“Facts” and the article in today’s View from Seaton
It is regrettable that “facts” are being bandied about to suit the originator – however, it is what one should expect when there is a great deal of money to be made and a great deal of sensationalism can be whipped up. Let us examine some of these “facts”:View says: “No-one has been sacked at the holiday village”. All 152 staff have received redundancy notices and they have been told that they will no longer have jobs after 2 January 2009. The pool, gym and nursery will all close at the same time.View says: the town is /not/ losing its only nursery, there are other pre-school facilities. The nursery is NOT a pre-school facility. Pre-school facilities are for children 2 – 5 before they start school and are free; a child can attend for a maximum of 12.5 hours a week for 38 weeks a year (usually closing during school holidays). The nursery in Seaton takes children from 6 months to 8 years old for working parents (who pay for it) from early morning until evening five days a week including school holidays . It IS the only facility in Seaton that does this.View says: “a “vacate” clause was written into the site’s purchase document seven years ago. This is true *BUT *the “vacate” clause could only come into operation *AFTER* planning permission had been secured for the site, then Hollybush would have had up to 17 months to leave. No such planning permission has been secured therefore Tesco must have bought the holiday village under some other arrangement. Anyone can get a copy of the "vacate clause" lease from the Land Registry in Plymouth to check this.Oddly, the View made no mention of the loss of the pool and gym. But then, of course, their reporter doesn’t live here.
posted by AMatthews @ 7:08 pm
15 Comments:
I dont read the view from seaton anymore
I was struck by the pro-Tesco stance taken in the View from Seaton, and by some of the letters published in its letter page. Call me cynical if you like, but while I am happy to believe the anti-tesco lobby speak from the heart, I do wonder how much of the comment from the pro-Tesco lobby is orchestrated and paid for by Tesco's professional agents and media manipulators. Frankley I smell a rat.
After reading the article today I think it should be re-named 'The View from Tesco'. The fact that this has been the biggest story in Seaton since the news broke and has been routinely ignored or played down by the View says everything.
Even the letters page does not give balance to the discussions/issues raised - amazing for a paper claiming to represent local viewpoints. I suppose someones eye (& wallet) are on the lookout for advertising revenue, after all they'll be losing the advertising from Lyme Bay. I now wish I could look at the way the View from Honiton covered (or not!)their towns battle with Tesco.
The other thing that rankles is the fact that Tesco are seeming to use a Devon based PR company rather than communicate with the town directly - anyone else feeling patronised? As far as I can see, this man John Taynton could say anything we wanted to hear but has no authority or responsibility to see it through - if I'm wrong please correct me, but it's very hard to be anything other than cynical.
My general view on the whole regeneration issue is that Seaton could accomodate another supermarket in order to offer local choice - I haven't got a problem with Tesco, but as there are already so many in the surrounding area I think it would be better for Seaton to have a different player which would bring new people into the town.
I also think it is a duty of any regeneration package to at least replace community facilities, preferably increase them.
My real concern is that Tesco, as represented by their PR, don't seem aware of the whole environmental/logistical nightmare that is the 'infill' issue as they are still glibly assuming that building work will commence as soon as Lyme Bay vacates the site. It makes you wonder if Tesco did their homework or whether Liatris struck a very lucky deal for themselves.
I think the letters reflected a lot of Seaton Residents views after the meeting at Winstons, People were rude to the PR man and shouting get you nowhere! As for the View I do feel that they are not reporting things as they are, it would also be nice to hear from a rep of EDDC!
"Free" newspapers rely on advertising for their revenue to pay the salaries of the journalists
Remember that four page spread around the View from Seaton that Liatris put round
Think of all the advertising a supermarket would do in local papers, think of all the houses that would have to be sold, the new shops that would have to advertise when they open and so on. Now, does it all make sense You can make enemies of your readers but you cant make enemies of your advertisers
I am amazed by what I have read in the "View from..", the reporter seems more interested in scoring points over the national dailies than being objective. The paper can, and I believe usually does, do better than this.
You are wrong gilbert scotland they can make enemies of their adverisers. I advertise in this paper along with other Stand up4 Seaton supporters, small fry in comparison with Tesco perhaps but they are going the right way to make an enemy of me.
