• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.

Apple cancels Athenry Data Cantre

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
Hopefully Apple are spiteful and vengeful.

They have much deeper pockets than Mr. McDonagh. His own planning applications might end up being inexplicably delayed. Even the extension to his house.
Faecesbook have built a mega facility on the outskirts of Dublin.
They too had to jump through all the planning and legal hoops to get their facility built.

Apple just do not have the bottle or the competence to follow through on investment decisions.
Their build quality is also declining.
 


dresden8

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
14,598
Faecesbook have built a mega facility on the outskirts of Dublin.
They too had to jump through all the planning and legal hoops to get their facility built.

Apple just do not have the bottle or the competence to follow through on investment decisions.
Their build quality is also declining.
Their i pads or their data centres?
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,669
The original location is still there. We don't know what plans apple has, or how many more datacentres they will need. But we know the Danes have been much more efficient at facilitating them. We need to cop on, if we want a slice of the industry.

The roulette analogy is nonsense. Planning permission is not like throwing the dice. In both Wicklow and Galway all the facts were laid out in the original planning applications, and they had a definite time limit to the decision.
All the rest was just spurious nonsense pursued by various vested interests, and facilitated by lawyers and other carpetbaggers; the appeals, the judicial reviews etc. all dragged out for as long as possible.
I agree with you as regards the technical aspects of planning applications. The process is reasonably predictable. What is not predictable is the input from third parties. They can delay and frustrate any application, no matter how flimsy the basis for their objection. In that respect it is a game of roulette. It's absolutely shameful what this guy did, and he should be left in no doubt about that. I'm not familiar at all with his own project. Though I see from the links you posted that Apple weren't directly involved. So, I take it they were never formally committed to it.

dresden8 said:
Hopefully Apple are spiteful and vengeful.
They won't be. No reputable company would. They walk away from bad investments like this, without ever looking back.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
32,656
Its quite simple really, international capital is mobile, if a company needs to invest, they will go wherever the greatest advantage lies. We do quite well from U.S. overseas investment but we're not the centre of the universe and if we are unable to compete for an investment it will go elsewhere. Its interesting that this particular investment was not lost to eastern Europe or Asia but to one of the higher cost, highly regulated countries in the EU.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
32,656
I agree with you as regards the technical aspects of planning applications.
In this case, the problem was not caused by the planning process but by the legal quagmire, chalk up another win for the law cartel.
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,669
They entire grid in the region will have to be upgraded - not just the local substation:roll:
Rubbish. Eirgrid stated in a letter that the grid did not need to be upgraded for this application. They weren't specific about what, if any upgrades might be needed for future phases. But, the time to address that question would have been when a new application for such a phase was prepared.
 

CatullusV

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
4,433
In my time in ESB any local upgrades to the network were paid for entirely by the customer if they were commercial or industrial. They would be repaid a percentage if others joined that branch. I remember specifically because due to finger problems one customer had for a short period against their account fifty thousand enormous transformers and one litre of transformer oil. The interest on this paper debt ran to tens of millions overnight.
 

Turbinator

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1,814
Rubbish. Eirgrid stated in a letter that the grid did not need to be upgraded for this application. They weren't specific about what, if any upgrades might be needed for future phases. But, the time to address that question would have been when a new application for such a phase was prepared.
Clearly Apples plans to go to 240mw in the future would have needed a massive upgrade of the regional network. Of course your inablity to grasp basic maths and cost/benefit issues with regards to the national grid etc. shines through again
 

niall78

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
11,108
Clearly Apples plans to go to 240mw in the future would have needed a massive upgrade of the regional network. Of course your inablity to grasp basic maths and cost/benefit issues with regards to the national grid etc. shines through again
Which Apple would have paid for. These companies have poured billions into this country. Part of that goes to upgrading the power network when they need it upgraded. Do you believe Eirgrid upgrades the network for free for these companies? Does it heck - it is billing them for every piece of upgrade completed.
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
Their i pads or their data centres?
Apple product build quality has declined in recent years.
The decline is accompanied by investment strategies that lack comprehensive pre project planning expertise as we now discover in Athenry Ireland.
 

clearmurk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
3,010
Which Apple would have paid for. These companies have poured billions into this country. Part of that goes to upgrading the power network when they need it upgraded. Do you believe Eirgrid upgrades the network for free for these companies? Does it heck - it is billing them for every piece of upgrade completed.
What evidence do you have for such bald statements?

We have already seen with wind farms that they do not carry the cost of the major grid upgrades needed to transport their subsidised power across the country.
 

Turbinator

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
1,814
Which Apple would have paid for. These companies have poured billions into this country. Part of that goes to upgrading the power network when they need it upgraded. Do you believe Eirgrid upgrades the network for free for these companies? Does it heck - it is billing them for every piece of upgrade completed.
Really?? - so you think that the likes of Apple pays for regional grid infrastructure projects like Grid 40?? The Apple groupies here really are brainwashed!!
 

4horsemen

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
2,969
Well it would have provided local employment for Irish people.
However Apple , unlike other giant US investors in Ireland , failed to operate due diligence on their planning application.

Personally I don’t have any problem with investment/ capitol projects of this nature.

Apple shareholders will no doubt take account of this management failure.
In what way did 'failed to operate due diligence on their planning application' lead to a series of failed objections to Apple's planning application?
 

