THE founder of Afflecks Palace has snubbed a crunch meeting called to determine its future.
Elaine Walsh, who opened the shopping centre 25 years ago and heads its management team, has turned down an invitation to attend the emergency talks tomorrow , according to organisers.
Manchester's city centre spokesman, Coun Pat Karney, invited all parties involved in the dispute to the Town Hall in the hope of hammering out an agreement which will keep Afflecks open following months of uncertainty.
But the attempt to reach a breakthrough appears doomed to fail unless Ms Walsh, who is the leaseholder, agrees to attend.
Traders have been told by the Afflecks management team that they have received "no formal response" to a tenancy request served on landlords Bruntwood last October and that if nothing is heard by this Saturday then the indoor market will close.
However, Bruntwood insists that the offer of a new lease is on the table and that negotiations have stalled.
Bruntwood has confirmed it will send a representative to tomorrow's meeting and said the firm is eager to keep the centre going. A number of traders also plan to attend.
Bruntwood last week said they had offered new lease terms and had no plans to redevelop the centre or convert it into apartments.
Coun Karney said: "I'm very disappointed that Elaine Walsh is not coming. The public want to get the full picture - they're completely confused as are traders.
New management
"If she doesn't turn up to the meeting I will go down there myself and the council will organise a general meeting, with all traders, to look at new management arrangements. We do not want to see Afflecks close."
The M.E.N has learnt that Bruntwood has proposed rent increases for the building in order to bring it into line with health and safety standards but the firm insists it has no plans to price out traders.
Bruntwood has a lease agreement with the centre's management team which in turn establishes its own rent charges with stall-holders.
The threat to Afflecks has prompted thousands of people to leave comments on the petitionspot.com website and add their names to `Save Afflecks' support pages on social networking site Facebook, stressing the importance of the emporium.
Leoncia Murphy, who owns clothing stall Sasa Loves, said: "I think traders would welcome anything to keep the building open. I can only speak for myself but anything positive for Afflecks is good and if there's someone who can keep it open that's great."
The M.E.N reported yesterday that some traders had already left the centre amid the uncertainty and others had handed in their notice.
Vanessa Cawley, who has run her stall American Grafitti since the centre opened said: "People are handing in their notice but we are still open and if these are our last couple of weeks we need to make them a success."
When the M.E.N. tried to contact Elaine Walsh and invite her to explain her position she refused to take calls and slammed a door in a reporter's face.
John Chapman, a chartered surveyor appointed to represent the Afflecks Palace management in the negotiations with Bruntwood, said: "I have no instructions to comment on this matter and my client does not wish a public debate in the media about these discussions.
"I am not entirely sure what meeting you are referring to as all discussions are privileged."
What do you think? Have your say.
Tweet
Afflecks manager 'snubs' meeting
January 16, 2008
AFFLECKS: Under threat
Showing comments 1 to 18 and replies | View All
Tubby Scruff (16/01/2008 at 09:15)
Proud Mancunian (16/01/2008 at 09:24)
Dave (16/01/2008 at 09:55)
robot, manchester (16/01/2008 at 10:01)
Secret Squirrel (16/01/2008 at 10:05)
robot, manchester (16/01/2008 at 10:06)
grav42, Manchester (16/01/2008 at 10:46)
This manager can't have it both ways. She seems to have whipped up a storm of protest against Bruntwood, claiming that they have ignored her requests for a new lease, leaving us to conclude that Bruntwood see the building as nothing more than high profit box flats. But when the MEN actually do give Bruntwood a platform to comment, she refuses to speak to the press and apparently "slams the door" in their faces. Worse, she's refusing to attend independently chaired, all party talks to find a solution to the problem. Who puts their own ego before the livelihoods of all of traders, there own business, and an important cornerstone of mancunian cultural history.
Don't get me wrong, Afflecks needs to stay open, but are we really on the side of this amateur business woman, or a local company who have invested millions in replenishing Manchester's decaying office stock.
John-Thai sandwich brigade (16/01/2008 at 11:00)
goods which were on offer,now called the Triangle for the pretty people paying pretty silly prices, also the Collisium , now with pretty cardboard nailed to the entrances, awaiting pretty exspensive city center flats to be built.
where's the profit for Bruntwood in selling an "alternative" T-Shirt, and having kids looking cool on the stairways.
as a great man once said.
Money doesn't talk, it swears.
and I can hear the screams of
their shareholders.
rock on
Matches Malone (16/01/2008 at 13:05)
looking at all of these stories from the beginning, reading between the lines and doing some resaerch of my own here's a few points I think should be made.
1. This story broke last February when a unit holder gave a copy of a letter to the evening news. At the time Bruntwoods and Afflecks Palace refused to comment, in further articles it states both sides have agreed not to comment on this issue. It seems to me Mrs Walsh is sticking to her word unlike other parties involved.