I think someone, somewhere has upset the View From reporter. I e-mailed to complain that they had not covered the story last week when many nationals had and was told it was just bad timing. However the Midweek Herald has given good coverage and they found the time to do so.
I too smell a rat. I do think the View from should remember that advertisers rely on people reading their paper, informing them of events, co-operating with them on local issues etc. This is a good opportunity for the Midweek to get back some of the goodwill it lost when the View began to be perceived as more relevant to this area. Allegiences can shift if people think they are not being treated fairly by their local newspaper.
This posting by AMatthews puts the relevant points very clearly and concisely.
Can I suggest that this be sent to the View from Seaton, in the hope that they might print it and regain much of the local goodwill that they have lost by this inaccurate and biassed reporting.
The issue of the "vacate clause" raised by A Matthews is a very telling one. Clearly PR Dogs,as well as Tesco, read this site and we must assume that, if they do not challenge A Matthews' assertions, these assertions become established truth in the mind of the public.
Well PR Dogs(TESCO)? Were you responsible for the impending closure of the holiday or what ? This is your chance to put the record REALLY straight, because if you do not respond, the people of Seaton will accept the A Matthews version of events.
48 hours should give you enough time I think.
Perhaps it would help the readers of this site to look at the media statement issued by Hollybush Hotels last month:
Lyme Bay Leisure Resort has been purchased by supermarket chain Tesco following their acquisition of the former caravan park situated next door and subsequent decision to exercise their option to purchase our property as part of the overall regeneration plan for the area.
This “buy back” clause was included by the owners of Lyme Bay Leisure Resort when Hollybush Hotels Ltd. purchased the site, which was closed at the time, in 2001, and meant that the property would have to be sold back to the owners of the neighbouring site if required.
Although the property has been sold, the resort will continue to operate as normal for the remainder of 2008 and guests will not be affected.
Staff have been fully briefed and we will be entering into a consultation process over the coming months. It is hoped that we will be able to offer staff opportunities to move to other parts of the business wherever possible.
Can we add that all posts and comments we have made on this website have been made openly so that you know they have come from us.
We have certainly not orchestrated any other comments.
There are many people in Seaton who support the regeneration of the town and Tesco's support in doing this, as both our own survey and supporting comments on this site have shown,
Whatever Holybush said some of us have read the terms of sale (available from the Land Registry at low cost) - and they only require a sale if planning permission is granted. The sale of the Holiday Village was not "required" for a supermarket to be built here - it would have been possible to make alternative arrangements for a storm drain!
Most people in Seaton support regeneration, many are willing to have another supermarket. But they have a stronge attachment to the Holiday Village and the company that forced its closure (with active support from EDDC)is not welcome. By forcing the closure of the village Tesco have lost support here. They will have to produce proposals that reinstate lost facilities if they hope to win that support back.
PR dogs are paid money, very good money to manipulate public opinion. They say they do everything openly. I will believe that when Tesco's replaces them for not doing their job, which is essentially one of disinformation, half truths and lies, and paying for support.
Anybody who has seen how politicans work, understand the PR process only too well.
I want another supermarket, but Tesco's seem to more into media control than baked beans
I understood the "buy back" clause to only apply if and when planning permission should be obtained for the change of use of the land that Lyme Bay Holiday Village stands on, from tourism and leisure, to housing.
Since no proposals, plans or any firm indication has been received from Tesco about this site, it is premature in the extreme to close the camp, along with it's tourism, nursery and leisure facilities.
This is not an easy site to build on, and it cannot simply be assumed that any plans that may be submitted will get it right first time.
I think if we are not careful here we will find ourselves doing PR Dogs work for them. They have thier own site where they can do their own PR after all.
Let's concentrate on the important things. Lyme Bay village will close soon and all the staff will lose their jobs. Local businesses will suffer, the nursery, pool and gym will close, 300-400 holidaymakers will be missing from Seaton every day. Tesco cannot deny any of that.
There is no Plan B to keep us going - this town goes on its knees next year (though I can see why Tesco wouldn't be bothered about that).
Let's hear from Tesco (not PR Dogs). Where has miss chiswell gone.
Post a Comment
<< Home