Author Topic: Llandudno Pier  (Read 178785 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Merddin Emrys

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #765 on: July 04, 2015, 07:22:27 AM »
We visited the pier yesterday to see the ship at around 4 pm to 4.45 pm, looked to me like most visitors were there to see the Balmoral. I saw very little evidence of shopping, I do not know if this is due to lack of spending money or if it is due to shops not having what people want to buy. I suspect t that people visiting prefer to spend on experiences than items? Good to see you yesterday Fester! ☺
A pigeon is for life not just Christmas

wrex

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #766 on: July 04, 2015, 07:36:49 AM »
Everything Fester has said is true,i was born in this town and always been interested in tourism,you all know how i like to point things out and it is definatley quieter for some reason.

Ian

  • Administrator
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #767 on: July 04, 2015, 08:27:42 AM »
Quote
I detect your frustration and disappointment that I will not simply kow-tow to your opinion.

And I'm sorry you feel the need to make this personal, by using marginally abusive language and implying perceptions and stances. What I'm trying to do is ensure a fair and balanced debate - which is difficult when people start becoming unpleasant. Using language like that is a form of bullying. If you cannot debate purely on the facts, then perhaps it's better to say nothing.

You have made a number of comments stated as fact, and they have been proved wrong - not by 'vested interests' as you say, but by objective, University-led studies. You may argue they're utterly wrong; that's your privilege, but don't simply discount them in favour of what you might be seeing.

This is never going to be resolved until we see the end-of-year accounts for the town's traders. If the hotels are steadily losing money, they will close. If the shops are steadily failing to increase sales, they will close. It's already been noted that we have a growing number of shops opening, and we did far less badly than many towns during the pinnacle of the recession. We seem to have new cafes and coffee shops opening all the time. The pier might be quiet, but that might be peculiar to the pier itself, and perhaps one or two other areas. What some of us are saying is that we need objective data, yet when that's located and presented, you simply dismiss it.
“Nothing is so firmly believed as that which we least know.”   ― Michel de Montaigne

Si hoc legere scis, nimis eruditionis habes.

Bosun

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #768 on: July 04, 2015, 09:05:22 AM »
I have taken a great deal of interest in this topic, I generally confine myself to the more frivolous topics,  but believe that the pier is fundamental to the future of Llandudno and I have been interested by everyone's perspective. I took this photograph yesterday at about 2pm., and it shows the amount of people on the prom, and the pier - and this was just after the Balmoral steamed of for her cruise.

Now, I am not suggesting that this is correct, it's a question: Could it be that that a great many visitors to Llandudno are put of from going along the pier because of the 'in-yer-face' amusement arcades and hot-dog stands at the entrance -in that they are the type of visitor who comes to Llandudno for that? The rise of good-quality establishments has been noted on here, is the 'Rhyl' syndrome putting the type of visitors Llandudno gets off visiting the pier? Before you shout at me, remember, it's just a question......
Being negative only makes a difficult journey more difficult. You may have been given a cactus, but you don't have to sit on it.

Merddin Emrys

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #769 on: July 04, 2015, 09:57:38 AM »
There have been amusements there for many years, sadly they replaced the much loved dodgem boats in around 1968, I think that people need a good reason for visiting the pier, like regular boats at the end, clearly the current shops do not attract shoppers? I have no magic answer, but shops need to supply items which customers want or they will not survive! Possibly the Internet and cheap package holidays are a large part of the problem?

A pigeon is for life not just Christmas

Ian

  • Administrator
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #770 on: July 04, 2015, 10:54:33 AM »
Quote
You live there and have no interest in the pier? It's the first place me and Paula make for on our weekend breaks, we love it. Oh and before you tell me it's just a novelty to us because we are 'only tourists', we had one in New Brighton that got demolished and is still sadly missed.

I remember it well, and used to love it as a child. What I was saying is that the doesn't hold a fascination for me in the way it used to as a child.
“Nothing is so firmly believed as that which we least know.”   ― Michel de Montaigne

Si hoc legere scis, nimis eruditionis habes.

wrex

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #771 on: July 04, 2015, 11:33:53 AM »
CCBC have done their best to get Colwyn of the ground and they have made the Bay a magnificent beach,yet there are only 3 traders making money out of it and of course they have made no effort to clear our town beach of stones so where do you think people are on a nice day,i think its 1-0 to CCBC .



Bri Roberts

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #772 on: July 04, 2015, 07:56:43 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Timetable   M.V. BALMORAL

Saturday 4 July
Liverpool 0900**
Llandudno arr 1215
Llandudno dep 1245
Cruise Great Orme & Anglesey
Coast towards RedWharf Bay
Llandudno arr 1530
Llandudno dep 1600
Liverpool 1930

We were sitting on the promenade around 1pm.