2. A section 26 notice was issued by the Tennants to the Landlords. Have any of the MEN reporters looked up what that is? It is a formal request for a lease a simple yes or no from the Landlords is all that is reuired.. If Bruntwoods have not answered the Section 26 then the ball is still very much in their court.
3. Why has this meeting been called 2 days before the deadline of the 19th seems, a bit of a hollow gesture to me but certain parties can walk away looking like they really tried to help.
5. Go and have a look around the place its half empty, if the business funds itself by charging rent their income must have halved. How can they recover?
How fickle the public are put yourself in the shoes of the owners of Afflecks Palace. After 25 years your losing the thing you created, how would you feel.
Manchester you deserve Bruntwoods
Proud Mancunian (16/01/2008 at 14:28)
Enough Said!
There are plenty of stairways to hang around on if that is your idea of fun. You can't walk passed Afflecks palace without seeing multitudes of customers entering or exiting and thinking to yourself .... "You'll never get a job looking like that!"
Afflecks Palace is nothing but a market and there are plenty of them about to be relocated to.
Pete (16/01/2008 at 15:03)
David, Manchester (16/01/2008 at 15:36)
Save Afflecks!
grav42, Manchester (16/01/2008 at 15:45)
A.) Refuses to attend a which could be a last ditch attempt to save their busines
B.) Allows this saga to continue for almost 12 months to the point where the business is at risk of collapse
c.) Cannot foresee that costs may rise (this includes lease costs), and adjusts their business model appropriately
D.) Appears to rely solely upon creating a public outcry to get her landlords to back down and thus save her business.
... is an amateur in my book. She certainly has the appearance of someone who is letting her heart rather than her head make decisions about the future of her business.
I'm certinaly not against afflecks. I used to shop there, and have impressed many out of town friends with a trip to Manchester's last bastion of independent bohemian retailing.
However, I think Mrs Walsh and the so called 'management' team are just as much to blame as the 'corporate giant'. Bruntwoods started life as a small independent local property business, Afflecks was one of the first buildings on their portfolio a decade ago. I don't agree with everything they've ever done, some of the refurbs they've delivered have been shocking. But just like Mrs Walsh they are in business to make profit.
Manchester does deserve indeed Bruntwoods. In fact it needs Bruntwoods. The company has invested significant amounts of money in the city and have been a large part of the continuing regeneration. However, Manchester also needs its "Afflecks Palaces", so it can stand above the clone towns and offer some indivduality.
Both parties need to work together to resolve this. Both parties have an opportunity to do this tomorrow night. Why is Mrs Walsh not attending?
John-Thai sandwich brigade (16/01/2008 at 15:53)
it is our very individuality which makes us all unique human beings.
and walking past Afflecks stairways makes me wish i was a kid again..able to upset AGAIN, proud upstanding citizens by just being alive, Let them be.
they are our future,
oh, and they work to live, not live to work. who wants to dress 24/7 like a drone.
rock on
Big Mike, Manchester (16/01/2008 at 21:15)
2 why would she allow afflecks to close after being in and out of court fighting to keep afflecks open for years and years ????
3 do you think someone she would just stop ??
YOU DONT KNOW MS WALSH THEN !!!!!
Ben Crinion (16/01/2008 at 22:30)
robot, manchester (16/01/2008 at 22:44)
Rather than claiming your paper "learnt" this,might it be more accurate to say "The M.E.N. was told this by Bruntwoods and have repeated it verbatim unquestioningly"? As has been said before,why are they happy to claim that they have been knowingly leasing and maintaining a building below health and safety standards? Also having "no plans to price out traders" is not the same as "seeking to avoid pricing out traders", or "setting a written lease that leaves the business viable".
Bruntwoods evidently has failed to supply written lease proposals-section 26 order,I looked it up on t'internet-so they have not supplied tangible evidence to anyone as to their ultimate intentions.
As for Mr Karney's latest bout of hyperbole- a public meeting to publicly discuss something that both parties said was not open to public discussion???If he'd wanted to do something,wouldn't last year have been the time to do it?
Afflecks Palace as an idea,institution,business etc-it IS Elaine Walsh, her idea, her business,her name, her hard work. Without the assistance or involvement of the council.Much as he'd like to pretend, he cannot march in and overthrow the management, and install some form of Bruntwoods puppet dictator inna North Koreah stylee- sad for him as she's obviously the only interested party he's not too scared to upset.
As it is Elaine Walsh, who is the participant least likely to be allowed to discuss the situation while Bruntwoods still have this unconfirmed lease hanging over her, is going to be stitched up so that the council and the property tycoons can pretend that the public actually trust /respect them. THAT is her reward for bringing excitement, style and a huge footfall to the Northern Quarter for 25 years.And your paper is content to regurgitate the press releases of Karney and Ogilby to reinforce this view.
Nice.
robot, manchester (17/01/2008 at 14:01)