Inflatable Church

I ‘think’ this is cool but I’m not sure! It’s an inflat­able church from InnovationsUK.com.
OK. It’s actu­ally a good idea tied into the change of the law in the UK from places being licensed to con­duct wed­dings to people being licensed.

24 thoughts on “Inflatable Church

  1. mark get­ting mar­ried in his inflat­able church valan­tines day and i didnt have to hire the worlds only inflat­able church off mike gill as i own it. mmmmmmmm strange that

  2. I have found Mr Gill and his com­pany of the highest stand­ards and the backup to my church is amaz­ing as i had some teeth­ing prob­lems with my new unit and his com­pany where so sup­port­ive to me i found it a great com­fort. and after dis­cuss­ing the com­ments of Mr Mark Whit­taker it seems that Mr Whit­taker also pur­chased a church from Mr Gill. It just shows you what people are pre­pared to do. In Business.

    From what i have heard Mr Whit­taker works out of a shed in Wales and can­not be trusted????

    A cus­tomer of Mr Gills — url at Thursday 12 Feb­ru­ary 2004 @ 23:43:08
    You can’t go wrong.
    http://www.inflatablechurch.com the original

  3. If any­one wants to see the copy­right papers for the inflat­able church designed by Rob Roden and Andi Fran­cis in 1996 and sold to Mark Whit­taker in 2001 they can con­tact me Andi Fran­cis. Michael Gill did not have any­thing to do with the inflat­able church until Mark Whit­taker employ him to pro­mote it. After that Mr Gill has made all sorts of claims and with the help of oth­ers copied the design. The design is out opf date and any­one want­ing anupto date inflat­able church from the ori­ginal design­ers should con­tact http://www.airquee.com

  4. Can Andi Fran­cis say the same for the idea of the inflat­able pub i think not.??? which i must say looks like a wendy house which can hold only 30 people instead of the 100 repor­ted plus their is no copy­right ever cre­ated for the inflat­able church,

  5. its good to see mr gill has come from behind his cover of one of mr gills cus­tom­ers. he knows the truth and seems to be upset that he has once again been out done by the true innov­ator of inflat­ables andi frances http://www.airquee.com keep up the good work andi and mr gill watch this space.your .coms seem to be so so empty run out of ideas to steal poor man.

  6. I know Mark Whit­taker per­son­ally. His children’s pic­tures have been ‘Illeg­ally’ used on Mr Gill’s Mini Bull Pro­mo­tion pic­ture! This is dis­grace­ful of Mr.Gill. He did not ask per­mis­sion from Mark or the Children’s Mother„They are not part of a mod­el­ling agency that such pro­moters use to pro­mote. He stole a Leaf­let that Mark+his part­ner pro­duced for the Mini-bulls„I know„as I had them prin­ted for him,at STAPLES,NEWPORT.
    Mr.Gill is a Con-Artist in the Rising!!

  7. I have known Mark Whit­taker since I was 11 we were in the same class at school and have remained friends since. I will tell you for a fact that Mark owned the church and Mr Gill is a brig­and and an imposter who has claimed own­er­ship and claims to have man­u­fac­tured the church. Basic­ally Mark Whit­taker is a man who gets up in the morn­ing to work to sup­port his fam­ily, he is a work­ing class lad who has always tried to bet­ter him­self. He can be con­sidered a grafter and is more at home on the heavy side of labour than on the pro­mo­tional side.

    Mr. Gill on the other hand is a cheap smooth talk­ing grifter and chan­cer who epi­tom­ises the word “agent”. Now Mr Gill is well doc­u­mented as claim­ing he designed said church and may well have set him­self up for charges being brought as to the leg­al­ity of his claims.

    As I am employed in cor­por­ate busi­ness and I am act­ive in local Gov­ern­ment I shall be mak­ing my own enquir­ies into this mat­ter. I have tried to con­tact Mr. Gill in Hamp­shire but as yet he has failed to respond to my correspondence.

    Mr Gill you play a dan­ger­ous game in this age of inter­con­nec­ted­ness and multi-media doc­u­ment­a­tion. Any­one else read­ing this please make your own minds up as to who is telling the falsehoods.

  8. As a par­ish priest I have known Mark Whit­taker most of his life and when he feel the need to talk he comes to me for advice. I remem­ber when he first bought the church as he came to me regard­ing using the church for wed­dings and even gay weddings.

    This I told him was not on and neither was his request for me to read a ser­mon on TV. How­ever I did give the church a bless­ing when he said it was for pro­mo­tional work.

    As a priest I am not allowed to digress my con­ver­sa­tion with Mark but I will agree he is a jolly sort who does no harm to nobody, I recall the days he worked in the brick works and then on a farm in the sum­mer months.

    He still found time to organ­ize fund rais­ing activ­it­ies for the church and has always been involved all his life.

    When untruths are being told it is my duty to speak out against mis­justice. The Church belonged to Mark Whit­taker and not Mike Gill who from what I under­stand has done Mark Whit­taker a great injustice

    What non­sense Mr Gill talks if he thinks an inflat­able church was ever going to work from a spir­itual angle. Our Car­dinal has been informed of this by the Cath­olic Arch­bishop of Wales.

    We are tak­ing this mat­ter most seriously.

  9. at the end of the day…you should always look behind the smiles and laughter? thats how mick {michael gill} got away with it!!! and mark let him. we live and we learn by our exper­i­ences and thats one mark wants to put behind now.
    its all just memor­ies for me
    jewels.{marks x.partner}

  10. mark will always be an innov­ator, full of bril­liant and inter­est­ing ideas. Its part of who he is… and what he does best.

    I think you should all move on and get over it.

    Mark has!!!!

    xxx

  11. Inter­est­ing busi­ness his­tory! Con­grat­u­la­tions to the ori­ginal cre­ator and thank the Lord that HE knows the truth in these mat­ters – that man­kind may never sort out! Copy­right law cer­tainly has a right­ful place in civ­il­ized nations. Some “smoke screens” make the truth hard to see, but the facts stated by sin­cere parties end up speak­ing volumes. Where people cre­ate and profit from ori­ginal intel­lec­tual prop­er­ties of oth­ers, the legal facts take time to sur­face. This brings to mind the clas­sic theater his­tory line: “He stole my thunder!”

  12. What a funny thread. I made a Blow-up Plastic Cathed­ral for my own wed­ding in 1987, so maybe I actu­ally inven­ted it. I blew it up for about 6 wed­dings between 1987 and 1995 when it was finally worn out and I retired it.…. It was well doc­u­mented in sev­eral news papers and pub­lic­a­tions in the early 90’s… I never bothered with a copy­right, I just have my own moral rights over it.
    Check it out here https://picasaweb.google.com/107609804521507241089/BlowUpPlasticCathedral1987
    Cheers

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>