Sue

Here we go again .....

BigEd, I am in awe of your ingenuity! There is a similar discussion going on on the Nunhead Facebook group (Nunhead Rocks). Look people, as soon as the weather warms up (it will!) the mice who have come in from the cold will go back outside. Really. They will. Trust me :))

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I have had many a argument with people over this > outside my house, and would do so again. I'm not surprised. You do not own the road outside your house. Anybody can park there, including people who may have urgent need of that space, including an ambulance needed for your neighbours. ETA: Perhaps it is my imagination, but you do seem to sometimes post things deliberately designed to provoke. "Out of town space stealers actively shunning said convention and ignorantly parking wherever they can." Like visiting relatives? You're having a laugh, no?

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's a poor first question: > > "1. Do you, or your visitors, find parking where > you live difficult? > Yes - all the time > Yes - Monday to Fridays > Yes - weekends only > No never" > > What about 'Sometimes, but it doesn't unduly > bother me'? I guess I'll just go for "No never" Yes, those options are very poor. Whoever produced the survey either has no knowledge of research/survey methodology or else is very bad at putting it into practice. Or else is trying to manipulate the result they want, of course ..

Robert Poste's Child Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now having visions of baffled Sainsbury's staff > staring at an endless procession of EDFers > clutching a pint of milk queuing up for the > self-service over the next few days... :)) :)) :))

Louisa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue, I agree it isn?t a charity, neither was > Iceland. If a business model isn?t working, it?s > time to move on. However, if the James Barber post > is correct, it can?t become a coffee > shop/restaurant either. If that?s the case, what > will it become? This space is not big enough for > anything else. No big chains will be interested. > Unless it?s taken on by another convenience store > offering. > Surely there are plenty of shops on Lordship Lane which are neither big chains or convenience stores? Why is the space not big enough for anything else? It seems like quite a big space to me. To the best of my knowledge shops like Pearspring, Celestial, Karavan, the jewellery shop, Farmers, the independent food shops, are not part of chains, let alone big chains. However I have no idea of relative rents. And there is a limit to how many convenience stores a place like East Dulwich with a totally changed demographic over the past couple of decades can support, surely. ETA: Many or most people will do a regular shop for basics, on or offline, and therefore probably won't run out of them. I have no idea what the pattern of Londis' sales is, but I suspect after the other food shops close it is mostly alcohol, cigarettes, confectionery and snacks like crisps. Not onions or stock cubes.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Sue, I think the shop on the corner of East > Dulwich Road and LL isn't a Costcutter now. The > other Costcutter at 395 Lordship Lane rebranded as > Payless. Ah, you're probably right. I haven't been in for a while. Louisa, unfortunately if a business is losing money, for whatever reason, it is unlikely to stay just because some people find it useful. It isn't a charity! Anyway, James Barber on the other thread says (if I understand him correctly) that it would not be allowed to become a coffee shop, for reasons he explains.

Haven't been to Sainsbury's for ages, and now I too feel the need to go and investigate these screens :)) Maybe I can combine it with a trip to buy the things I can only buy in Sainsbury's (if they still sell them ....) Surely their check-outs can't all now be self service though? Aren't supermarkets obliged to have at least one till with an actual assistant, or is that wishful thinking?

Drive-In MacDonalds? Multi-storey carpark to solve the ED parking problem (joke)?

See James Barber's recent post on the thread I linked to above for more info about the likelihood (or not) of Londis becoming a coffee shop ...... ETA: Isn't CostCutter down the road (towards Goose Green and on the same side as M&S) 24/7?

negative equity Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > jimlad48 > YOU'RE A BLATANT SHILL > A person engaged in covert advertising. The shill > attempts to spread buzz by personally endorsing > the product in public forums with the pretense of > sincerity, when in fact he is being paid for his > services. Er, what? Interesting first post, negative equity ..... ETA: Having read the OP again, I see where you may be coming from. Would you like to expand?

Thanks nxjen, that's reassuring! I did check out reviews etc before I went with them.

I'm worried now. I'm changing from Plusnet to BT at the end of the month :( ETA: I got a really good deal, but that's a bit pointless if the broadband is rubbish!!

Despite the thread title, there is a discussion about the future of Londis on here: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1911131,1912555#msg-1912555 ETA: Sorry, that link goes to a post in the middle of the relevant thread, but you can scroll back to the beginning of the Londis bit!

Thanks BNG. Not much forward then by the look of it.

