Why save Dreamland?

[dave771]

Just for the record members of the campaign did put an offer in writing at the end of December to Waterbridge to take the park on for a three year contract but of course never received any response from them. Proposals were suggested from campaign members but if the current owners choose to ignore them there is nothing more that can be done to secure a contract. I look forward to your response Bob but as you have been proved wrong yet again I doubt very much that you will respond !

[Jim Douglas Jr.]

Yes.
Bob, perhaps you don't understand the amount of money that's being talked about. These real eastate companies have more money than God.

Isn't there a message board for negative people? Bob, really. If you hate it so much, don't go. Should any harm come to any of the listed buildings in the form of vandalism or arson, we'll be sure to ring your bell first.

The fastest way to get Dreamland back on it's feet is to continue to pressure the council to reverse the change of use that was assigned to the property to drop it's value. The current owner will continue to seek developement on it as long as it's zoned for redevelopement.

Perhaps Dreamland isn't the money maker it could be in it's current state. It will need a massive beautification for sure, but this is all within the scope of what can be done. It's going to be easier to replace trees and grass than to build flats and stupid shopping. Whoever paved Dreamland should be shot, but that's over and done with.

Operators will continue to see Dreamland as the portable-ride county fair that it's been treated as as long as it remains in it's current state.
However, it's still imperative to get it operation and then work on getting the changes made as soon as possible.

I have a friend in Ramsgate (it was a suprise to me how close that is to Margate) who didn't even know Dreamland had still been open the last couple years, yet here I sit an ocean and a continent away trying to do something. There are people who care, so keep up the excellent work. Keep in mind that even your neighbors might not know the situation, so continue working the radio, papers, and TV.

[Nick]

You are all so certain Dreamland is a massive money pot so why the reluctance of you to Invest in it. There is nothing at all to stop you operating rides this year or sub contracting it to an operator. Think of all the money the Save Dreamland Campaign can make and you can prove how profitable it is.

There is not a hope in hell you will though. You commitment runs to hot air only.

Of course, you know very well that we are a pressure group, not an amusement park operating company. We prefer to leave that to people who know how to do it, such as Adventure Island.

However, you are clearly unaware that an active member of this campaign made a formal expression of interest to run the park following the advert in World's Fair. To the best of my knowledge, he has not even been given the courtesy of a reply. So please do not raise that issue again until Waterbridge either a) reply to the expression of interest, or b) issue a lease to this member.

And, as Jim Douglas Jr said, please try and stay on topic.

Nick

[Neil]

You are very keen to tell other that they should subsidies a loss making business that has lost money every year for the past 20 years

If you are going to spam in an inappropriate topic please atleast post original spam. 20 years ago would bring us to 1986 when the park was apparently still attracting almost 2 million visitors a year. That's more than Thorpe park, Legoland, Chessington and pretty much every UK theme park save Alton Towers. I take this from a very reliable source (Dreamland Remembered) so please don't fob me off with 'it wasn't making money'. You pull these statsistics out of thin and hope we won't challenge you. It's like you said a major ride can't be built for under £5 million and like you said that the 'fency' didn't need planning permission when the Council had already written to Waterbridge. You're a time waste.

Will it be operating any rides will it be doing anything other then generate hot air of course not.

If I've mis-translated you poor english then I apologise in advance, but I think you're saying we produce hot air. This must be very nice for you considering how cold it is out at the moment. You are also producuing hot air, but unfortunately yours stinks.

You claim that Dreamland can make money and are so certain it will so invest your own money in it the opportunity is there

As Nick said, we are a pressure group and not an amusment park operator and if you haven't grasped that much yet then you must be even slower than I gave you credit for.

...he has not even been given the courtesy of a reply.

Unfortunately Waterbridge are a very rude company. I have also tried to make contact with them (although not about running the park) and was ignored. Bob's assessment that you are like dirt if you aren't filthy rich having milked towns for every penny sums Waterbridge up. It's a shame Sandy Ezikiel can't see that!

[Neil]

Sorry to double post (although I'm not that sorry or I wouldn't be doing it!!!). I've added another page to my campaign mini-site. It's basically kind of a homepage to it all explaining a bit of history, why we're campaigning, how people can help...etc
http://www.freewebs.com/savedreamland/index.htm
Again it won't win many awards for presentation, but hopefully it gives some background info to those who aren't as familar with the campaign as we are.

[Neil]

Well a tripple post makes me look kind of desparate, but here it is.

I emailed Toby Hunter earlier today asking for his response on my statement about Dreamland (the list of reasons to save it). I really apprechiated his prompt reply, which I have to admit puts him under a better light than some of his collegues. here it is:

Dear Mr Wilson,

Thank you for your note. Most of your web mail is one sided and as such inaccurate. But thank you none the less for trying to stimulate interest in Margate.

I am a great supporter of strong debate and welcome the attention that you and your campaign members are giving to such a wonderful site.

