Jump to content

Mountain B club owner selling up after devastating fire that killed 20


webfact

Recommended Posts

image.png

Picture: INN

 

INN reported that the owner of Mountain bar and bistro (Mountain B) has advertised it is for sale.

 

The pub on Sukhumvit Road in Sattahip, Chonburi, was the scene of a devastating fire that has left 20 dead and 35 injured.

 

The media reported a sign had gone up with a phone number for "B" - that's Sia B also known as Pongsiri, aged 27.

 

The owner is facing mounting costs in compensation for the dead and injured.

 

The decision also means almost 60 staff will be out of a job.

 

INN further reported that 15 of the injured had now left hospital but 20 remain hospitalized, nine on respirators.

 

asean_now_BB.jpg

-- © Copyright  ASEAN NOW 2022-08-26

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Monthly car subscription with first-class insurance, 24x7 assistance and more in one price - click here to find out more!

 

Get your business in front of millions of customers who read ASEAN NOW with an interest in Thailand every month - email [email protected] for more information
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Excel said:

Obviously some of the real investors want a return on the money now that the place is no more and given Thai superstitions, never will be anymore. 

Not an attractive venue with it's history and assigned superstition. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

What job did the 60 employees have in the burnt out shell ?

Its unclear as to whether those 60 employees was the total of the lucky ones still alive or whether some employees, including the manager I believe, were incinerated ? Indeed of those still hopitalised are there any employees amongst them, and, would they be able to work anymore if they recover ?

Edited by Excel
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, steven100 said:

.

As for the 60 employees,  that I suspect is the total number of employees from bar staff, waiters,  stage group, doorman, cleaners, and others .... and obviously they all work different shifts.

 

I hope you and others can understand this.

Those 60 employees that are made up of bar staff, waiters,  stage group, doorman, cleaners, and others that obviously work different shifts.....

 

Well they don't have a job so not sure why the author of the article felt compelled to include them.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Those 60 employees that are made up of bar staff, waiters,  stage group, doorman, cleaners, and others that obviously work different shifts.....

 

Well they don't have a job so not sure why the author of the article felt compelled to include them.

you'll have to ask the author 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

'The owner is facing mounting costs in compensation for the dead and injured'

 

Did they omit criminal charges?

 

 

Edited by anchadian
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, steven100 said:

As for the 60 employees,  that I suspect is the total number of employees from bar staff, waiters,  stage group, doorman, cleaners, and others .... and obviously they all work different shifts.

I suspect of those groups only 1 works a different shift.... cleaners... the rest will work when the place was open or preparing and hence the same shift. They are all out of a job if they survived.

It does not look positive for those poor customers still in hospital.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Hard to imagine many stepping up to the plate, to buy this place. One would think with the superstitions here, it would be considered bad juju to ever go there again. 

Even with safe reconstruction, new 'management' and without all the superstitions no-one would go there for a fun night out any more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Not an attractive venue with it's history and assigned superstition. 

Yes indeed, and my thought as well - ghosts!! (with respect)

Why not clear the area and establish a memorial garden?

Edited by Burma Bill
additional information
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, champers said:

Mr B should be held behind bars, not outside conducting business.

You seem a bit miffed he was released on bail.

 

Do you think the courts/judge/legal system should  forgo the whole "innocent until proven guilty" mantra and just lock him up and throw away the key ?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

You seem a bit miffed he was released on bail.

 

Do you think the courts/judge/legal system should  forgo the whole "innocent until proven guilty" mantra and just lock him up and throw away the key ?

Being remanded in custody until trial isn't unusual. In this case, to prevent absconding, also not unusual in Thailand.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, steven100 said:

It's difficult to see the front entrance in that photo,  however the owner is obviously selling a building that has been destroyed by fire including the land that it sits on which is probably quite valuable.

As for the 60 employees,  that I suspect is the total number of employees from bar staff, waiters,  stage group, doorman, cleaners, and others .... and obviously they all work different shifts.

 

I hope you and others can understand this.

I thought read that the land was rented? The rest won't be worth much.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, steven100 said:

the owner is obviously selling a building that has been destroyed by fire including the land that it sits on which is probably quite valuable.

Probably selling the lease for the land, it was rented according to reports.

Edited by Liverpool Lou
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, champers said:

Mr B should be held behind bars, not outside conducting business.

Mr B should be held behind bars, not outside conducting business (where he could very likely find the money to pay more compensation).   Makes more sense than locking him up where he can do nothing for the victims before he's been to trial.

Edited by Liverpool Lou
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...