Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I went there last night, admittedly a monday night, and it was pretty dead. On the plus side though they seem to have a new manager who is keen to revamp the beer list, long overdue in my opinion. They had a special on last night for Shoreditch Triangle IPA for ?2.75 a pint; I don't think I've ever paid that for a pint. Admittedly some of their other offerings are more expensive, but they're also usually stronger than your typical pub offerings so I'd rarely order a pint anyway. Seems strange that they'd bring in new staff if they're supposedly closing though.

Perhaps any new owner should rename it 'The Tardis'


May give one a certain perception of space...


Cream colors and icy blues combinations can convert a small interior into a seemingly bigger space.


Reds will make a room look smaller.


Reds also compresses time. Anyone who has spent a seemingly 2 hours in a darkroom only to emerge

having lost most of the day.


Blues give the opposite perception. Someone having a meal in such a room will feel they have been there for hours.

They are likely to drink more.


Foxy.

david_carnell Wrote:

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

> I'm with Quids and Jah on this.

>

> When places like the Oglander, Hoopers and other

> pubs are being turned into shoe box flats it's

> crazy that bars are trying to cram into small

> former shops.



There is a difference between a pub and a bar of course. Most openings these days are bars rather than pubs. Bars are small space ventures and are popular currently. Big open pubs are no longer what people want.


I'm afraid thats just the way it is. You might do better opening yet another bar next door to the Draft House than you would trying to get hoopers to work as many people like to be able to move from bar to bar/pub on a night out hence LL does well as its "bar central", a focal point for people to have a whole evening out. Also on LL people like to people watch - you cant do a lot of that at Hoopers.

SJ has a point... you're not comparing like-with-like when you talk about Hoopers and the Draft House. A backstreet pub with singalongs and real ale is hardly going to attract the same crowd as a high street bar in a buzzy location serving world beers and Korean fried chicken.


It may be ironic, but it's not crazy.

footandmaff Wrote:

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

They had a special on last night for

> Shoreditch Triangle IPA for ?2.75 a pint; I don't

> think I've ever paid that for a pint.


xxxxxxxx


The EDT usually has Lighthouse for - I think - ?2.70 a pint :)

I don't think there are any plans... I'm sure if permission had been sought, it would be all over the forum! But it does seem like a likely outcome.


It really is/was a nice pub... they must have spent quite a bit on the refurb. One of the best beer selections round these parts too, with a few foreign/microbrew bottles. They engaged the local community, helping out with the Ivanhoe Rd street party, etc. They had music and comedy nights. They tried showing different sports. I even seem to remember they did French bistro food at one point (am I imagining that?). But it just didn't work in the end.

You do wonder what else a pub had to do to turn over a profit. In this instance you can't even blame a pub-tie since Jamie owned the place outright as a free house.


In winter if there weren't many people in there it could feel a little cold but I don't know many pubs that don't. And at least he had the snug as a smaller space to cosy up in, unlike many of the aircraft hanger refurbs in other pubs that demolish every interior wall and divide.


I think my own tastes in pubs are rather anachronistic but the drinking habits and tastes of the majority have obviously changed. Beer duty doesn't help any landlord but I'm not sure what else can be done to save the backstreet boozer.

Perhaps - but why aren't the local residents the ones drinking in there?


Places like the Montpellier and the Victoria took over old backstreet pubs and have made them work, albeit in areas where there is at least a good footfall.


But when you think about the huge housing estate next to Hoopers and the lack of alternatives unless you walk up the hill to the Canning or down onto Bellenden then I'm still not sure why it was never more popular.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> Didn't Jamie @ Hoopers have specific issues with

> some of local residents objecting to evening

> entertainment? I thought that was the main

> stumbling block


xxxxx


There was one particular resident.


Jamie did everything he reasonably could to address her complaints, including putting up hideous shutters inside the pub, but she was still not happy.


Yes, they did have a French chef at one point, but it was far from bistro food if I recall.


His first attempt at a menu was things like ham sandwiches. Apparently he thought that the English had not changed their food preferences since the fifties. I did mention this to whoever was the bar manager at the time (Nick I think) and I think the menu changed a bit.


Then for a while (I don't know if it was the same chef) it included stuff like "a selection of breads" which turned out to be a plate of dried up pitta bread. If it had been anywhere else it would have gone straight back, but I knew Jamie and Viv through putting on music nights there for a while, so didn't feel I could complain.


I recognise that Jamie was trying to give Hoopers the feel of an old school back street boozer, but I always felt that the decor could have been updated - in particular the horrid swirly carpet at one end of the room - without straying too far from that concept. I never much liked it as a place to spend an evening unless there was music on.


He did usually have a good selection of ales, though.


The pub really picked up at one point when Pete (I think) put on musicians such as James Riley who brought a much younger crowd down, and there was a completely different and much welcome vibe, but apparently Jamie didn't renew Pete's contract - though Pete did reappear later on. But the writing was on the wall by then.

I liked it... I found it quite "homely". Never really noticed the carpet. Although there was a rather awkward narrow bit by the corner of the bar. As for food - I remember seeing things like beef bourguignon advertised briefly, although admittedly I never tried (or even saw) it. Food is key, I suppose... name me a succesful pub round here that can't rustle up something half decent to eat.


I was also under the impression that there was one particular resident who was opposed to live music. Although I only have limited sympathy for someone who moves next to a pub and then complains about noise... it's understandable nonetheless.

Hi people - it's been a while...we are not selling up for sure - just speculative to see what interest there may be. We're not losing money but it is marginal. I don't think we have always had it right but also feel that - in hindsight - it's not the best lay-out and street position for a Draft House. However I do love the place and I feel we are in a good place with it right now. And in fact things have picked up markedly in the last few weeks so thanks for being there. Though I hear from other traders on the Lane that business in the last year or two has been tough.


The new manager is Ivor who was at our Tower Bridge site before. I think he is raising the tone and - as you say - the beer list is getting an overdue refresh.


The ?2.75 pint is a daily offer on an interesting cask ale - when it's gone it's gone. We're also running a British Keg festival all summer and there should always be a big range of awesome beers on.


We'd love to make it work and - as I say - there are some green shoots.


Do pop in and say hi to Ivor - he lives a couple of blocks away so knows the 'hood.


All best,


Charlie

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

    • 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.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
    • Yes..that may be the case but membership STARTING at £115 a month is still unafforable for many. Council gyms also have a large range of equipment and I had a  PT at Dulwich leisure centre when I was in Full Time employment who was incredible and even kept in contact during lockdown giving me a program I could do at home and checking in weekly at no charge or personal gain for herself. I dont doubt that Fit For may be a good gym (Its been in situ long enough so must be doing something right) However the cost of membership means it is affordable for the few not the many. If I could afford that kind of fee I would rather get a train to Canary Wharf and go to Virgin active where theres a pool and incredible classes and facilities 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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