Fascinating, that'll give many hours profitable consideration

Thanks for your support, John.  It must have been frustrating for you, I have no doubt.  Of course, in order to bring people to the negotiating table, you need one of two things - something that they want (incentives) or something that they want to avoid (sanctions or threats).  The more of both you have, the more power you wield.

I suspect that, as far as the other side was concerned, you were still in "sales" mode - in other words you still had to persuade them that your solution was the answer to their requirements; they therefore felt able to walk away if they judged that your solution did not meet their requirements.  The simple truth of the matter is that they were not persuaded and therefore, as far as they were concerned, you had no hold over them.  Hugely frustrating, of course, when you believe as passionately as you do in your proposition.

What has happened subsequently will do little to make that rejection any easier I suspect.  Anyhow - onwards and upwards!  No point in being bitter !

The problem with work is it is the curse of the curling classes.
Just back in civilisation and thought I would see what progress had been made on the Lees Painting and found this.
Is it any wonder the RCCC board choose to ignore this site, would you want to continually read this deluded dribble?
An ice rink is just another capital project, does the capital investment sum generate sufficient income to justify it. Yes - go  No means No
John,  Unless you can convince a private investor of this you finished before you start.
Local authorities are trying to keep people employed at the moment so not much opportunity there.
The curlers of Cupar have had the B-lls to have a go themselves and I wish them luck.
Kinross is a pipe dream driven by a landowner who will fall heir to it if it gets built and fails. The problem with Kinross is it not just a curling rink, but a suite of offices for RCCC which it does not require now that the extension to the airport has been shelved and a museum which is in the wrong place and will not generate an income to cover its running costs.
On Kinross, John is absolutely correct
ICE RINKS
As for a standard design the actual building design costs are only a small part of the package, it will be the land purchase, site conditions and what other extras you wish to add.
Have a look at existing successful ice rinks, Lockerbie , Nissan Type Building,
Stranraer Atcost Farm building and block walls , Greenacres, minimum steel portal frame.
As far as I am aware John’s experience is based around the four sheeter at Forrest Hills, Excellent facility, excellent icemaker and still it closed.
Simple, it did not have enough customers for McDonald Hotels to keep it open.

John, I think its time you accepted that perhaps its not the design or the idea that’s been rejected but that you have not come up with a project on a site which can generate enough income to make it a viable investment.
In the meantime (unless you own the site) if you could stop going round in circles trying to justify your Circle with a personal vendetta against RCCC, they and a lot more people might see this Forum as a potential platform to monitor the unbiased opinion of curlers. We might even have humorous circle of friends out there I was going say keep on sliding John but again I think that something you don’t do.
Of to back to the uncivilised European continent for another three weeks.
CHEERS




 

I think you might be close to libel in these statements about the Manager, may be he was just like the RCCC members who would not listen to the your dribble.
The Forest Hills curling rink is now part of an extended swimming pool and a every expensive 
gym with a lot staff running it, would say they have spent a large part of the £100k, increased  turnover and still have 2/3rd of the rink left for future development.
Its surprising how Forest Hill have survived without your guidance.
Never mind John if the chopper fails you wont hear anymore from me, O and by the way I once had a look on the way through Copehagen at their rink. Simple effective, modern steel clad portal frame building. Its OK for them but would not work here as from memory its either five or six sheets. Perhaps there is a large market available in North America to replace all the Three, Five, Six and Eight sheet rinks they have got wrong.
Look on the bright side John, more often than not recognition of ones great talents usually comes after they have passed away. Your right though, best not to suffer in silence in the mean time. 
Look forward to your continuing sermons in 20 days time.pity the RCCC board were not of the same mind.
Cheers Old Boy



     
   

Thanks, Robin. The principal reason why Jamie had to get rid of us was because he wanted control of the project, and with us on board he would have had to negotiate. I believe the mash they have now is a direct result of his involvement. But let's leave it there, I am doing my best to complete the report that will spell out the whole business for the record and I will make it known here once the report is available.

Yet another gem, and a very relevant one, from this blog:

http://www.scotworkblog.com/index.php/2010/11/integrity-is-it-over-rated/

There remains much integrity in Curling. Sadly I can name a few who have let it slip for their own personal gain.

These people continue to find some very good ways of making a point. Check this one:

http://www.scotworkblog.com/index.php/2011/04/how-much/