Did I see the M.V. Balmoral sailing in the direction of Liverpool or am I mistaken?

norman08

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #773 on: July 04, 2015, 08:22:53 PM »
You are correct bri ,I was by the paddling pool about 12.30 ish seen it comming across sailed right round the Orme  bit later you seen it sailing back to Liverpool , Not a very good advert ,see how they get on tomorrow .

wardeworld

  • Member
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #774 on: July 04, 2015, 10:38:52 PM »
well i had prebooked tickets for this afternoon cruise - still waiting to board and not a  squeak from the company as to what happened

norman08

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #775 on: July 04, 2015, 11:41:56 PM »
That is another problem they have when we used to have the Iom boats comming in we had ship to shore radio contact ,weather conditions etc they have nothing now , I,m sure you were so looking forward to the sailing .

Fester

  • Ad Free Member.
  • *
  • El Baldito
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #776 on: July 05, 2015, 01:50:52 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
I detect your frustration and disappointment that I will not simply kow-tow to your opinion.

And I'm sorry you feel the need to make this personal, by using marginally abusive language and implying perceptions and stances. What I'm trying to do is ensure a fair and balanced debate - which is difficult when people start becoming unpleasant. Using language like that is a form of bullying. If you cannot debate purely on the facts, then perhaps it's better to say nothing.

You have made a number of comments stated as fact, and they have been proved wrong -


 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Ian,  we have met personally, and I hope to again, I never set out to offend.
All today's contributors I have met personally, and will hopefully do so again, many times over...
I might approach things differently to you, but that doesn't constitute 'abuse' surely??

No matter what I say, you won't accept it.... and if I can't commission a University survey, then I must be wrong.
I am utterly bemused that you find any of my comments abusive, I have scratched my (bald) head, and genuinely can't see what you mean by that repeated statement.
You mentioned 'bullying'... (that's borderline abusive in itself I would have thought), ... I have wracked my brains to try and fathom what you could possibly mean by that.
Do you feel that the argument is going against you, given the weight of responses we have seen?  If so, that's not bullying, that's just what people think!   Don't feel threatened by it, we are ALL entitled to our opinions.

I gave up believing official reports in 2004, when a very powerful Govt body proved that Saddam Hussein had missiles that could strike the UK in 45 minutes, and we had better get to war to sort him out!
The rest is history..... so hopefully you will forgive me if I use the evidence I see around me, and think for myself from that point onwards.

Incidentally,  I would expect bullying behaviour to be against Forum rules. Therefore, if I am guilty of it... (and it is proven) then surely I must be banned.
However, my fellow Star Trek loving friend..... if YOU are found to be the bully.... then you must 'self destruct' .... it's in your programming!!       Remember the Nomad probe in the Original Series???   :laugh: [*££] :laugh: [*££] ?{}?


Fester...
- Semper in Excretum, Sole Profundum Variat -

Ian

  • Administrator
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #777 on: July 05, 2015, 11:14:40 AM »
Quote
No matter what I say, you won't accept it.... and if I can't commission a University survey, then I must be wrong.

I not sure where you’re getting that from.  I’ve said many times that I don’t dispute your opinions regarding the Pier. How can I? You’re there and I’m not. But if subjective opinions, based on single-viewpoint observations, were always valid, then we’d still assume the Sun goes round the Earth.

The reason University-led research is usually better than subjective opinion is the Academic verification structure, but more on that later.

Where I take issue is when you present opinions as facts viz:

 “Llandudno is pretty much like a ghost town this year”
 “those who are coming are spending very little indeed”
 “…many other shops (of all kinds) are closing so early in the day, and many closing down for good”
 “no one is wanting to buy anything”
 “are there any Llandudno hotels that are NOT up for sale”:
 “…a rapidly growing proportion of them are from Asian or Eastern European ethnicity.”
 “Ian and Steve H went to great lengths to find a billion Google articles”

Putting aside the fact that you clearly enjoy hyperbole I’ve attempted rationally to argue the case that Llandudno - far from being the deserted carcass of a once-famous holiday resort as you seemingly imply - is alive and well and, although I accept a lot could be done to safeguard what we once had, we’re in far, far better condition than I would have expected at this point in a prolonged and desperate period of austerity.

To take your post in more detail:

Quote
I am utterly bemused that you find any of my comments abusive

I think your reaction to my assertions is often belligerent and phrases such as “I detect your frustration and disappointment that I will not simply kow-tow to your opinion” I believe are, as I said, marginally abusive. You’re personalising a debate and by using a pejorative you’re moving close to abuse. Why? I can only assume you don’t like anyone to contradict your oft stated opinions and views with facts and thus seek to distract from their impact by creating a conflicted situation. I could well be wrong, but that’s the way it appears.

If you don’t agree, offer verifiable facts but please don’t descend to playground politics.

Quote
You mentioned 'bullying'... (that's borderline abusive in itself I would have thought)


I got the phrase from your not infrequent use of it, so I assumed you would be unperturbed by its use. I see you’re not, so perhaps you will exercise more caution  with the word in future. There are, as I’m sure you know, many forms of bullying but the salient point about it is the use of influence to intimidate. You have significant influence (yes, really…) and by phrases such as the one I quoted above you’re seeking to garner sympathy by portraying yourself as the underdog. Despite, I might add, being an alpha male.

