The MO in Bejing is gone !
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 18:07Link to Google.
Edit by mod to shorten link...... Nick
Page 1 of 1
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 18:07Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 18:12Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 18:27Ouch! I'd love to see what the insurers have to day.
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 18:27Bugger. That means we need to re-evaluate our 2010 travel plans....
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 19:14What an absolute shame, all those years of design up in smoke. It must have been very near to opening as they've had a sexy online pdf brochure for it on the website for a couple of months.
Still, a relief that no one was hurt. It is only bricks and mortar (although I'm not sure MO's laywers may be thinking that at the moment) and nothing compared to the tragedy in Southern Australia.
Still, a relief that no one was hurt. It is only bricks and mortar (although I'm not sure MO's laywers may be thinking that at the moment) and nothing compared to the tragedy in Southern Australia.
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 20:30That will indeed be some insurance payout and a half.
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 20:50[:o] I'm gutted.
Thankfully nobody was hurt, but what a bugger! To lose a hotel that hasnt even opened? I am sure the payout will be good but this will be a real setback to the MO corp, I imagine they'll need a couple of years at least to rebuild it.
Thanks,
Sarah
Thankfully nobody was hurt, but what a bugger! To lose a hotel that hasnt even opened? I am sure the payout will be good but this will be a real setback to the MO corp, I imagine they'll need a couple of years at least to rebuild it.
Thanks,
Sarah
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 20:56Press release from MO HERE
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 21:52Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 21:52No hot deals for the opening then?
Posted: 09 Feb 2009, 23:22quote:Originally posted by RichardMannion
No hot deals for the opening then?
Ha pun ha pun
No hot deals for the opening then?
Ha pun ha pun
Posted: 10 Feb 2009, 21:26Any chance the building could be saved seems dashed in the cold light of day, shown here. Looks like if they want an MO in Beijing they will have to tear it down and start again. [:#]
Posted: 10 Feb 2009, 21:51What a shame it looked like it was going to be an amazing building. Good that no-one was hurt.
Posted: 10 Feb 2009, 22:06Looks like there were injuries to the fire crew that tackled the blaze, resulting in one fatality. Now the insurance battle will be interesting, as CCTV have admitted liability....
Posted: 10 Feb 2009, 22:13As CCTV is state-run, I can see the state paying for the rebuilding so as to save face. Especially as it's global news.
http://www.cctv.com/english/20090210/108460.shtml
http://www.cctv.com/english/20090210/108460.shtml
Posted: 11 Feb 2009, 14:33I found this story in today's Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/fe ... ijing-fire
I remember seeing an exhibition and model of the area about two years ago at MOMA in NYC and thinking 'Blimy (or stronger words to that effect) it'll take them years to build that !'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/fe ... ijing-fire
I remember seeing an exhibition and model of the area about two years ago at MOMA in NYC and thinking 'Blimy (or stronger words to that effect) it'll take them years to build that !'
Posted: 12 Feb 2009, 09:18Posted: 12 Feb 2009, 11:40Wow what an inferno! Now seems an unlicensed fireworks display set of the blaze and 12 in police custody! MO didn't own the building but must have been in the process of spending a fortune kitting it out ...
Posted: 12 Feb 2009, 12:05Not only that, but they were expressly told not to set them off.
I can see the MO lawyers rubbing their hands with glee.
I can see the MO lawyers rubbing their hands with glee.