Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The plans show a seating plan..

Any branded chain would have their own seating plan that fits in with their layout style.


Looks like M&S killed off Iceland and now looks to of had some influence on the closure of Londis.


Anyway this is the Sweaty Betty thread so off topic..


DulwichFox

Londis is of course a chain. The replacement may be a chain, or possibly an independent. I'm not sure what the point is either way. There is no shortage of convenience stores on LL, so I don't know why anyone woudl be particularly exercised about the change without even knowing what's going to be there. Is it evidence the ED is dying. Not really.
I agree with rahrahrah - I also like the diversity of this part of SE London and it is only a small outlet. Is this a good time to mention that there's a special competition on the Sweaty Betty East Dulwich Facebook page? Don't shoot the messenger I just thought anybody who is interested/likes their clothes might like to check it out.

I don't care what it becomes..

I don't sit down to eat Pasta... Pizza... Burgers.. Fried Chicken.. Ribs... and all the rest of that sort of crap.


..So very unlikely I will ever use the place.. Whereas I use Londis most days..


DulwichFox.

The loss of Londis will be detrimental to the neighborhood, and I've already discussed this with James Barber over PM who is looking into it. We have already lost a number of convenience stores over the years, and the former 7/11 site is absolutely crucial to the retail mix of the area. We do not need more restaurants. We have plenty already. I also do think that the M&S/Iceland situation has probably in some way influenced this change of use application either directly or indirectly. Once a precedence has been set, bring on the flood of applications.


Louisa.

What are you talking about Louisa? There was no change of use for M&S! Its one supermarket chain taking over another supermarket chain.


The only change of use on that application concerns converting the office to residential units, which isn't part of the Londis application as far as I can see.

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Other places recently pronounced 'dead' also

> include New York, Berlin, Sydney, Paris, Madrid,

> Melbourne and so on.

>

> Two millennia of continuous capital civic

> evolution and I just happen to be born at the when

> they all die. Just my luck.



I'M sorry but speaking as someone who spent time in the late '70's and 80's in New york, It IS DEAD.

Ok, street crime is down, once no-go areas like Alphabet City ( I had a friend lived on Avenue A in the 80's when visiting you'd stay over rather than risk the junkies on the doorstep and the shootings at night) are now gentrified full of hip bars and resturants.

But Gone are the interesting places CBGBS, Mars Bar, Yaffa Cafe, Chelsea Hotel is being turned into an overpriced soulless 'boutique hotel'.

Gone are the quirky independent stores in the East Village, Ditto SoHO..now home to the likes of TopShop and H&M

I could go on and on.

Berlin is now going the same way.

The very people and shops that made an area interesting and dare I say it 'Cool" are being priced out

And in their place come psudo hipster bare brick oh so ironic 'we only play vinyl' hangouts.

I'm a city girl, always have been-I love the diversity, the edge the creative buzz of cities.

But soon I fear everywhere will be the same.

It's a peculiar thing isn't it; to believe that for all the hundreds of years something has been in existence, the bit of it that just happened to coincide with a prime bit of your life just happened to also be the very time when that place was at its best, then all downhill.


A whole lot of teenagers these days are going to have to suffer their parents banging on about amazing squat parties in NWSomething. They will roll up heir eyes, just as surely as their parents did at the previous generation. Then they'll go on to do exactly the same. That's just how it works.

I remember they are planning to do a rear extension of the existing building across two levels, right? I think the use is already residential there though so its not a change of use. What's the precedent M&S is supposed to have created: buildings can be extended to create flats? Surely that was already the case and for Londis, they aren't changing the original height of the building as seen from LL are they? Can someone please re-link the planning application?


Anyway, I find the term luxury flats really loaded. Its just more housing. Its not like they are building One Hyde Park above the shop. London needs more housing so unless there is a good reason not to do the residential extensions, I'm supportive.

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes but it's "more than something to sweat in,

> it's a tool for transformation"

>

> That's what Tamara's inspirational omni-channel

> sports retailer of the year, one to watch, award

> winning website will tell you. Even when you're

> paddle boarding in Witterings or mid-run on a copa

> cabana beach, not driving your 1970's VW

> convertible with your dog Ennis thinking of your

> global fitness powerhouse or going to the coffee

> shop on the paddle board


Ok, so I came back for this one. No lattes or bugaboos here, and I freaking love Sweaty Betty.


I'm spending all that money I saved on not procreating going surfing in Bali. There might even be a little yoga. And I'm gonna be wearing Sweaty Betty, baby.


And raising a cocktail to you all in your Decathlon gear.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm a bit lost now - is the argument that Sweaty

> Betty moving in will kill ED (or Peckham, or

> London) or that it will kill Lowestoft (presumably

> by moving into ED rather than there)?


DaveR, Sweaty Beaty in and of itself will make no difference. It's just another shop. But the process of high end chain wntrenchment will kill ED and yes even Lowestoft, indirectly, in time. Mark my words! Poor London neighborhoods gentrified get the high end chains and disappearing social diversity further enhancing the notion London is a country all by itself, which indirectly continues to damage outlying towns and cities (Lowestoft and Bognor etc) which are already poor and will just get poorer!!


