Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think Jack Wills is pitched a little younger, with Aubin & Wills pitcher higher. Agreed with cate that the pricing structure is very lopsided and I am sure as a growing brand this is part of a future strategy.



sophiesofa Wrote:

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

> Jack Wills is for rich Bristol University students

> IMO

Perfect uniform for the over priveledged DCPS / DC boys and JAGS girls. Also, would we all rather go back to the 'cheerz' and fried chicken shops of old? Come on - you have to take the rough with the smooth in ED. You pays your money...You Don't have to buy the stuff, but someone Jack will(s)


(sorry...)

It's weird if you ask me. ED seemed to be heading quite neatly into the gentrified mode of almost Clapham proportions with it's organic shops and overpriced polo sweatshirt stores - then came the credit crunch. The tail took a dramatic twist, and just like a half finished masterpiece by Picasso, the gentrification came to an abrupt halt. Lordship Lane has boutique sat comfortably next to chicken shop (for now).. Will this continue? Will Jack Wills and other posh folk shops continue in the same mould as White Stuff? Nail biting times for Judith from the home counties who is desperate to leave her recently bought bargain basement terrace on Zenoria Street, but cannot bare walking past the likes of Iceland on the way incase she see's a poor person! Tough times for Judith! ... Will ED's gentrification process continue.. Jack Wills, over to you my friends


Louisa.

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

    • It's called The Restorative Place. Also, the Fired Earth storefront is under offer too, apparently. How exciting...!
    • Perhaps the view is that there are fewer people needing social housing in London, going forward, or to cap it as it is rather than increasing it. We already see the demographic changing.
    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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