  Bvos Member Username: Bvos Post Number: 1592 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 66.238.170.50 |
Here's the latest from the Snews from the same reporter who I said did a hack job with an earlier article on the BC and Tiger Stadium deal (a view I still stand by). This article I feel is a much better piece of journalism since it gets down to the facts at the begining and then talks about other related things at the end. Anyone receive their invitation yet? http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.d ll/article?AID=/20060622/BIZ/6 06220360 | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4364 Registered: 02-2004 Posted From: 141.217.174.223 |
HAH! Once again when I see contruction work in progress at thew BC Then I would believe it. As for right now our leaders are talking about the BC plans but they would NOT do any action.  Did the KING KWAME and Granholm talk about this development plan just 6 years ago? | ||
E_hemingway Member Username: E_hemingway Post Number: 781 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 69.242.215.8 |
Comparing the two news stories is sort of like comparing apples and oranges. The story about Tiger Stadium and the Book Cadillac projects is more of a feature. Yes there is a hard news hook in the story, but it's more of an examination of the projects and what they represent to their respective areas. Today's story is a straight up news story about hard news. They're two different styles, of which you prefer one over the other. There's nothing wrong with having that preferance. However, a reporter is not doing a hack job just because they used a style that some readers don't like. BTW, this is great news. It's not scafolding on the building and workers restoring it yet, but it's getting closer. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 208 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 207.148.213.218 |
Are the articles' critics really this unsophisticated or merely pretending to be so as a sort of devil's advocate? I cannot imagine anyone can be this truly confused as to the existence of different writing styles. As E_hemingway noted, there is more than one style of writing, both journalistic and otherwise, and there are several ways to begin an article. Most of us were introduced to this notion somewhere in grade school. The original article was an overarching piece about the rebirth of dilapidated properties in the city. The second is about a specific event related to a specific structure that happened to be cited in the previous article. Different subject matter calls for different writing styles. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp? Should all articles be written according to the same template because they're apparently too difficult to understand for a small slice of the paper's readership? The original article was about longstanding conditions and drew on historic fact, current events, and observations from those who actually have to live within the current conditions, in order to paint a picture of the degraded condition of the area that is the target of improvements. The anecdotes, facts, history and observations serve to demonstrate why the rebirth of these structures is an important and necessary thing. The people who live near the structures are the ones who will be most affected, and thus they are the obvious choice as subjects. To ignore the realities of the area would be a true hack job and most importantly, would buy into the fantasy world of denial promulgated by some here. That's not journalism, it's mental illness. The second article doesn't lend itself to the same feature writing because it is basically an announcement of an upcoming event. The two articles and their subject matter could not be more different. It's one thing to have a legitimate beef with an article if it is missing key elements, but to complain ad nauseum suggests that the true complaint is that the writer didn't buy into the "see no evil" mentality some on this forum would prefer. | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 472 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.20.69 |
Although a small part of me had an unpleasant flashback after reading this latest B-C article to Kwame's several pronouncements over the last few years ("Just wait two weeks...We'll announce something in two weeks") I think the real difference between this and the ceremony in front of the hotel 3 years ago is that Kimberly-Clark hadn't technically closed the deal before the big ceremony happened. | ||
Detroitplanner Member Username: Detroitplanner Post Number: 153 Registered: 04-2006 Posted From: 63.85.13.248 |
119,000 square feet of retail??? Where are they going to put it? Great another Starbucks, I suppose they will put in a Jimmy Johns and Subway too. | ||
Dialh4hipster Member Username: Dialh4hipster Post Number: 1682 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.61.187.234 |
Um, we've got like what, 2 or 3 open Starbucks in the city? And one more planned in the Ellington? Is this one really going to throw us over the edge? 119,000 sf of retail will probably have a couple restaurants, and services for hotel guests and residents (and Lafayette building residents across the street), and who knows, by the time it's done there may be a market for some reasonable retail in that space. I certainly think it's a waste of time to get worked up over how much space it is at this point, let alone let loose with more hackneyed jokes about downtown retail. | ||
Upinottawa Member Username: Upinottawa Post Number: 432 Registered: 09-2005 Posted From: 198.103.184.76 |
As for retail, there will likely be high end clothing available in order to service the needs of the BC's higher end clients. This is the case with most higher end historic hotels that have retail space. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 504 Registered: 01-2005 Posted From: 70.229.231.102 |
High end? Such as on Woodward Ave? I remember all the excitement about a Nike store on Woodward two summers ago. And what did it turn out to be? | ||
Dalangdon Member Username: Dalangdon Post Number: 23 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 66.54.213.11 |
Since Starwood farms out all of their Food & Beverage (except for catering and room service) the restaurants may very well be included in that 119000 Square Foot figure. There will most likely be a dining room and bar upstairs and coffee shop on street level. I wouldn't expect a cheap franchise though - as they get a cut of the profit, as well as rental, and they want to take advantage of those corporate expense accounts. As far as retail, expect an overpriced gift store and clothing store. Since they are supported by the guest room business, the surrounding neighborhood doesn't matter to them. But any big convention hotel usually gets ancillary businesses (dry cleaners, copy centers, delis, shoe repair, drug stores) locating nearby. Big hotels make good neighbors: There's 24 hour activity around them, which is a plus. And most hotels cultivate a good relationship with the cops (leting the uniformed cops eat for free in the employee cafeteria while on duty, for example) so the neighborhood gets better coverage. Lastly, they generally have political clout, and know how to use it. |
