HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #221  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 7:24 AM
Bluenote's Avatar
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winnipeg Architect View Post
Waterfront Drive needs a grocer, medical clinic and a Coffee Shop.

And the Duncan Arena painted or torn down. Major Eyesore.

Plus the docks have to be repaired as a minimum.

Centre Venture promised a lot of improvements to this street in 2010 and have done nothing as they did whatever True North wanted for their development across from the MTS Centre.

They feel their work is done in the Waterfront/Exchange.
Chipmans blah blah blah
True north blah blah blah

Yet you and Simplicity. The negative Nancy's on any project where all for the Alt. And now you are against it.

Really. Are you ever happy? Seriously question. As I can go into any thread and see you two bashing everything. Heck I even find Simplicity in the general Canada forum bashing.

You all need to get outside and away from your keyboards as it is obvious you spend way way to much time here searching for everything you can find to fill some void in your lives to run down anything that has a positive spin on this city.

Btw. The east exchange was a joke to start. Who builds and doesn't build parking? Especially In the hopes the city will welfare them a parkade?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #222  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 3:40 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
Chipmans blah blah blah
True north blah blah blah

Yet you and Simplicity. The negative Nancy's on any project where all for the Alt. And now you are against it.

Really. Are you ever happy? Seriously question. As I can go into any thread and see you two bashing everything. Heck I even find Simplicity in the general Canada forum bashing.

You all need to get outside and away from your keyboards as it is obvious you spend way way to much time here searching for everything you can find to fill some void in your lives to run down anything that has a positive spin on this city.

Btw. The east exchange was a joke to start. Who builds and doesn't build parking? Especially In the hopes the city will welfare them a parkade?
Given I've never even been into the general Canada forum, that's impressive you've seen posts from me in there.

Last edited by 1ajs; Feb 13, 2015 at 5:20 PM. Reason: deleted unessary personal attack.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #223  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 5:19 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lynn lake
Posts: 24,357
simplicity realy that last bit was unclalled for
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #224  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 8:45 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,993
SkyCity model. Doesn't quite look like the rendering. I counted 43 floors plus the white rooftop detail.



from SkyCityCentre WPG ‏@SkyCityWinnipeg Twitter
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #225  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 8:48 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,710
Of course not. They realized how expensive the top hat or whatever was. So it's nixed. And the cool looking glazing pattern is gone too. Oh well, still a tall building at a similar height to the original. Maybe it's just incomplete and doesn't have some of the features added yet. What about the St. Regis, that was supposed to be redeveloped by these guys and I was expecting the podium to now include that site. Or maybe it does. I don't know, hard to tell.

Puting all the economics and that aside. How would the new energy code affect this building? I'm assuming they would have a hard time going with a Glasshouse style building. Which is what the SkyCity model looks like.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #226  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 8:52 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,993
The model is still being constructed so I guess some features might still be added. Again I would be happy if a building half that size takes up one those hideous gravel parking lots on Graham.

.......Simplicity - no need to comment on how they are crooks and how it wont be built. I am merely commenting on the image, model and site.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #227  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 8:57 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,710
Lol everyone and their disclaimers.. sheesh. Anyways, I as well would be happy if half the building went up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #228  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 8:59 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 5,832
if nothing else, it's kinda cool that a development in Winnipeg is getting the "model" treatment. That's pretty rare here.

Thanks for posting Biff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #229  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 9:00 PM
bomberjet bomberjet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 7,710
dCondo actually had a really nice model, with interior lighting and all, when I stopped into their display office. I was impressed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #230  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2015, 10:05 PM
1ajs's Avatar
1ajs 1ajs is offline
ʇɥƃıuʞ -*ʞpʇ*-
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: lynn lake
Posts: 24,357
looks like a simlar finish that one of the evergreen towers was refinished with so i would say its going for a glass look while meeting the new code should be interesting

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #231  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2015, 12:21 AM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff View Post
The model is still being constructed so I guess some features might still be added. Again I would be happy if a building half that size takes up one those hideous gravel parking lots on Graham.

.......Simplicity - no need to comment on how they are crooks and how it wont be built. I am merely commenting on the image, model and site.
I just laugh at this stuff now.

Hang on for next week. I'm building 90 storey Lego tower everybody can dissect. There's a grocer and condos and a hockey arena and like, two thousand condo units and four pools and the biggest sauna in the western hemisphere. It's also gonna be so tall people are going to need clearance to be up there and - and! - they'll have to take an oxygen tank with them.

And it's all right around the corner. Just lining up that grocer and we're good to go!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #232  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2015, 12:37 AM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is offline
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,025
I can't help but feel that there are some of us on this forum who are hell bent on seeing skycity fail. Stop being so negative and dismissive. I understand that this has been a dubious proposal from the outset but the worst thing that could happen is that the thing actually gets built and we add to the skyline. As long as I'm not the sucker that stands to lose here, I don't see why we should demonize a pretty cool and progressive development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #233  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2015, 5:32 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 5,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1ajs View Post
looks like a simlar finish that one of the evergreen towers was refinished with so i would say its going for a glass look while meeting the new code should be interesting

