Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Deptford got one of these first... http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vZjevLZzt7E/T_ptFEfsuDI/AAAAAAAAEUk/bXpiR7eer1Q/s320/IMG_1429.JPG




Y'see, Waitrose see these and realise that people have correspondingly more cash for marinated elvers and such and so move in to the area... ergo you need to convince Poundland to move to the Lane first. Problem solved.

silverfox Wrote:

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

> Fact is Waitrose would not have moved into

> Deptford unless the profile was right.

>

> what does that say about Ed?


ED has recently sent out a clear message that it is not open for business. Cant blame Waitrose and M&S for focussing their priorities elsewhere.

Haha my friend in Bellenden Road sent me a link to this thread (I am a former EDer and EDFrs, now New Cross). If it makes you feel any better, the Waitrose is not opening up in "Deptford as it currently exists", but in the gigantic riverside yuppie flat developments that are opening soon, and are essentially a westward extension of Greenwich.


But yeah guys, keep the faith!!!!

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> "what does that say about Ed?"

>

> it says (for the umpteenth fliipin' time!) that ED

> has commercial property of a very small unit size



Maybe, but that hasn't stopped Tesco Metro and Sainbury's Local setting up in recent years.

The Evening Standard has basically PRETENDED that Deptford is getting a Waitrose (when in fact Greenwich is getting a Waitrose) in order to drum up interest in one of its major advertisers riverside developments, New Capital Quay. Hence why the article was followed by a full page advert flogging flats in New Capital Quay.


The new store is 100% west of Deptford Creek, the 'border' between Greenwich and Deptford and therefore 100% in SE10 (Greenwich) and not in SE8 (Deptford).


Waitrose themselves list it as being Greenwich, which it is - http://www.waitrose.com/content/waitrose/en/bf_home/bf.html


It is to be a large store I believe, over 30k sq ft, and opens at the end of July along with a heap of other shops, restaurants and cafes.

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

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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