- Feb 23, 2023
- 2,249
- 7,840
I don’t think it’s at all a given that it makes long term financial sense for anyone other than Comcast.
Universal Great Britain
- Thread starter AlexanderMBush
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Potentially yeah, I see where you’re coming from. I do genuinely think it’d be a net positive in the long run for this country. But the taxpayer is going have to fork over a substantial sum of money, that’s not something I personally disagree with.
We give billions of pounds in tax breaks to Comcast and other production companies so they film here, but we make a lot and those tax breaks bolster our extraordinary creative industry, they allow it to thrive.
I do genuinely think the same could happen here.
But Comcast obviously have vested interests, they’re pretty nailed on imo and they want to open up shop here which is why they’re doing all the PR stuff such as community engagement which is great. But it’s kind of all fluff really isn’t it because like I said it’s the bean counters in London that make the decisions and they’re very unforgiving.
Just a quick reminder:
£50Bn of economic benefit for the UK
This is a summary of an independent report, which I think was undertaken by Leisure Development Partners using standard analysis approved by HM Treasury. The summary on Universal's project site might look a bit glossy and lightweight, but I'm pretty sure the underlying work is robust and persuasive. Thousands of jobs will be created by this project, many of which will be based in the Bedford locality and across the Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire counties.
It seems to me that the British public have been happy to see the government subsidise the cost of different industries such as car manufacturing, steelworks, tourism and culture if there is the promise of creating (or saving) jobs. I'm not sure that building a bigger railway station and a spur road off a dual carriageway to ensure no traffic chaos would attract much opprobrium.
£50Bn of economic benefit for the UK
This is a summary of an independent report, which I think was undertaken by Leisure Development Partners using standard analysis approved by HM Treasury. The summary on Universal's project site might look a bit glossy and lightweight, but I'm pretty sure the underlying work is robust and persuasive. Thousands of jobs will be created by this project, many of which will be based in the Bedford locality and across the Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire counties.
It seems to me that the British public have been happy to see the government subsidise the cost of different industries such as car manufacturing, steelworks, tourism and culture if there is the promise of creating (or saving) jobs. I'm not sure that building a bigger railway station and a spur road off a dual carriageway to ensure no traffic chaos would attract much opprobrium.
From a modest background she took her first degree from Oxford, a Masters from LSE, and was a high-flyer at the Bank of England before entering politics, where she has now risen to become the first female Chancellor of the Exchequer in British history.
Boy, I wish I was not bright enough like Rachel Reeves.
Last edited:
I agree with you I think it will be a net benefit.
But the bean counters in London do tend to make decisions at times that don’t seem to be sane or rational.
I think people will be largely support it, but! I also think the messaging is going to be far more difficult when it comes to giving money/tax breaks to a multinational like Comcast. Especially when the press are going all in on freezing grannies and a 20 billion black hole.
I’m not saying they won’t do it, I’m just confused about how they’re going to square that circle.
Just wait and see I guess.
But the bean counters in London do tend to make decisions at times that don’t seem to be sane or rational.
I think people will be largely support it, but! I also think the messaging is going to be far more difficult when it comes to giving money/tax breaks to a multinational like Comcast. Especially when the press are going all in on freezing grannies and a 20 billion black hole.
I’m not saying they won’t do it, I’m just confused about how they’re going to square that circle.
Just wait and see I guess.
It seems to me that's there's widespread political support at local and national level. There's been lots of press coverage of the proposal, which apart from one stupid Richard Littlejohn article (who is paid to write stupid articles) has been broadly positive, a massive injection of foreign investment, boosts to domestic and international tourism and independent analysis which shows a huge economic benefit to the country including the creation of thousands of jobs. I don't think the British public are stupid, and will readily understand that a small investment of public money unlocks all those benefits. So I don't think there's a circle to be squared.
At some point the government, any government which happens to be in office, is going to proclaim this proposal as a 'Good Thing'. Whether it happens in the forthcoming Budget I neither know, nor care. It was a bit of idle speculation on my part, and the one thing which I considered before posting my comment was whether this was a big enough deal to actually warrant a mention in the Budget (assuming that it's close enough to final sign-off to make a public announcement at that time). It might not be big enough, but if the Chancellor is casting around for something nice to say, I'd say that a $10Bn investment in the UK by Comcast, creating thousands of jobs, meets the bill.
Last edited:
I think the conversation is extremely emotive at this moment in time with things like the winter fuel allowance being cut.
If some of the other leaked proposals for the forthcoming budget (scrapping the 25% discount for council tax, scrapping the higher rate tax rebate for pensions, scrapping the 25% tax free pot for personal pensions etc) are true then it’s going to become a whole lot more emotive.
Whether the proposals are sensible or not doesn’t mean anything when the press have a headline that reads ‘freezing grannies’.
Anyway none of us knows what the true feeling/conversations are behind closed doors.
Like you I suspect we’ll get a better feel for the project at the end of October so it really is just wait and see and hope it’s positive news.
If some of the other leaked proposals for the forthcoming budget (scrapping the 25% discount for council tax, scrapping the higher rate tax rebate for pensions, scrapping the 25% tax free pot for personal pensions etc) are true then it’s going to become a whole lot more emotive.
Whether the proposals are sensible or not doesn’t mean anything when the press have a headline that reads ‘freezing grannies’.
Anyway none of us knows what the true feeling/conversations are behind closed doors.
Like you I suspect we’ll get a better feel for the project at the end of October so it really is just wait and see and hope it’s positive news.
Yes, I think that's right. But what I'm interested in is what decision is made, rather than what some elements of the press might make of it. The Daily Mail might see this as an opportunity to strategically lose its mind about the heartless stupid of it all, while the FT might say it makes great economic sense. Neither report would be of much interest to me, only the actual decision.
I understand the political nature of this conversation but Universal Studios Korea and Universal Studios Moscow were stopped due to over reliance on government partners and the hope of it being a joint venture.
The fact is Comcast/Sky will try get tax breaks but funding this mostly aside from infrastructure means they are truly invested in this project and have a strong enough belief in the project they can be the full owner. Yea, its great if Labour party will give them things to cut development costs but they are invested in this and likely already planned with the thought of it not getting benefits.
The fact is Comcast/Sky will try get tax breaks but funding this mostly aside from infrastructure means they are truly invested in this project and have a strong enough belief in the project they can be the full owner. Yea, its great if Labour party will give them things to cut development costs but they are invested in this and likely already planned with the thought of it not getting benefits.
I think that's probably right. There has been no indication that this proposal is anything like a joint venture with government, it's entirely a Universal project. Obviously Universal will negotiate with the government for some support around public/semi-public infrastructure and tax incentives necessary for a major theme park in that location, and obviously the government will enter those negotiations with an eye on value-for-money for the public purse. Nothing wrong with that at all. But ultimately the scale of the overall investment and likely contribution to the public purse dwarfs the expenditure on that local infrastructure, so I'm sure that neither side of those negotiations will see that expenditure as a major stumbling block. It's just a part of the process of getting this thing done.
- Feb 23, 2023
- 2,249
- 7,840
I don’t think a report by a firm called “Leisure Development” can be considered independent haha.
- Dec 28, 2023
- 200
- 349
I didn’t actually notice that, that’s classic.
“ThemeParks4U report says “it’s a good idea” in industry shock!”