I don't believe the model is the finished product, or colour.
__________________
"But a city can be smothered by too much reverence for its past. The skyline must keep acquiring new peaks, because the day we consider it complete and untouchable is the day the city begins to die." - Justin Davidson - May 2010 Issue of New York
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #234  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2015, 6:30 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimusREIM View Post
I can't help but feel that there are some of us on this forum who are hell bent on seeing skycity fail. Stop being so negative and dismissive. I understand that this has been a dubious proposal from the outset but the worst thing that could happen is that the thing actually gets built and we add to the skyline. As long as I'm not the sucker that stands to lose here, I don't see why we should demonize a pretty cool and progressive development.
You've completely missed the point. The development is irrelevant. Nobody cares about some fictitious building with no development partner because the guy is on the verge of bankruptcy elsewhere. The idea of this building being built is a long dead fantasy. But this forum tends to have a high google ranking. And it gets passed around on Twitter from one disgruntled investor to the next because they have no means for recourse in any other capacity. The only thing I've ever tried to make the point about is that some slimy, unqualified sales guy who can't get his hands on the Glengarry leads and whose bosses are convicted fraudsters might be calling you to sell you some bonds as part of some impossible project that claims to protect your principal with security that doesn't exist in a market you likely don't understand and you should be careful. And I've laid out nothing but facts.

If anybody still thinks this project is happening, I don't know what to tell you. It's not. Holding out hope is great, but it doesn't change that. It's not like if the wind blows just right the thing could manifest. Every little movement we see is just Fortress trying to keep the idea alive so the investors don't get too squirrely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #235  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 6:47 AM
Bluenote's Avatar
Bluenote Bluenote is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Winnipeg / St Vital
Posts: 1,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simplicity View Post
You've completely missed the point. The development is irrelevant. Nobody cares about some fictitious building with no development partner because the guy is on the verge of bankruptcy elsewhere. The idea of this building being built is a long dead fantasy. But this forum tends to have a high google ranking. And it gets passed around on Twitter from one disgruntled investor to the next because they have no means for recourse in any other capacity. The only thing I've ever tried to make the point about is that some slimy, unqualified sales guy who can't get his hands on the Glengarry leads and whose bosses are convicted fraudsters might be calling you to sell you some bonds as part of some impossible project that claims to protect your principal with security that doesn't exist in a market you likely don't understand and you should be careful. And I've laid out nothing but facts.

If anybody still thinks this project is happening, I don't know what to tell you. It's not. Holding out hope is great, but it doesn't change that. It's not like if the wind blows just right the thing could manifest. Every little movement we see is just Fortress trying to keep the idea alive so the investors don't get too squirrely.
For a person who doesn't believe in it you sure take a lot of effort to tear it apart.
Have you noticed your negative attitude is starting to be a drain on this forum? If you don't like it or them. Then move on. No one really wants to hear your repetitive posts. Just take a step away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #236  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 11:57 AM
SD1 SD1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote View Post
For a person who doesn't believe in it you sure take a lot of effort to tear it apart.
Have you noticed your negative attitude is starting to be a drain on this forum? If you don't like it or them. Then move on. No one really wants to hear your repetitive posts. Just take a step away.
I disagree completely. Simplicity is the only one putting out hard numbers and presenting a solid, reasoned critique of this project specifically, and the Fortress business model more generally. He's the reason I hang around here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #237  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 5:07 PM
Labroco's Avatar
Labroco Labroco is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 265
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD1 View Post
I disagree completely. Simplicity is the only one putting out hard numbers and presenting a solid, reasoned critique of this project specifically, and the Fortress business model more generally. He's the reason I hang around here.
I tend to agree...

Although a slightly gentler approach would be appreciated first thing in the morning and would add to simplicity's rational position...

You really have to ask why they spent $9,500,000 for a site that sold months earlier for $4,500,000 ...

That's 48,000 ft2 of land at over $90ft2!! (Highest price to that date).

The fortress price was almost $200ft2!!

$5,000,000 of investors money flew out the window on the day the transaction
closed...

Typical OPM mentality .

Go try and make any sense of that!

If anything it should be use as a comparable for the Carlton Avenue site in an attempt to recover its huge purchase price... (CV went on record justifying the purchase price by using this site as a comprable).

I think this sale will be excluded though in an attempt to average down the final Carlton sale price...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #238  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 5:35 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,391
LOL that model is pretty clearly not finished yet.. it does take time to build those things you know.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #239  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 6:47 PM
IN'SAUGA IN'SAUGA is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 8
So is this proposal still alive?... I keep hearing rumours that it is dead. I hope it's still going forward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #240  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2015, 7:23 PM
Simplicity Simplicity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,773
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labroco View Post
I tend to agree...

Although a slightly gentler approach would be appreciated first thing in the morning and would add to simplicity's rational position...

You really have to ask why they spent $9,500,000 for a site that sold months earlier for $4,500,000 ...

That's 48,000 ft2 of land at over $90ft2!! (Highest price to that date).

The fortress price was almost $200ft2!!

$5,000,000 of investors money flew out the window on the day the transaction
closed...

Typical OPM mentality .

Go try and make any sense of that!

If anything it should be use as a comparable for the Carlton Avenue site in an attempt to recover its huge purchase price... (CV went on record justifying the purchase price by using this site as a comprable).

I think this sale will be excluded though in an attempt to average down the final Carlton sale price...
I think the site is actually closer to an 1.5 acres making the price closer to $150 sq ft - but yeah, ridiculous.

And it's explained by the fact that Fortress takes a commission on the deal from the investors for putting it together. Their incentive lies in manipulating the value to the high side as far as it will go. And it's funny because not long after that deal closed I had a commercial appraisal done on a property on a similar piece of property by a very reputable AACI appraiser. He went out of his way to throw out the comparable noting that there's absolutely no justification for it, so if CV was using that to justify their purchase of the Carlton Inn, they're either too unsophisticated to deal with property valuation or complicit. Neither better than the other.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:09 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.