Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Varosha needs billions of infrastructure if I remember well it was 3-5 during the Annan Plan. And this to just make the return of inhabitants with water/electricity/sewage/roads etc. On top of that the inhabitants and hoteliers have to spend billions from their own savings to re-built their houses/hotels/bussiness etc.

The 3 possible options for return are
a)As per what VP said, to be returned but stay in the hands of the occupation regime.
Question:will the occupation regime do the infrastructure? The answer is definetely NO. But even if some miracle happens and they do it, then which GC would spend his lifetime savings just to go back and be administered by an illegal regime, which is hostile and racist to GCs by it's own law.
b)Under the UN. Here the situation becomes complicated because there will be matters of taxation, trade etc that have to be regulated.The area must be under certain law and that law can be nothing else than the existing RoC law and the EU aquis. So in reality it will be return to RoC but law enforcement will be excercised by the UN.
c)Under the RoC. The most clear cut and effective solution, but the TC/Turkish side will never do it.

It's getting more and more obvious the TC/Turkish side is only interested to keep whatever land it grabbed with the 1974 invasion and achieve legal status/recognition on top of it. They don't want to give anything back.

[bigOz]

Varosha needs billions of infrastructure if I remember well it was 3-5 during the Annan Plan. And this to just make the return of inhabitants with water/electricity/sewage/roads etc. On top of that the inhabitants and hoteliers have to spend billions from their own savings to re-built their houses/hotels/bussiness etc.

The 3 possible options for return are
a)As per what VP said, to be returned but stay in the hands of the occupation regime.
Question:will the occupation regime do the infrastructure? The answer is definetely NO. But even if some miracle happens and they do it, then which GC would spend his lifetime savings just to go back and be administered by an illegal regime, which is hostile and racist to GCs by it's own law.
b)Under the UN. Here the situation becomes complicated because there will be matters of taxation, trade etc that have to be regulated.The area must be under certain law and that law can be nothing else than the existing RoC law and the EU aquis. So in reality it will be return to RoC but law enforcement will be excercised by the UN.
c)Under the RoC. The most clear cut and effective solution, but the TC/Turkish side will never do it.

It's getting more and more obvious the TC/Turkish side is only interested to keep whatever land it grabbed with the 1974 invasion and achieve legal status/recognition on top of it. They don't want to give anything back.

I have heard it on numerous occasions that the GC hotel and holiday resort owners in the South are / would be very worried about competition if all of a sudden the unused hotels in the area are reconstructed and become active! The main reason being the added competition to what is already a very competitive business in Cyprus.

Imagine extra 10,000 beds becoming available to tourists which are not exactly increasing by that number every year! Someone will lose customers and money on their ongoing investments in the South if tour operators and tourists start shifting towards Varosha. Would I be right in thinking not everyone in the South really want Varosha back? (that is - except those refugees who had homes in that part of Cyprus).

[StuartN]

Imagine extra 10,000 beds becoming available to tourists which are not exactly increasing by that number every year! Someone will lose customers and money on their ongoing investments in the South if tour operators and tourists start shifting towards Varosha. Would I be right in thinking not everyone in the South really want Varosha back? (that is - except those refugees who had homes in that part of Cyprus).

They already are BigOz - in Bafra.....

[Pyrpolizer]

Hmm... you are both right and wrong BigOZ.

First you have to consider who the hoteliers are in the Government controlled areas! The answer is that at least half of them are the ex-Famagustian Hoteliers.

Second where are all those ex-Famagustian hoteliers have their hotels now? The answer is:Mostly at Ayia Napa/Protaras area (a few Km away from Famagusta.)

Third which area's tourism is going to affect the opening of Varoshia the MOST. The answer is the Ayia Napa/Protaras tourism.

Then you have to think if ANY hotel in the Varoshia area can operate any time soon. It CANNOT. 99% of them have to be knocked down and rebuilt. (they were built very close to the sea and they had a foundations corrossion problem from sea salt water even before 1974).

So the conclussion is that rebuilding the hotels in Famagusta will become a competitor MOSTLY to the Famagustian hoteliers who now have their hotels in Ayia Napa/Protaras area.

Think about it this way. You have a supermarket that is doing well. You built another supermarket much better in the best place in Cyprus a few KM away that slowly kills your old supermarket. Would you be happy or sad. I would personally be happy because my new supermarket would be doing superb, furthermore my old supermarket can be easily transform into holiday appartments and sold on freehold basis to locals. It is still a profit.

If on the other hand the opening of Varoshia turns out to attract an additional amount of tourism (to the already 2 million) then the hotels at Ayia Napa/Protaras (which belong mostly to Famagustians) will still remain a viable bussiness.

So in any case the Famagustians will gain.

Of course we need a really scientific economic study to predict what effect the opening of Famagusta hotels will have on other areas of tourism e.g Limassol and Paphos. It will certainly have some impact, and you are right in saying not everyone would like to have such a competitor getting even part of their profits away.

Now, there is also the general argument that the GCs who ARE NOT refugees will object any move towards a solution because their lands/bussinesses etc will loose value. This argument holds a lot of water. The truth is the refugees spread all over Cyprus, and most of the families today are a mixture of refugees and non refugees. So imo opinion the idea of "let’s not let the refugees regain their properties or we will loose ourselves" will always counter much impedance.

[bigOz]

Hmm... you are both right and wrong BigOZ.

First you have to consider who the hoteliers are in the Government controlled areas! The answer is that at least half of them are the ex-Famagustian Hoteliers.

