honeybee79

Thanks - we're really excited to be shortlisted for this and to be in the company of such fantastic competition!

Nope. Thames Water has been told yet it's still going off.

Confirmed - it's coming from the pumping station thingy just off Cheltanham Rd, which explains why it can be heard on the Colyton Rd end too. Thames Water have been notified!

I am on Borland Road and we've been wondering that all day too. Can't place it. It's def not the Ivy House though!

I don't take my mini Beast (2.5) to restaurants because he can't be trusted to behave properly. The odd trip to Pizza Ezpress, perhaps. Or the Victoria. But I wouldn't enjoy my own meal out if I was having to constantly monitor his behaviour and chase him around so I would rather get a babysitter. Cafes are easier because I can always down my coffee and bundle him out! He's too big for a buggy really but I still put him in it to get to nursery in the morning. If I didn't, I'd be about an hour late to work on a daily basis. He's 2.5 but big, so if he decides not to walk it's not that easy to throw him over your shoulder and carry him. I always thought that East Dulwich was very child friendly! I definitely recommend the Dish & Spoon in Nunhead for kids and also the Old Nun's Head. Both are very welcoming.

Hi - the steering group notified the shareholders by email that the application went in. We will also be updating the FB page and twitter at the end of the week. There is nothing "hush, hush" about it - we have just been busy getting the building ready for re-opening, recruiting a manager, dealing with the end of the share issue and doing our day jobs! The application has been published on Southwark's website in the usual way and has been displayed outside the pub. We will, of course, be consulting with the community. We, and most of our shareholders, live in the immediate vicinity of the pub and have no interest in disrupting our neighbourhood. Our licence application was modelled largely on the licensing hours the pub had under Nick last year (with no complaints from residents), and the reason for asking for a 12am finish was to enable a reasonable drinking-up time and prevent the noise issue of everyone being kicked out at 11.15 - this is a strategy that works well for many other local pubs. And no, we weren't required to have a licence in place before launching our community share issue!

*Singray* - PM me. We have a revised cash flow that reflects recent expenditure and the current outlook that I would be happy to send you. We now have a much clearer picture of the start up costs. You're also correct about the forecast figure for wages and we know we need to address that. We're in the process of recruiting an experienced manager for the the venue, but like you say we will also require someone with extensive operating experience. We're fully aware of the fact that none of us our industry professionals and so we need the input of people who are!

Well, let's see where we're at in a year's time. As I have said before, none of us would have worked so hard to save the building and our funders would not have funded us to do so, unless we all thought it was a viable business and could thrive given hard work. I have explained the competitive advantages of the business model elsewhere on this thread. It appears we're just going over old ground here so I guess we should agree to disagree and see how things unfold!

*DulwichFox* - the building is Grade II listed and we campaigned to save it in order to protect it's lovely historic interior. We will not be changing the original features!

Dulwich Fox and DJKQ ? your confusion in relation to shares, shared ownership and interest payments on shares has already been addressed by me and others earlier in the thread. For clarity: our community shares carry voting rights, part ownership and the right to an interest payment on shares in the event of sufficient distributable profits. So what Sue says earlier in the thread is correct - a shareholder owns part of Ivy House Community Pub Limited and Ivy House Community Pub Limited is the registered owner of the freehold. The date on which the freehold was purchased is irrelevant. The position in relation to interest payments on shares has been explained to potential shareholders in our share prospectus. To the best of my knowledge, neither of you - Dulwich Fox or DJKQ - are shareholders and thus this information is of limited use to you, though I am happy to answer any further questions if you have developed an interest in supporting the project.

Yes, the pub had already been bought! We bought the freehold in March. The community share issue was to help us raise working capital to get ready to trade again, plus give us a chance to reinstate the second front bar. We set a target of ?100,000 for the share issue and we're delighted to have exceeded that!

Cyclemonkey - Thanks! We're going to issue statements of account to our shareholders over the coming weeks.

*pipsky* - we put a deadline in place because we need to draw a line in the sand and establish exactly how much money we have so we can plan ahead. We received quite a bit of advice from the Plunkett Foundation on this point (they have advised on many community shares issues across the UK)and they quite rightly said not to let it roll on indefinitely because we would never know where we stood financially!

Thanks to all who have supported us to date - be it share purchases, time, expertise or a combination of all three! We're determined to put the Ivy House back at the heart of the community and see it thrive.

I think we have been very honest with ourselves and realistic about the pub's prospects. It's going to be tough on a number of fronts - but that's OK, we never thought it would be anything other than tough. We know what we're up against and we've planned for it. Our business plan and associated documents have been carefully reviewed by our funders too (The Architectural Heritage Fund and the Social Investment Business Group). They have interrogated our assumptions and projections and neither body would have funded us if they thought that the venture wasn't viable. We're a community organisation so we welcome debate. We also accept that what we're doing isn't for everyone. However, I think it's very easy to sit on the sidelines, prophesising doom and gloom, and much harder to stand up, roll up your sleeves and get on with it. DJKQ - my door is always open if you have some practical tips or suggestions that you think we might benefit from or if you would like to volunteer your time.

LondonMix - I will PM you.

I do like a lively debate! And it's doing wonders for our share sales. DJKQ - you did misunderstand. You said it had "nothing to do with freehold etc . . . " (9.23pm, 28.5) but, as I explained to you, owning the freehold and being free of tie is extremely important. And you still don't seem to appreciate the difference between the previous tenant's business model and our own. As to geographical location, we recognised this as a challenge in our business plan. However, it is not insurmountable and we have thought very carefully about ways to address it. Again, community shares will be important in mitigating this difficulty. Did you come to our public meeting in April? People were lined up outside the building waiting to come in. The pub was totally packed with people wanted to see it re-open and to become part of what is a groundbreaking project. There is immense will locally to see the pub become a successful and thriving part of our neighbourhood. I would not have given up over a year of my life to work tirelessly on the pub in between doing a demanding job and bringing up a toddler, raise ?1 million, buy the freehold and conduct a community share issue that currently stands at more than ?100k for a project that I did not think would succeed. And I am no fool! I have, of course, also put my money where my mouth is and bought my own shares. So perhaps you should reserve judgment and we can reconvene this debate in 18 months - over a pint in the Ivy House?!

