Jump to content

Recommended Posts

???? Wrote:

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

> Well said SJ - was going to check that one out,

> won't bother now if they think they can traet

> punters like idiots.


same here.


agree with SJ too and they certainly are 'web savvy' enough to post on twitter (which is more than can be said for some businesses, rightly or wrongly for them). Er..and I am talking about the not-the-cakes one.

It is a definite problem - these unofficial "reviews" are necessarily completely subjective and one person's favourite establishment is another's "never again". I do think there is a major difference between a customer's criticism and a disgruntled ex-employee's.


The big mistake for any establishment though is for them to lose their rag and issue an indignant and poorly written flounce in response, forbidding any mention of their name. As the OP states, others have responded to criticism with positive and mature steps to address any issues (without submitting to the whims of every bitchy complainant.)


I wouldn't frequent an establishment that had the sort of attitude we have just witnessed.

Well, it's not like this forum has a solid core of regular users, with memories like elephants and a good eye for spotting spam or astroturfing posts, who will from henceforth go out of their way to comply with the letter of forum rules, whilst making quite clear what they think of this kind of approach...


Oh.

steveo Wrote:

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

> the forum is so potent it could affect his business or even shut him down


> Now maybe the pitta was cold and maybe toys were

> thrown but surely even us the mighty forum don't

> want that.



He's obviously lost his sense of hummus

  • 2 weeks later...

I was looking at frequenting one of the above mentioned establishments last week, but then found this thread, and it made be wary. Since going past it since then, I've noted that it is significantly quieter than it was around opening time. Now that could be because people aren't going back, or because those that may have given it a try haven't risked it, like me.


So his request to have reviews removed could have backfired...

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...