I would be interested in the WTE (whole time equivalent) of the 200 employed at Mobberley.
A number of posters have had factory visits, as have I. The, a gentle word I hope, mature, staff were great. As I have said before no continuity planning and although we toured every Dept., excepting admin., no way could I make 200 employees up from those we saw. Yes there is shift work but even then echoing large buildings and few staff. Obviously enough for the workload but the 200, always suspicious of conveniently round numbers, no way, unless there was a mirrored factory next door.
Not only do they make their own film with that number, whatever is a true number, but contract coat and contract finish as well. The £20 million T/O would struggle to support the move on site alone, costed at £100 million in the planning application discussions in the press. The capital costs are high and have been written off long ago although ongoing repairs and running servicing must be high, the economic case for investing £100 million must be thin, unless someone wants a hobby. The buy out achieved its aim, keep running to keep us in jobs until we can retire, even better if we can sell near then and get a gain on our investment, cynical and does discount the obvious dedication of the team.
Statement from Harman Technology Ltd
Apologies for joining the discussion so late, yesterday was a little hectic...
I just wanted to post a something on here as I know Simon is a regular contributor and many will be expecting a response. Firstly I have to tell you that Simon exited the business when it was sold. Simon may well continue to be an APUG contributor in a personal capacity however I don't know that for sure.
Many of you have already read the press release about the sale of the business. I don't really have anything more to add on that front, other that to say it's definitely business as usual. This is an exciting time for all involved in the business, I've worked for Harman / Ilford for 28 years and this is yet another chapter in our story !
Harman will continue to support APUG and my Technical services team (David, Sue and Myself) will monitor and contribute to APUG. I have set up a "Harman Tech Service" APUG member which we will share between us.
Our primary technical support will continue to be via the "Contact Us" section of the Ilford Photo website.
Neil
Neil Hibbs
Is there a chance here that operations could be being moved to a more business-friendly environ? Some money infusion to build inventory to cover needs during a move? Conjecture, certainly, but it makes as much sense as some of the guessing.
Cost of moving HARMAN's equipment, including the coating line, to new buildings at the Mobberley site was to be (and still may be, if the appeal is decided in favor of development) born by LPC Living, HARMAN's landlord....The £20 million T/O would struggle to support the move on site alone, costed at £100 million in the planning application discussions in the press...
Cost of moving HARMAN's equipment, including the coating line, to new buildings at the Mobberley site was to be (and still may be, if the appeal is decided in favor of development) born by LPC Living, HARMAN's landlord.
Cost of moving HARMAN's equipment, including the coating line, to new buildings at the Mobberley site was to be (and still may be, if the appeal is decided in favor of development) born by LPC Living, HARMAN's landlord.
My posts have a consistent theme. They concentrate on objective facts.I just can't see how it will happen with 500 village complainants (largely about the scale of the proposed housing development) but also the noise regulations for domestic housing. If the noise is above regulations they would need to ignore the regulations and that would create a storm. And who would want to buy these houses anyway given that they are right under the airport flightpath.
I just can't see how it will happen with 500 village complainants (largely about the scale of the proposed housing development) but also the noise regulations for domestic housing. If the noise is above regulations they would need to ignore the regulations and that would create a storm. And who would want to buy these houses anyway given that they are right under the airport flightpath.
Well, take a look at the area with Google Earth. It appears to be pretty prosperous, with some fairly new-looking homes and large estates even more directly under the flight path and closer to the airport. Knutsford, just a mile down the road, has over 13,000 people and it's population grew by 500 in the last 10 years. It has much lower rates of council renters, unemployed and unhealthy people along with higher homeownership, and a more qualified workforce than English averages. There are plenty of people to buy those houses.
If they are only truly grossing 20M in revenue there is no way in hell they can afford to relocate nor will anyone else invest those funds to do so. Can you imagine the cost for land, or building, or even just renting a new locale and the cost relocating and re-set up of all that equipment?
Planning rules here in the UK seem, to me at least, to depend entirely on the current views, plans and whims of the incumbent local and government authorities, with no real regard to their trumpeted "public participation".
Public participation is just a token gesture to make people think that their opinions matter. The reality is that any planning application must be approved unless there is a valid reason to reject it. A load of locals just saying "we don't want it" is not a valid reason.
Steve.
No Ilford couldn't afford it but PV may already own a site so land purchase may not be an issue. It then becomes a question of a purpose design and built manufacturing facility. They already have all the major equipment but since its 30+ years old some of it may require renewing.
The current site owners were going to pay for a new building on the current site and if thats still going to happen then all well and good. But they have to get planning for development of the site which presumably would need to generate sufficient funds to cover costs of the new building. It all sounds very complicated to me.
My posts have a consistent theme. They concentrate on objective facts.
The answer to "how" is "politics." Since discussion of politics, as well as speculation, is prohibited here, we'll just have to wait until next year and see what the appeal outcome is.
I'm reminded right now of the private equity firm that bought the rights to a 60 year old drug that sold for $13 a pill. They raised the price to $750 a pill overnight because they decided they wanted more profit.
Well one fact that is true today is I can buy fresh, new Ilford film and paper at great prices.
We will see what the half life of that fact is and whether it is obsolete tomorrow.
I'm reminded right now of the private equity firm that bought the rights to a 60 year old drug that sold for $13 a pill. They raised the price to $750 a pill overnight because they decided they wanted more profit.
I wonder if such a horrible thing might happen to our beloved Ilford film?
Just guessing here... Pemberstone now owning Harman along with their other holdings and resources puts Pemberstone in a fulcrum position to get the developers to not just fund upgrading the site, but now funding a relocation instead, as the property is worth more to the developers to get the site changed over to the proposed housing project. Harman alone was not a player in the future of the site, but now with Pemberstone/Harman together, whatever the direction, the proposed developers and land owners will foot the bill for whatever Pemberstone/Harman decide to do. Relocating and setting up a factory in a new location would make everyone happy. How much everyone contributes is what's being worked out. I can bet that the burden will not be on Pemberstone/Harman but on the people looking to make big money from re-development for housing (all or part of the land???).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?