Louisa.


I'm still confused. If Sweaty Betty is successful, how will that kill ED? And if it's unsuccessful, presumably it will be replaced by something that might be, so how will that kill ED?


I think the confusion might be semantic - does 'kill ED' actually mean 'make me and my friends cross'?

I really liked Grace and Favour when it was a cafe. Back in the late 90s and early 00s it was a treat coming to North cross Road and using the slightly off-beat cafes there.


Shocked at what is has become but hey-ho rarely go there nowawdays in any case and quite like the plant stall (and family like the popcorn).


I also liked the salvage place but rarely bought things due to the cost and now seen its gone. And the charity shops are good. And the Cheese Block (as long as you set a limit on your spending). And that basement place that does music. And from the early 80s the dodgy tailor that sold Levis and kept porn mags. But no LL carpets.


Not really sure of the point of my post.

Has something awful happened? Has someone died??!? Has there been a mass disaster in East Dulwich!? A shop opened!? A new one? Selling gym wear!? OMFG!? How on earth will we cope???


And people who shop in said shop "may" have a takeaway coffee sometimes? Or "may" be so rude to have born a child and not only that, push said child in a pram!? Are you kidding!?!?? AND they do yoga to top it all off!? It's all so hideous!


On a serious note, I moved to East Dulwich a year ago. I absolutely love it. I have family here, my father was born here. I love it so much... until I see threads like this on this forum. I check into the forum just every once in a while to check in with any new developments in the area or to see if there is something I should know. But then I feel very sad to see people being so negative about something like a new shop opening! I'm sorry, but didn't the Sweaty Betty shop used to be a Deli? Because an artisan cheese and a tub of hummus are essentials, of course. Let's be honest, you can never and will never be able to buy all your essentials on a high street as small as Lordship Lane. However, as long as an area is clean, safe and friendly, whatever somebody's class, job, which schools their children attend, whether they make their coffee at home or buy it out as a treat once in a while, their preference of exercise gear (!!), isn't that surely the most important thing?


This forum gives me the impression that maybe East Dulwich isn't the warm and friendly area that I thought it was, so hopefully I'm wrong.


And just to be clear, Sweaty Betty have written on their blog their recommendations of their favourite places in East Dulwich:


http://www.sweatybetty.com/blog/sweaty-bettys-guide-to-east-dulwich/?__ja=tsid:65551~cgn:20160506EastDulwichUK~kw:swbetty.258522&utm_source=responsys&utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=20160506EastDulwichUK


You'll see that includes a whole wealth of independent and local businesses as well as institutions we should be proud of (Picture Gallery, Horniman Museum etc.). So it's hardly ruining the area, is it?


Let's all calm down - I hear yoga is very good for that!

  • 2 weeks later...

Positivity Rules Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Has something awful happened? Has someone died??!?

> Has there been a mass disaster in East Dulwich!? A

> shop opened!? A new one? Selling gym wear!? OMFG!?

> How on earth will we cope???

>

> And people who shop in said shop "may" have a

> takeaway coffee sometimes? Or "may" be so rude to

> have born a child and not only that, push said

> child in a pram!? Are you kidding!?!?? AND they do

> yoga to top it all off!? It's all so hideous!

>

> On a serious note, I moved to East Dulwich a year

> ago. I absolutely love it. I have family here, my

> father was born here. I love it so much... until I

> see threads like this on this forum. I check into

> the forum just every once in a while to check in

> with any new developments in the area or to see if

> there is something I should know. But then I feel

> very sad to see people being so negative about

> something like a new shop opening! I'm sorry, but

> didn't the Sweaty Betty shop used to be a Deli?

> Because an artisan cheese and a tub of hummus are

> essentials, of course. Let's be honest, you can

> never and will never be able to buy all your

> essentials on a high street as small as Lordship

> Lane. However, as long as an area is clean, safe

> and friendly, whatever somebody's class, job,

> which schools their children attend, whether they

> make their coffee at home or buy it out as a treat

> once in a while, their preference of exercise gear

> (!!), isn't that surely the most important thing?

>

> This forum gives me the impression that maybe East

> Dulwich isn't the warm and friendly area that I

> thought it was, so hopefully I'm wrong.

>

> And just to be clear, Sweaty Betty have written on

> their blog their recommendations of their

> favourite places in East Dulwich:

>

> http://www.sweatybetty.com/blog/sweaty-bettys-guid

> e-to-east-dulwich/?__ja=tsid:65551~cgn:20160506Eas

> tDulwichUK~kw:swbetty.258522&utm_source=responsys&

> utm_medium=eml&utm_campaign=20160506EastDulwichUK

>

> You'll see that includes a whole wealth of

> independent and local businesses as well as

> institutions we should be proud of (Picture

> Gallery, Horniman Museum etc.). So it's hardly

> ruining the area, is it?

>

> Let's all calm down - I hear yoga is very good for

> that!



This forum is far from representative of the area (in fact most of the regular posters don't live here). Internet forums in general bring out the worst in peeps. Don't think it's any reflection on real life ED.

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> And raising a cocktail to you all in your

> Decathlon gear.



I suspect the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference without checking the label.




Or give a shit either way.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...