No doubt when I am ready to say more about the future of Dreamland, you too will be one of the first to read about it in the press.

With regard to the pallisade fence - Bob is unknown to me by the way - this issue is a matter of public record.

Yours,

Toby Hunter.

There's a lot to say about this, and so feel free to give comments before I make the fourth consecutive post.
Cheers

[David Ellis]

When Toby mentioned that "Bob" was not known to him, did you refer to him as Bob in your communication with Toby, or call him by the name we think he really is?

David.

[Sarah]

No doubt when I am ready to say more about the future of Dreamland, you too will be one of the first to read about it in the press.

Grrr. I'm still angry that the Gazette - my local paper, not Hunter's local paper - printed his really quite long statement word for word. Without giving us right of reply and, so far, without printing my response (if they do, it'll most likely be edited to shreds).

So on past experience, yes, when he next makes some kind of public utterance - whether it be on how unseasonably chilly March is this year, or the fact that someone needs to run the hoover round the office - I expect the Gazette will fall over themselves to print it. Pronto.

Grrr.

Sarah

[Neil]

When Toby mentioned that "Bob" was not known to him, did you refer to him as Bob in your communication with Toby, or call him by the name we think he really is?

David.

I named him as Bob, since I wasn't 100% certain as to whether he was or wasn't really Barry Moss. Nevertheless since he hasn't denied that he is really Mr Moss, it suggests there is something he would prefer to have covered up, just as he has failed to comment on the witty posts by his friend James. The thing that most intrigged me was the criticism that my statement is somehow less valid than his because mine is one sided. Clearly we have strong views on this, but I don't want to seem too critical as if I am clearly he will be justified in not responding to future emails sent to him by campagin members. As I said before it is better that he gave this reponse, than did what his colleugues would no doubt have done and quickly hit delete before even finishing reading it.

[vince69619]

Personally I think we should just go with the line that Toby Hunter does not know a 'Bob' and therefore Bob is nothing to do with Waterbridge.

I do think however that individual members should refrain from contacting Waterbridge and leave this to 'official' contact from the campaign leaders.

Vince.

[David Ellis]

I think that is very sensible advice.

David.

[Neil]

OK, the coordinators I've spoken to have seemed happy about it, but I will take your advice (although to a certain extent now I have to reply to replys or it would seem rude. If I suddenly ignore the comments Toby Hunter takes the trouble to send surely that's the worst possible thing?).

Anyhow I wasn't writting as a representative from the campaign, and as such the reference to Bob was a sideline and that wasn't the purpose of my email. As you know I am creating a mini-site which includes my statement (as a response to Toby Hunter's). I will then add a set of 'responses' to it which include a few MPs (I managed to get David Cameron to give a few lines on it, but on this note I had spoken to Nick about it before making contact), some Councillors and I thought that it would be interessting to include a comment from the developers perspective (hence the reference to 'webmail'). Nevertheless I happy to drop the project if member's of the campaign feel it isn't a good idea.

I can see that I am not a coordinator and that the danger is my email's could be taken to stand for the entire campaign which they do not. It's just that clearly people like Nick and Sarah are doing so much already I wanted something I could get my teeth into that would be practicle from my remote location of deepest darkest North Oxfordshire.

ps In regard to David Cameron, the letter was from a representative for him at the House of Commons, but they transcripe what he apparently said.

[vince69619]

Hello Neil,

The reason I suggested holding back from emailing people like Toby Hunter is that ad-hoc communications from members of the campaign might easily be interpreted as official communication rather than individual.

There may be merit in discussing this with Nick in this case, but I thought we should discourage general emailing, we could easily damage the campaign if everyone here contact people like Toby Hunter.

Best regards
Vince.

[Jim Douglas Jr.]

I agree.
I would think messges that simply state support for the park and campaign would be OK, but asking questions and making statements should be avoided. Since there's been so much done over the last couple weekends, it might be prudent to hold off and let the recent weekend poll taking commitee draft something.

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

[Neil]

OK, thanks for your comments. I can see that emailing Toby Hunter has upset quite a few people, so I'm sorry.

I would think messges that simple state support for the park and campaign would be OK

Possibly, but we've already done that so clearly for us to make head way we have to do something more (although it seems that the strategy I'm taking isn't it). My statement simply provides a list of 12 key reasons for saving Dreamland and nothing more.

Again I may be in a minorty here, but logically there can't be anything wrong with giving reasons for supporting Dreamland. In terms of holding off, again I realise that there is a feeling amongst some people that I'm rushing. I actually put the original statement online over two weeks ago so this is a longer running project with me trying to get a response as to how people view it and most importantly whether they can come up with any effective counter arguments, or alternatively to see whether people are pursuaded by it and if not why they don't think my arguments are valid enough.

Again in this instance I may have rushed into something (although again as far as I'm aware the coordinators are still happy with the project), but with us being into the last week of the public consultation I'm surprised if this is the time when we should be holding off campaigning.