Glentress bids selected

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-12275646

Dont really have any strong views who gets it, Alpine bikes or the Glentress hotel lot.

Shame the Hubs gotta go though!!

No “or” about it: Alpine preferred bidder for the shop, GT Restaurants for the cafe.

and whos looking after the trails ……

not going to get into a debate so ill keep my views to my self 😉

i will the new centre is not needed not wanted and a fekin waste of money ! IMHO

i for one will never cross that bridge!

GT is fine as it is thanks IMHO

I have nothing constructive to say.

deertrackdoctor. Have you never been there on a busy winter saturday when you have to queue for ages to get served and there are no seats inside the cafe?

Whatever you think of who got the contracts the new building is essential.

So yo are not going to eat or drink at Glentress again?

correct !

not a penny to FE!

But you’ll be happy to ride on the trails there?

Blimey he could bankrupt them.

Least it’s still local business, does it need a centre well it’s very popular so ni doubt it’ll be used. Minus 1 person of course.

I for one welcome our new cafe overlords, with their newfangled roof.

druidh
yes i will probably treat it the same as I did before the man made trails or the hub ever happened.
i will ride through and around glentress forest now and again.

i much prefer selkirk,innerleithen area if im up towards the tweed valley.

IMHO FE have far too much say in MTB in scotland.

deertrackdoctor – Member

“IMHO FE have far too much say in MTB in scotland. “

Could you expand a bit on that? Unless I’m missing it completely, the FC’s say extends to mtb on FC land, which is hard to argue with. And the reason that gives them a big say over mtb in general in scotland is that their contribution is so important. Does it exceed that?

>Does it exceed that?<

Subtly – yes. There is only so much public cash to go round. FE/FCS are variously the self appointed guardians / custodians / major providers of mtb facilities in Scotland and they have a very strong influence on the behaviour of the major funding partners and other public agencies/quangos. They spend very large sums of money on some of their own projects (Peel being one example)but can and do direct significant sums of cash towards development on private land via (what was the) Woodland Grants Scheme, WIAT and for that matter any other funding streams they care to invent. Ergo they are currently more or less determining where the bulk of the cash and finite resources for MTB in Scotland are directed.

Not productive to get into point scoring projects one against the other but I think what Deertrackdoctor is partially alluding to is the fact there hasn’t really been any proper strategic debate. Or at least none that has been genuinely open to public scrutiny…