Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Lordship could do with some livening up, i'm in favour of this and tats in general, should i feel the urge for another it'll save me a trip to Camden.


As for the haters, if you dont like them dont get one.


p.s. please retain the contact details of attractive girls that get them as tats are awesome on women.

As a few others have said it might be a bit expensive to open in Lordship Lane but somewhere nearby would be fine I think. Northcross Road would be ideal but anywhere visible should do the trick. It's a small area so word would get around quickly anyway, especially if you did plenty of leafletting. And maybe a few more tattoos in the area might stop some people thinking they are only for sailors and convicts.

Please try and steer away from associating tattoo's and artists with drugs/alcohol. Tattoo artists are very professional and drug/alcohol free who take their work and customers very seriously.


Thanks for all your feedback. Everyone has been very helpful and I have taken everything into considering.


Thanks again and hope to see you soon. Please feel free to message me.


Pete

Silverfox, you snob; get back to Dulwich Village!


Good luck pedropowers - yes it would suit the people of this area and fit in well. I'm too old for my first tattoo now, but I would'nt mind some more piercing if you did that too.


I'm a great fan of LA Ink on the Discovery Channel; if you are really successful maybe you could invite Kat over. I can hear her now "This is East Dulwich, Babe, where anything can happen; I'm Kat Von Dee and this is (insert name of your shop)".


Cheers!

Before any new business opens anywhere, it's suitability and benifit to the local community needs to be considered.


Would a Tattoo Parlour be of benifit to the Majority of the Community. Threre are places withing a 10-15 minute

walk where one can get a tattoo.


In various passed Threads on what East Dulwich needs, I cannot remember anyone suggesting a Tattoo Parlour.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Not true dulwichfox

>

> http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5

> ,284269,284556#msg-284556


What I said was true..


I said, I cannot remember anyone suggesting a Tattoo Parlour.


Ok there was someone, but most of the suggestions were for M&S and Waitrose which I do remember..


Cannot read every line of every thread.


Not that sad...

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> >

> And how exactly did I qualify for this honour?

>



I wouldn't call being an unapologetic and unpleasant snob an honour. But since you ask, describing tattoos as 'cheap and demeaning' is offensive, frankly. And you may not like David Beckham, but the man has put his money where his mouth is with his footballing academy and can put what he wants on his body. He's a good father and - a rarity in modern footballers - a decent role model for hard work.

You're saying that you are the arbiter of taste and decency, and that you're opinion of what is good and right should dictate whether or not a tattoo shop should open near us.


Nimbyism and arrogance of the highest order. Just because you don't like looking at it isn't a reason to tell others they can't look like that.


As for Silverfox...wow. Were you mugged by a tattood person in your youth or something? You bigoted freak. Get a sense of perspective and stop being a hater. Or get to the Village where your way of life isn't threatened.

Disgusting.



If a tattoo place isn't wanted here then it will fail within a few months. If it survives then it's because there;s business for it. How people think that it will lower the tone of the area is beyond me.

Alan Medic Wrote:

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

> >

> Is it? I think it's cheap and demeaning. I realise

> in this country I'm probably in a minority. What

> happens though when they are not trendy? I think

> David Beckham is a disgrace and sets a terrible

> example.



So how exactly did I put words in your mouth?

Alan - yes, fair enough. I did put words in your mouth there.


Let me rephrase.


I believe that anyone who describes tattoos as 'cheap and demeaning' is ignoring the fact that many others think differently, and is ignorant of the fact that it is a PERSONAL CHOICE.


I believe that to describe David Beckham in the way you did is wrong, and it GIVES ME THE IMPRESSION that you feel a tattoo place should not be opened round here, simply because you don't like how they look.

I have a theory... that the fashion for tatoos is why there has been a massive drop in the number of under 40 year olds giving blood. I heard this on the radio last week but no one made the connection between tatoos and the decline in numbers


If I am right then no, I dont want a tattoo shop!

This is from the current advice for potential UK blood donors. It doesn't look drastically prohibitive.


"If you have had any body piercing including permanent and semi permanent makeup and tattooing, or acupuncture outside the NHS and not perfomed by a qualified Health Care Professional registered with a statutory body, please wait 4 months from your last piercing before donating. If your treatment was between 4 and 12 months ago, you must let us know as your donation will need an additional blood test."

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

    • Pretty much, Sue, yeah. It's the perennial, knotty problem of imposing a tax and balancing that with the cost of collecting it.  The famous one was the dog licence - I think it was 37 1/2 pence when it was abolished, but the revenue didn't' come close to covering the administration costs. As much I'd love to have a Stasi patrolling the South Bank, looking for mullet haircuts, unshaven armpits, overly expressive hand movements and red Kicker shoes, I'm afraid your modern Continental is almost indistinguishable from your modern Londoner. That's Schengen for you. So you couldn't justify it from an ROI point of view, really. This scheme seems a pretty good idea, overall. It's not perfect, but it's cheap to implement and takes some tax burden off Southwark residents.   'The Man' has got wise to this. It's got bad juju now. If you're looking to rinse medium to large amounts of small denomination notes, there are far better ways. Please drop me a direct message if you'd like to discuss this matter further.   Kind Regards  Dave
    • "What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???" Why is it perceived, Reeves is responsible for doubling the "black hole" to £20b through the public sector pay increases. You can't live beyond your means and when you try you go bankrupt pdq. In 4 yrs time if this Govt survives that long and the country doesn't go bust before then, in 2029 I dread to think the state the country will be in.  At least Sunak and co had inflation back to 2% with unemployment being stable and not rising.   
    • He seemed to me to be fully immersed in the Jeremy Corbyn ethos of the Labour Party. I dint think that (and self describing as a Marxist) would have helped much when Labour was changed under Starmer. There was a purge of people as far left as him that he was lucky to survive once in my opinion.   Stuff like this heavy endorsement of Momentum and Corbyn. It doesn't wash with a party that is in actual government.   https://labourlist.org/2020/04/forward-momentum-weve-launched-to-change-it-from-the-bottom-up/
    • I perceive the problem.simply as spending too much without first shoring up the economy.  If the government had reduced borrowing,  and as much as most hate the idea, reduced government deiartment spending (so called austerity) and not bowed to union pressures for pay rises, then encouraged businesses to grow, extra cash would have entered the coffers and at a later stage when the economy was in a stronger position rises in NI or taxes would have a lesser impact, but instead Reeves turned that on its head by increasing ni which has killed growth, increased prices and shimmied the economy.  What's worse is that the perceived 20 billion black hole has increased to 30 billion in a year. Is there a risk that after 5 years it could be as high as 70 billion ???     
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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