DJKillaQueen - As I explained, the previous tenant's business model is not the same as ours. The building itself does not constitute the business so there is no value in rehashing the previous tenant's figures if, indeed, the figures you state are accurate. Having spent the last 13 months researching, analysing, campaigning and buying the pub, this is what I know: 1. I'm afraid that it is everything to do with owning the freehold and being free of tie. The economics of the beer tie mean that tied licensees face an uphill battle to make a profit. The previous tenant was a tied licensee and had to buy drinks through the pubco, Enterprise Inns. The difference between what you pay through a pub co such as Enterprise and what you pay when you buy direct from your suppliers is stark. One publican has described how he has been forced to pay prices for some draft beers that are more than 66% above market value. You can read an account of tied publicans' predicament here: www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/10080033/Historic-pub-to-stop-serving-pints-in-protest-at-beer-tie-fees.html. The beer tie stifles the profitability of pubs up and down the country and affected the Ivy House when it was owned by Enterprise. 2. You're confusing the building with the business. The outgoing tenant's business is not ours. The outgoing tenant's bar manager did the best he could under the circumstances and worked extremely hard - years of underinvestment by the pubco and the beer tie squeezed profits. The circumstances that we face differ dramatically. We are free to negotiate the best deals possible directly with our suppliers. This puts us at a huge advantage. Also, as owners of the freehold, all profits from the residential lettings above will accrue to us, not to an absent landlord as they did before. 3. Do not underestimate how important a successful community share issue will be to the viability of the Ivy House. You say that you do not believe the pub will be successful. I say that we have 285 people who have ordered shares and think otherwise. All of our shareholders want to drink in the pub, use it as a venue for community events and celebrations, and see it succeed. Clearly shares in the Ivy House are not for you and that is fine! But lots of people think otherwise and see immense potential in the building and a chance to transform our community.

Hi everyone I'm one of the co-founders of Ivy House Community Pub Limited. To clarify: 1. What Gubodge stated at 6.49pm is correct. Our community shares carry voting rights (we have adopted the principle of one member, one vote so everyone has an equal vote regardless of the size of their investment), part ownership and the right to an interest payment on shares in the event of sufficient distributable profits. So what Sue says is correct - a shareholder owns part of Ivy House Community Pub Limited and Ivy House Community Pub Limited is the registered owner of the freehold. 2. Ivy House Community Pub Limited is responsible for paying all utility bills, salaries and for the upkeep of the building. 3. Community shares are an investment, not a charitable donation. If you want to find out more then please go to the link that Gubodge posted - www.communityshares.org.uk 4. Our shares prospectus explains the principle of limited liability which will apply to share purchases in the unlikely event that our organisation becomes insolvent. 5. DJKillaQueen - the figures you are quoting are based on the previous tenant's attempts to run a business from the building. They do not relate to our business, which is based on an entirely different model. To start off with, we will own the freehold and be entirely free of tie, which is something of a game changer. The financial viability of our business is also written by community shares, ie a community of over 200 people who have invested in the building and can't wait for it to re-open. We are content that our estimates are realistic. All our shareholders will have access to our audited accounts at the end of our financial year. Time will tell. 7. I am no tax expert and anyone concerned about tax implications should speak to their accountant. However, community shares cannot increase in value and so capital gains tax (CGT) does not apply. Please read our prospectus or contact us if you have any further questions. Glad to see the Ivy Housebis sparking lively debate and remaining at the top of the forum! Thanks to all who have bought shares to date.

With some help from the Peckham Society, the pub has been listed as an ?asset of community value? by Southwark Council pursuant to the Localism Act 2011. The Council processed the application swiftly and the pub was withdrawn from the auction it was due to be sold at on 29 October. The campaign to save the Ivy House is investigating putting together a community to bid to buy the pub when it goes back on the market. It?s a big, exciting project that has the potential to really enhance the surrounding area and we hope that you will support us. There is much work to be done over the coming months. In particular, the campaign is looking for help from people with skills in the following areas: 1. PR and communications. 2. Fundraising, particular for social enterprises. 3. Financial planning, forecasting and accounting. If you have some time, skills and energy that you?d like to share with the campaign then please get in touch by personal message through this forum. Everyone is working pro bono on the campaign, but it's a chance to work on a great project with some lovely and talented people. You can also find out more about what we?re doing by checking out our facebook group (savetheivyhouse) and following us on Twitter @save_ivy_house Thank you! Save the Ivy House.

I love both Theo and Max. When my little boy was born 2 years ago we were convinced that we were going to call him Theo. But when he arrived it just didn't suit . . We called him Sid. Sidney Joseph is the full name but we always call him Sid unless he's been particularly naughty. I think it's the best name ever but then I'm extremely biased!!

Try Peckham Rye (tho still pricey) or Nunhead instead. We bought a lovely, big 4 double bedroomed house in Nunhead for ?420k back in March. Yes, it needs some work but it's structurally sound and all works. Close to the top of Peckham Rye park, close enough to East Dulwich for us to still go to the shops and pubs there. A fraction of what you would pay for a similar house in East Dul and has a lovely, peaceful feeling to the neighbourhood.

Please contact the Police and the RSPCA so see what, if any, action can be taken. Horrifying.

Franklins. Interested to hear about Joanna's as not heard of it - will def give it a go.