Quote
I have wracked my brains to try and fathom what you could possibly mean by that.


Debates become arguments fairly easily. A debate is usually a formal discussion where (unwritten) rules are followed to prevent actual and sometimes physical conflict emerging. But there’s another dimension to debates; the use of objectively garnered and independently verifiable data to prove or disprove points being made. Debates also draw very clear distinctions between what qualifies as fact and what qualifies as opinion. As you rightly point out, everyone is entitled to their opinion but without facts to establish the veracity or otherwise of that opinion, that’s all it is - an opinion. I could, for instance, argue that the moon landings never took place but there is a huge body of scientific and technical data to support the fact that they did.

Quote
Do you feel that the argument is going against you, given the weight of responses we have seen? 

That sentence illustrates the main difference between you and me. In a debate, we’re trying to establish facts, whereas you seem to view it as individual winners and losers. You are a big presence on the forum, a major presence and never afraid to offer opinions on everything and anything.  You’re the likeable bloke in the pub, the centre of amusement, the frustrated comic who loves the limelight and views the forum as a stage on which to perform.

And that’s perfectly fine so long as when you make points in serious debates you do so seriously and consider the facts without inserting throwaways into your arguments.  Then it becomes political.

I suspect you also see arguments as having two sides. But arguments normally have as many sides or facets as there are contributors.  I strongly suspect the ‘two sides’ concept is perpetuated by the Parliamentary structure, but I could be wrong.

Quote
I gave up believing official reports in 2004, when a very powerful Govt body proved that Saddam Hussein had missiles that could strike the UK in 45 minutes, and we had better get to war to sort him out!

And that’s a perfect example of what I’m talking about. In that single paragraph you've done the following:

 1.  sought to muddy the waters by introducing unrelated points
 2. Made misleading, unrelated and actually incorrect assertions (that’s not what the Dossier actually said)
 3. Attempted to further sow confusion by deliberately conflating opposed meanings (“official”)
 4. Done your usual throwaway to deflect the course of debate.

 
Quote
The rest is history..... so hopefully you will forgive me if I use the evidence I see around me, and think for myself from that point onwards.

Of course, and provided that evidence is properly documented and independently verified, then I have no quibble. But, once again, you’re conflating issues.

The first phrase - “The rest is history” - related to the preceding paragraph, which was itself deeply flawed (or plain wrong), and by using a sequential conjunction (so) you inextricably link your reasoning to a flawed statement. That equates to building a house with cardboard as the foundation.

But the most telling phrase is this: “(I) think for myself from that point onwards”.  That implies that you have at a single stroke dismissed all the evidence which is contrary to your own assertions (first paragraph) and now make all your deductions on some subjective, inconsistent and possibly haphazard observations, which you’ve then generalised to fit the entire town. Much of what you claim to know as fact is actually contradictory, such as your comments about the shops in general. I’d show you it all, only this post is already overlong.

In summary I’ve no issue with your opinions whatsoever, provided you make it clear that’s what they are, and you stop stating things as fact which clearly aren’t. It also might be useful if you were to revise your appreciation of independent and verifiable studies. I agree they’re often far from perfect, sometimes draw incorrect conclusions, sometimes reveal influences, prejudices and are even sometimes sponsored by vested interests. But that’s what the academic structure is all about, however: by forcing reviewers to publish their data and - crucially - the ways in which it was obtained, it’s all subject to peer review and the inaccuracies found.

That’s partially what happened in the worst case of its kind: the MMR ‘research’ which not only sparked a wave of hysteria among worried mothers but led indirectly to the deaths and disabilities of many children.  Eventually, Wakefield, whose research had caused it and whose methodology was found to be incredibly flawed was eventually struck off. Interestingly, however, that was through the efforts of a Sunday Times reporter (Brian Deede, I seem to remember )  and not simply peer review. 

But when all the data Steve and I have located is examined and it’s all broadly saying the same thing, or reaching similar conclusions, then it stands to reason that a single person making random observations might, just conceivably, be less than accurate.
“Nothing is so firmly believed as that which we least know.”   ― Michel de Montaigne

Si hoc legere scis, nimis eruditionis habes.

SDQ

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #778 on: July 05, 2015, 11:41:31 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Quote
No matter what I say, you won't accept it.... and if I can't commission a University survey, then I must be wrong.

But when all the data Steve and I have located is examined and it’s all broadly saying the same thing, or reaching similar conclusions, then it stands to reason that a single person making random observations might, just conceivably, be less than accurate.


Jeez! You've got too much spare time on your hands dude!
Find a hobby!
« Last Edit: July 05, 2015, 04:28:29 PM by Ian »
Valar Morghulis

Nemesis

  • Ad Free Member
  • *
Re: Llandudno Pier
« Reply #779 on: July 05, 2015, 01:57:06 PM »
If I , as a mere bystander, might interrupt any argument to state a fact.....the pier was packed to the gunnels yesterday afternoon.
Mad, Bad and Dangerous to know.