Blah Blah said: "I'm just not sure what the purpose of the shareholder equity is within the model of a business, when there is neither no return, nor option to cash in the shares when there are rules like DF cites above." To add to what DovertheRoad said above, one of the reasons for the new share offer, apart from other people wanting the opportunity to buy shares, is that a number of the original shareholders have left the area and have withdrawn their shares.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But if I want to 'donate' money to something, I > can pick any number of charities that do something > more meaningful than a pub for example. I don't > doubt for one moment the achievement here. Just > breaking even in any pub these days seems to be a > challenge for a lot of publicans. But when a > business seeks to sell more 'shares' there is > usually a reason for needing to raise the extra > finance. Dismissing my point with comments about > dull ISA's and stuff is just infantile. I looked > at Sue's link. I looked at the financial reports, > and I should be able to say what I think from > that. As the link I posted above clearly states, over the last five years, many of the people who did not buy shares initially have been asking the Ivy House if more shares could be made available for them to buy, as they wished to have a stake in the pub which they use. The money raised from the community shares is a very small proportion of the pub's finances, as if you have looked at the financial reports I would have thought you would realise. Perhaps you need to read more widely on the website. As noted here https://www.ivyhousenunhead.com/about.php the community share offer was opened to raise money for necessary repairs and refurbishment, as well as to provide a trading reserve for the pub. These essential repairs and renovations are still ongoing. I am not sure why a community pub which brings people together in such diverse ways as chess groups, knitting groups, dance classes, live jazz bands playing while you eat Sunday lunch, children's drama classes, Irish sessions and many forms of other live music, should be considered somehow less worthy of support and not "meaningful" because it is a pub. Many people also book the lovely ballroom for special events including children's parties and wedding receptions. And quite apart from these benefits to the local community and beyond, the original group of customers who worked so hard to save the pub succeeded in having its beautiful interior listed, so that it could not become flats. And they give support and advice to other community groups who are involved in similar initiatives. I despair really. Anybody would think you did not want this valuable community asset to succeed, Blah Blah.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well when it comes down to empty shelves in the > Co-Op being a major talking point, > its hardly surprising things have taken a turn. > > East Dulwich isn't really that exciting. Its > just like any other place, only different. But it's a local forum and, in the main (lounge excepted) the discussions are around local issues. Which are extremely useful for those of us who live in East Dulwich, which I'm guessing is most of us, since it's the East Dulwich Forum :) Depends how you define "excitement" and how much "excitement" you want, I suppose. Many of them are quite exciting to me. I would really like to see the Co-op improve, so nothing wrong with discussing empty shelves, in my opinion. Thank God life in East Dulwich isn't more "exciting". Imagine what discussion on the equivalent Salisbury Forum is like just now, if there is one ...... :))

DovertheRoad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Somewhere on the original Ivy House shares thread > (2013?) I remember an amateur > builder/footballer/DJ claiming that she had run a > bar in the area for 5 years. And that the Ivy > House would never work. That dry sales could never > hit ?3k a week there. Whilst no doubt it's been a > huge challenge, the current team have really > proved a lot of doubters/self proclaimed "experts" > wrong. And stuck one right up them. Indeed. Well remembered.

Does anybody know whether there has been any response by Meadow to this rally? I realise it's early days.

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hmmm, a pattern emerges over where they?ve been > placed then. What do you mean, JoeLeg?

eddeal1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > this is the kind of HATE AND EVIL people like > EDF and Britain First and NEO NAZI spread. Christ. I wish I hadn't read that attachment. That's absolutely vile.

DulwichBorn&Bred Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My road is on there and there is always a parking > space. I?m against CPZ. > > > worldwiser Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Crawthew Grove, Frogley Road, Archdale Road, > > Crystal Palace Road, North Cross Road, Nutfield > > Road, Spurling Road, Matham Grove.. that's just > > for starters! I live around that area, and I rarely have a problem parking, even despite all the skips and tradespeople. Maybe two or three times in a year I have to park in an adjacent road, but it isn't a big deal unless I have heavy stuff to unload, and then I either double park whilst I unload it, or unload it later when I can park outside my house.

Obviously they did not make a profit in the initial years, and nor did they predict that they would. And I doubt very much that anybody buying community shares is doing it to make money. We are doing it because we think this is a fantastic initiative, on which a lot of people have worked extremely hard over the last five years. As for "lack of incentive", Dulwich Fox. Just go there and see the diverse range of people enjoying themselves, and the range of activities going on for people of all ages. That's enough return on my money for me. The predictable people are still being negative. They were negative even before the pub first opened as a community pub, and despite the fact that it's clearly thriving, they are still being negative now. It's very very sad to see.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One would assume Thames will be using remote Water > Pressure Monitoring. > > This simple system would flag up (Alarm) any drop > in pressure caused by any leak > and give a good indication where the leak is. > Thames should be aware of any problem before it > was evident to the public. That's interesting. I wonder why they would bother having a system for the public to report leaks, if it's all being monitored remotely? That seems a bit of a waste of staff answering phones and logging emails, or whatever the report system is. But I have no idea what technology they have. However, even if they are aware of all leaks, it doesn't mean they have the resources to deal with them all immediately, particularly after icy weather like we have just had.