Second where are all those ex-Famagustian hoteliers have their hotels now? The answer is:Mostly at Ayia Napa/Protaras area (a few Km away from Famagusta.)

Third which area's tourism is going to affect the opening of Varoshia the MOST. The answer is the Ayia Napa/Protaras tourism.

Then you have to think if ANY hotel in the Varoshia area can operate any time soon. It CANNOT. 99% of them have to be knocked down and rebuilt. (they were built very close to the sea and they had a foundations corrossion problem from sea salt water even before 1974).

So the conclussion is that rebuilding the hotels in Famagusta will become a competitor MOSTLY to the Famagustian hoteliers who now have their hotels in Ayia Napa/Protaras area.

Think about it this way. You have a supermarket that is doing well. You built another supermarket much better in the best place in Cyprus a few KM away that slowly kills your old supermarket. Would you be happy or sad. I would personally be happy because my new supermarket would be doing superb, furthermore my old supermarket can be easily transform into holiday appartments and sold on freehold basis to locals. It is still a profit.

If on the other hand the opening of Varoshia turns out to attract an additional amount of tourism (to the already 2 million) then the hotels at Ayia Napa/Protaras (which belong mostly to Famagustians) will still remain a viable bussiness.

So in any case the Famagustians will gain.

Of course we need a really scientific economic study to predict what effect the opening of Famagusta hotels will have on other areas of tourism e.g Limassol and Paphos. It will certainly have some impact, and you are right in saying not everyone would like to have such a competitor getting even part of their profits away.

Now, there is also the general argument that the GCs who ARE NOT refugees will object any move towards a solution because their lands/bussinesses etc will loose value. This argument holds a lot of water. The truth is the refugees spread all over Cyprus, and most of the families today are a mixture of refugees and non refugees. So imo opinion the idea of "let’s not let the refugees regain their properties or we will loose ourselves" will always counter much impedance.

I certainly agree with all that P, but one area I have not done any research into and lack knowledge of is the question:

Were the hotels in Famagusta really owned by individual GCs or were most of them owned by international consortiums or foreign share-holders?

In the past I heard a lot of claims and counter-claims on the subject. It would be good to know the truth about the status of the hotels there. If for nothing else, at least to understand how much of a bargaining point it is for anyone!

I am also sure of hearing, the actual land on which the hotels were built originally belonged to "Vakiflar" before 1963 and their ownership never legally passed on to anyone else.

Any FACTUAL information (not views and opinions please!) anyone has on the above would be most welcome.

[Pyrpolizer]

This might shed some light to your questions BigOz.

It also blows down the propaganda that the Tcs were supressed and had no Hotels...

http://www.mfa.gov.cy/mfa/embassies/emb ... enDocument

[Pyrpolizer]

I also heard of the claims of Evkaf, but from what I heard all their claims are supported by some letters from pashas during the Ottoman era. The lands registry in Cyprus was established by the British in 1948, when everybody got title deeds, including Evkaf. The truth i believe is somewhat different:the British used some land that indeed belonged to Evkaf for government offices in Varoshia. They never denied it. Before leaving "her majesty" compensated Evkaf in real cash and Evkaf signed acceptance. Kutchuk took that money and started buying land massively in the north of Nicosia to establish his first enclave....

[EPSILON]

Varosha needs billions of infrastructure if I remember well it was 3-5 during the Annan Plan. And this to just make the return of inhabitants with water/electricity/sewage/roads etc. On top of that the inhabitants and hoteliers have to spend billions from their own savings to re-built their houses/hotels/bussiness etc.

The 3 possible options for return are
a)As per what VP said, to be returned but stay in the hands of the occupation regime.
Question:will the occupation regime do the infrastructure? The answer is definetely NO. But even if some miracle happens and they do it, then which GC would spend his lifetime savings just to go back and be administered by an illegal regime, which is hostile and racist to GCs by it's own law.
b)Under the UN. Here the situation becomes complicated because there will be matters of taxation, trade etc that have to be regulated.The area must be under certain law and that law can be nothing else than the existing RoC law and the EU aquis. So in reality it will be return to RoC but law enforcement will be excercised by the UN.
c)Under the RoC. The most clear cut and effective solution, but the TC/Turkish side will never do it.

It's getting more and more obvious the TC/Turkish side is only interested to keep whatever land it grabbed with the 1974 invasion and achieve legal status/recognition on top of it. They don't want to give anything back.

I have heard it on numerous occasions that the GC hotel and holiday resort owners in the South are / would be very worried about competition if all of a sudden the unused hotels in the area are reconstructed and become active! The main reason being the added competition to what is already a very competitive business in Cyprus.

Imagine extra 10,000 beds becoming available to tourists which are not exactly increasing by that number every year! Someone will lose customers and money on their ongoing investments in the South if tour operators and tourists start shifting towards Varosha. Would I be right in thinking not everyone in the South really want Varosha back? (that is - except those refugees who had homes in that part of Cyprus).

Big conculsion of BigOZ: Do not give Famagusta to Greeks of Cyprus because this is no good for them. Keep Famagusta a dead city in order Greek hoteliers in South keep working good.

Tks invasion army for your financial help!!!

(DEN MAS XEZEIS RE NTALARA)!!!!

[Pyrpolizer]

EPSILON,

bigOz simply asked questions that I also heard before, and by no means said what you are saying.

Would you mind stop farting so much