Sue

Thanks for posting the link, Penguin68. My ancient Micra is eligible but as I avoid the congestion charge zone anyway I should be OK.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And the money for the rent and a manager would > come from where? > > Presumably from the revenues and profits of being > a bookshop? Being run by volunteers? Unpaid volunteers? As in a charity shop? Do you have any examples of this working anywhere as a financially viable concern? In an area with rents on a level similar to those in Lordship Lane? It would be nice to think it could work, but I really can't see it.

And the money for the rent and a manager would come from where?

tomskip Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It will be a significant loss to Lordship Lane if > it goes, but I can't see how any independent > bookshops stay open these days. Well there are quite a few independent bookshops staying open round here! Apart from Chener, there is Rye Books in Upland Road, the bookshop in Bellenden Road, one in Dulwich Village, one in Crystal Palace. That's just off the top of my head. ETA: And four of those are within easy walking distance of my house.

RubyGraeme Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the freehold is owned by John, a community > run bookshop sounds a brilliant idea....along the > lines of The Ivy? Is there anyone out there who > can advise? The Ivy House had grants and loans. Its community shares are only a relatively small part of its finances. And the turnover/profit on a pub is surely far far greater than anything a bookshop is likely to achieve, particularly given it is competing with the likes of Amazon, let alone Kindles etc. Plus, it may sound a brilliant idea, but it needs a strong core of very committed and very hardworking people to make it succeed. The Ivy House had (and has) that, and has gone from strength to strength, but I'm not convinced a small bookshop could work on a similar model.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Could have something to do with people driving too > much and concreting over their front gardens to > install their cars, thereby reducing the amount of > greenery available to host insects (and do other > beneficial stuff). Like many things, each of us > can help change it for the better but there's also > an excuse, eh? Many people are also concreting/paving/decking their back gardens. There is usually at least one thread on this forum offering topsoil :( I have a paved garden myself, which I inherited from the previous owner - it is very tiny though and it would be an absolute pain to have to keep a mower to mow such a tiny patch of grass. I have been gradually removing paving stones to increase the number of plants I can cram in, however I am a bit worried I will end up with just a few stepping stones amongst a tiny jungle :)) However, sad as the loss of urban plantlife is, I think the main cause of the problem is the commercial/agricultural use of pesticides. They don't just kill the pests that attack the crops in question, they kill other insects as well, and that has a knock-on effect on the things which eat those insects, or did do. But there are loads more birds round here than magpies, crows and parakeets - blackbirds, sparrows, blue tits, great tits, goldfinches, wrens, sparrowhawks, seagulls, robins, pigeons, collared doves, probably loads more but I have seen all those in my garden. Plus jays and magpies I have seen elsewhere, and woodpeckers I have heard. And long tailed tits I vaguely remember seeing in the woods, though I may be confusing that with another wood elsewhere. Fair number of butterflies too, but I don't have any plants at the moment which specifically attract them.

Eh?

I think you'll find the rent would be too high for that!

Michael Palaeologus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Dulwich Tandoori? Double check your bill. Just saying .....

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree that the carpets could do with a deep > clean (or preferably being taken up and > incinerated) but in PP's defence it has (at least > in the gents' version) some of the most salubrious > lavatories in this neck of the woods! The Ladies aren't bad either :)) But yes it would be good to see those carpets disappear ...... Went to see Blade Runner there last week. Six quid (for the 3D version). Compared to fourteen quid in East Dulwich (not for the 3D version). Worth the walk :))

John is hoping that it can stay a bookshop, but at the end of the day that may not be possible.

To be fair, if these people have only just moved in today, they have probably got more on their minds than not slamming doors. Like getting all their stuff into their new home. Might it not have been kind to wait a few days before starting a thread about them on here? Or maybe gently ask them not to slam the door? They have probably got absolutely no idea that it might be annoying you.

Excellent news! Thanks for posting it, rendelharris!

It could be put on the roundabout! 360 degree traffic fumes!

Heartwarming thread, thanks x

Crikey, kids in the fifties used to throw fireworks about in the street all the time around 5 November. Admittedly it was quite scary, but I expect that was the intention.

I saw Blade Runner yesterday. The light is just like that. But yes, apparently sand and stuff blown over.

Already a thread ..... http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?30,1871600

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Real ladies use the lavatory. > http://www.lady.co.uk/people/8352-pardon-that-s-pr > actically-a-swear-word The Lady - "For elegant women with elegant minds." :))

I'm wondering how 'Ladies' are different from Ladies :))

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > There was a major problem with the drainage right > along that side / end oh LL at that time. > All outlets were affected from the Palmerston to > the EDT > In the Bishop there is a Drain cover in the back > bar area that would of been there when it was the > Foresters. > The smell came from there, not the gents. > Strange the smell got stronger the nearer you were to the gents, then .... :)) And it was a smell of piss, not of drains ..... :))

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Foresters was a Great boozer. It was horrible! The carpet was squidgy, and you could smell the stench from the gents from just about every seat in the pub. ETA: Admittedly I'm only going back, oh, maybe twenty years?? So maybe it had passed its prime .....

Ah, thanks, that's good to hear!

Bet it was quiet though :))

That's eighteen years in total for all of them. Not eighteen years each, sadly.