Been away for a few days & nice to see that there has been some activity on this site, though can't believe the amount of cr
p that has been deposited here as to the old chestnut "land Development".
P330 thankfully has injected some sense into the previous posts where clearly no-one has a clue as to what is likely (if anything) to arise out of the current dire situation at DTV.
Whereas I have held the view that DTV in it's present format presents an unsustainable business model, there are obviously other more political elements in the equation. Way back on this thread, land development issue was introduced as a "pop" against Peel, as this was a prime activity of the holding company, the only other specific reference that I am aware was that in reference to development of the far side & the consequential proposed altering of the boundaries.
If anyone has a credible source as to any justification as to the site's suitability as to housing development then please clarify, otherwise further comment is rather pointless.
As to the question as to who gets the cash re the BMI compensation, it will be the Peel holding company that brought the action & if successful, there is not necessarily a business case that much of this will ever filter through to DTV as available funds for future development.
The key issue in all of this is that DTV is part of a group albeit a part that is not generating revenue. Whether it survives & in what format will be the group board's financial decision.
In the current ecconomic environment there are few "private" company's that are able to sustain funding to loss making ventures over the long term, & as for the public sector then we all know as to the governments attitude on this... Where does this leave DTV ?, I can't see that it can sustain many more blows andto have any chance of survival needs to radically improve it's business model, though ironically in practical terms it's future probably hinges on the Dutch !
