the same category as James, a wind-up merchant who doesn't really know anything. Using Nick's logic for James I think Bob should also be banned.

So what do we have from Waterbridge? A few public statements, but nothing really, until plans are published, we don't really know what they want to do.

Vince.

All Toby Hunter has said is that he doesn't know Bob. That isn't the same as saying he doesn't know the person who is using the name Bob. I have a suspicion that he does (based on my suspicion about who Bob is) but I don't know for certain.

Bob has sometimes come close to attempting to disrupt the forum (e.g. saying that we are all "losers" in one post, and in another stating that the SDC supports Waterbridge on the basis of one forum member being happy to hear that the park will open in 2006). But generally his posts are fine, and often betray a very good knowledge of the site and a number of key issues associated with it...However, I very rarely agree with anything he says. In fact, I can't remember agreeing with anything he has ever said!

Some forums only allow the use of real names, which is something that we could introduce here, but at the moment this is a very well-behaved forum so I don't think it is necessary.

Some forums only allow the use of real names, which is something that we could introduce here, but at the moment this is a very well
behaved forum so I don't think it is necessary.

You mean I would have to start calling myself David Beckham?

Seriously though I can't say whether he is or is not related to Waterbridge, but either way I have a feeling that he has some kind of motive he would rather not make known.

Oh, and it's obvious by his lies and child-like use of language skills and attitude that Bob's not affiliated with Waterbridge.

Well possibly, but remember the job description-"Here's a clue to our culture, you will not be judge by you qulification, or lack of them"

I'm not quite sure what they do judge on, but it seems to me that the type who won't ask questions is just the kind they like.

Nick,

You are right in what you say, but unless Bob finally confirms who he is, so far I am concearned Toby says Bob is nothing to do with them, and there are probably many on the forum that would read this the same way.

Vince.

OK, backtracking a little I've just had a little rumage in my 'coaster cuboard' (yes; I really am sad enough to have an entire cuboard dedicated to roller coaster bits and BOBS.) and have found an interessting article by a journalist who has interviewed James (Godden-not sure if this is the same person as the James who frequented this forum before he got banned)

People don't want to come to the seaside for rides anymore.

Not quite the same thing as saying everyone goes abroad, and he's not Waterbridge, but it's interesting neverthess.

vince69619 wrote:Nick,

You are right in what you say, but unless Bob finally confirms who he is, so far I am concearned Toby says Bob is nothing to do with them, and there are probably many on the forum that would read this the same way.

Vince.

Absolutely. Bob has given us no evidence that he is anything to do with Waterbridge, so as far as I am concerned, he is just a forum member who has a different view to virtually everybody else on here.

He has gone very quiet of late, though.

vince69619 wrote:So what do we have from Waterbridge? A few public statements, but nothing really, until plans are published, we don't really know what they want to do.

Vince.

Sorry to keep taking topics off topic, but when Waterbridge first took Dreamland over Toby Hunter made several interesting statements includuing a fascinating one on the 14th of March 2005 (it's in the news page!)

Mr Hunter said: " Its a fantastic site and its a great opportunity to develop a wonderful forward-thinking leisure, residential and retail complex."

There are several quotes in different papers where Toby Hunter says that housing is likely to be built, and rather worrying this now has some additional semantics as it seems they may have the Conservatives backing.