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
11,669
Clearly Apples plans to go to 240mw in the future would have needed a massive upgrade of the regional network. Of course your inablity to grasp basic maths and cost/benefit issues with regards to the national grid etc. shines through again
This is what the Bord Pleanala inspector said:
The applicant has submitted documentation from Eirgrid stating that the data centre development proposed under Ref. PL07.245518 which is for a 30MW load and which comprises phase one of a potentially larger development, is capable of being accommodated without any upgrades to the grid being required. On the subject of whether subsequent phases of development of the data centre could similarly be accommodated without reinforcement works being required, the applicant, and Eirgrid, are not so definitive. This subject was the subject of discussion at the oral hearing and it is apparent that at this time the ability to accommodate future phases of the development of the data centre depend on overall energy demand at that time as well as developments in generating capacity.
The reason why they are not so definitive is explained in the following sentence. Yet, you seem to be certain that "a massive upgrade" is required. Whatever upgrade might be required should of course have been paid for by Apple. Why would it be any different? But, the question is hypothetical because there's no point wondering about phase 2, 3 or 4 when phase 1 is not going ahead.

------
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.” -- Bertrand Russell
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
In what way did 'failed to operate due diligence on their planning application' lead to a series of failed objections to Apple's planning application?
Thats not what I said.
It was granted permission by the Bord so all planning requirements are deemed to be in order.
The courts do not adjudicate on planning matters per se which are the sole preserve of the Bord.



The failure to operate due diligence on their planning application must relate to legal requirements intrinsic to the application itself and not planning requirements.

Court action can only be pursued relative to some alleged legal failure/ommission within a planning application.
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
Todays IT - Interesting :)

One of the objectors to Apple’s Athenry data centre is facing a €22 million claim from Ulster Bank over unpaid loans.

The bank is seeking judgment against three brothers over money given to them to buy an 80-acre site in Wicklow where it was proposed to develop a data centre.

Brian McDonagh, of Dromin House, Dromin East, Delgany, Co Wicklow, is being sued by the bank and two receivers it appointed over the land at Kilpedder alongside his brothers Kenneth McDonagh and Maurice McDonagh, both of Charleston Road, Ranelagh, Dublin.

Brian McDonagh was one of three objectors who challenged the planning permission granted to Apple for an €850 million data centre project in Athenry, Co Galway, delaying the high-profile project which was eventually abandoned by Apple.

Mr Justice Paul McDermott ultimately dismissed Mr McDonagh’s challenge, ruling that he lacked the necessary legal standing to challenge An Bord Pleanála’s decision for reasons including that he did not live close to the site and had not participated in the planning process.

He said Mr McDonagh should have disclosed that he was a director and shareholder of Ecologic Data Centre, which had secured permission for a data centre on a Co Wicklow site considered as an alternative location for the proposed Apple development.

Mr Justice McDermott said the court was satisfied there had been “significant non-disclosure and lack of candour” by Mr McDonagh, which had not been sufficiently explained, in his action in relation to his interest in challenging the development.

In the current action, Ulster Bank said the brothers also sought to deceive it by using a company which the bank described as “a front” for one of the brothers to buy the land for just €1.5 million, where the original loan for the property was €21.5 million.

The plaintiffs are seeking judgment for €22 million as well as declarations that the brothers were in breach of a 2014 agreement to deal with their debt.


Planning permission
It arose out of a 2007 loan for €21.8 million to the brothers to buy the Kilpedder site. Planning permission was obtained for a data centre on the property but ultimately it did not proceed.

The case was admitted to the Commercial Court on Monday by Mr Justice Robert Haughton on consent between the parties.

In an affidavit, Ulster Bank relationship manager Brian Conlan said that, under a 2014 agreement to deal with their debt, the McDonaghs were to sell the land by the end of July 2014.

They failed to do so but instead purportedly entered into an agreement to sell the land for €1.5 million to a company called Granja Ltd without the knowledge of the bank and in breach of the 2014 settlement agreement, Mr Conlan said.

Granja brought High Court proceedings in 2014 claiming the bank failed to specifically perform an agreement between them. Five days into the hearing of that case, it was discontinued.

Mr Conlan says it became clear in those proceedings, during cross-examination of the principal witness for Granja, that it (Granja) was “in fact ‘a front’ for Brian McDonagh” for the purpose of acquiring the land without the knowledge of the bank and therefore writing off all outstanding debt.

Mr Conlan says that while the McDonaghs are likely to contend they were not in default of their loan in accordance with the 2014 agreement with the bank, this is not the case.

The defendants failed to sell the land as was agreed and instead sought to “deceive the bank through using Granja as a device for their own gain to reclaim the land and avoid their liability under the [loan] facility”.

Mr Conlan also says they failed to openly market the property following the agreement and that Brian McDonagh failed to provide the bank with a charge over a holiday home he has in Portugal.

It is also claimed the brothers are engaged in an attempt to further delay and frustrate the sale of the land by the receivers. Cattle have been put on the land, a “for sale” sign was burned down and “no trespass/private land” signs had been removed, Mr Conlan said.
 

stanley

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
9,493
Some story that, they will have the word about that no-one should buy this property.

"The bank is seeking judgment against three brothers over money given to them to buy an 80-acre site in Wicklow where it was proposed to develop a data centre".

21.5m for a proposal, the good old days.
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
In the current action, Ulster Bank said the brothers also sought to deceive it by using a company which the bank described as “a front” for one of the brothers to buy the land for just €1.5 million, where the original loan for the property was €21.5 million.

That is some knock down price.................
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top