Jump to content

Grand Opening of THE FLYING PIG, Goose Green,


Recommended Posts

We were there last night.


The Bristol milk stout was delicious. I'd go again just for that :) Can't remember how much it was, but I didn't recoil in horror, so it must have been reasonably priced.


We both ordered Scotch eggs and had to wait a while for one of them, however they brought us a free plate of chicken wings and blue cheese sauce (I think it was) to eat while we waited, which was both kind and unexpected.


I personally wouldn't have the Scotch egg again - nothing wrong with it, but the pulled pork round it was quite smokey and not really to my taste. The wings were nice.


The service was very good and friendly, and there was a good atmosphere. We'll be back, definitely.

Sue Wrote:

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

> Dog duck Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > For goodness sake... just want to hear about

> the

> > opening of The Flying Pig and all we get is

> > endless whingeing about non related subjects

> and

> > other crap that has nothing to do with subject

> > header? Why don't you lot just text each other

> and

> > be done with it? It's pathetic and boring, you

> all

> > craving for the 'next new place to eat in ED'

> It's

> > as if ED has turned in to some giant nursery

> > catering for bored parents that need to drag

> > children to every watering hole that opens up.

>

> xxxxxx

>

> Is this going to be the tone of your "credible"

> new magazine for East Dulwich ??

>

> :))


Eh? This is my tone for this thread. Why don't you, Jeremy and Angela go and drink some Prosecco somewhere

Dissappointing!!!!

Went there today, the food was rubbish! Baby Ribs were dry as a bone, BBQ sauce was just water which made chips soggy. Beef Ribs were just one big lump of fat. Definitely wont be going there again. complete waste of money.

funfamily Wrote:

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


> Beer selection was good but for a pint of beer to

> cost ?6.20 just seems a little over priced.


That depends on the beer. They have plenty of ordinary strength cask ales from close to home at very reasonable prices, but if you're going to try a 6+ % imported ale on tap, you're going to have to pay for it. Rogue's Hazelnut Brown Nectar was delicious when I tried it, but was never going to be cheap.


And it's nice if they do good food, but not essential for me when I visit a bar. The beer's the thing :-)

Food is ok, nothing to rave on about. Like people mentioned, the baby ribs are dry and not enough sauce....the meat doesn't really fall off the bone..


Buffalo wings were disappointing....very bland..


The food came out within 3 minutes of me placing my order!

TD Wrote:

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

> Food is ok, nothing to rave on about. Like people

> mentioned, the baby ribs are dry and not enough

> sauce....the meat doesn't really fall off the

> bone..

>

> Buffalo wings were disappointing....very bland..

>


The food came out within 3 minutes of me placing my order!


Did you hear the PING!


Dulwich fox.

Humdinger ahoy.


I don't write this with any sort of glee but only to stop others wasting their money and in the forlorn hope that the owner/manager/chef might read this and take note.


I was looking forward to eating here - good bbq is hard to find in London and the idea it might be on my doorstep was a great prospect. Alas, on tonight's showing, a ?4.99 insta-light from the petrol station across the road and some chicken bits from Tesco Metro would be a better bet. And a cheaper one.


First, the (relatively) good bits. The beers were good and reasonably priced. If I'd stayed I'd liked to have tried more of them. I could probabl=y, just, drink here again. Service was brisk and attentive. Oddly, they wouldn't set up a tab which meant paying as I ordered rather than being able to settle at the end. Given what as to follow, this isn't surprising.


Along with my better half, we ordered corn bread, the buttermilk fried chicken, soft-shell crab and baby ribs. For a bbq place, the fact the crab was the best of a bad bunch speaks volumes.


Everything tasted of stale, dirty oil and was greasy. If it's been changed since opening night I'd be surprised.


Corn bread was two small triangles of deep fried "stuff". No discernible bread or corn content. Edible. Just.


The crab was ok. Compared to the rest it, was a symphony, but in reality it was decent enough. A decent portion. Batter a little soggy and tasting of that oil and the quinoa salad was drowned in mayo. But this was good compared to....


The chicken and waffles. The chicken was a sub-kfc job in flavour. That stale oil doing its best to render any flavour in the coating redundant but I got a sense there was some spice or heat trying to get through somewhere. But worst, it was dangerous. Bloody. Not pink. Bloody. On pointing this out to the otherwise decent waiter I was told this was normal as a result of the brining process and was nothing to worry about. I'm an adventurous chap, but this is frankly BS and I'm not buying it. The waffles were a familiar sight to anyone who has worked in the packaging industry and would have slipped unnoticed into a cardboard box warehouse. The maple syrup was diluted with carob. All elements inedible.


The ribs were dry and unyielding. Given that they are trying to charge 30p(!) extra for bbq sauce - it's a BBQ restaurant FFS - I'd presumed the unadorned product would be edible. I was wrong. Anemic chips and more death-by-mayo salad was left untouched. I think it might have seen a smoker at some point but it had seen a heat lamp for longer.


The whole lot was ?50.


We did complain and were offered two free (draft) beers as compensation.


We declined and went elsewhere.


If the chef has ever been to the Carolinas, Texas, Kentucky or any other BBQ state in the South he'd know this isn't even the same food at all. It is an insult to the name BBQ. I suspect this is a case of Jamie Oliver-style bandwagon jumping on a food genre currently doing well elsewhere in London. Save your money, people.

If this is the same company as Locale, which is what I'm now reading, this all makes sense.


From piss-poor, never seen or been to Italy Italian food, to the same by-the-numbers attempt at bbq bandwagon jumping.


In the words of Marlon Brando: "I could have been a contender..."

Give the place a chance. I don't think we should judge just because it's the same company. Personally I didn't like Locale, but I think this place is pretty good so far.


Pretty sure they also own the lease on next door. Makes sense. They take the day trade. And did anyone ever see 'to let' signs outdoors.


Despite all this I have no issue with it being the same company. Why can't they reinvent themselves?

I went there the other day and had a lovely pulled pork burger. They brought ketchup and mustard to the table but told me that I would have to pay for any bbq sauce as it was made on the premises????? I thought it would have been good to give a bit to the customer and then offer for sale their 'homestyle bbq sauce' in lovely bottles which could be on the shelves with other stuff ......
We went last night, had burgers and pork belly. The burgers were tasty but bit greasy, triple cooked chips strangely slightly underdone. Pork belly very good. Tried a few of the ales which were great but London prices. If manager reading: get some hot sauces, let people start tabs, put some plants in the outside planters!
I find it amazing that a new pub with a new menu, which is therefore likely to have a few teething problems, seem to leave themselves wide open to criticism over the silliest things. Went there last week and the maximum amount of chips we had per meal was 9.... NINE CHIPS?! Surely you'd spend the extra 10 pence and double this amount?! The charging for BBQ sauce is outrageous, obviously it's a small amount but hell, I'm sure it costs McDonalds to give sauces away for free but you'd just swallow that cost to avoid getting people's back up, right? And my girlfriend had the beef ribs which were essentially just fat and gristle which she returned... compensation? A little plate of (ironic) chips

we had a drink there yesterday- no table service - i know its only a little thing, but its a nice thing to be served in a bar/grill especially at those prices, not tried the food yet , i agree small menu but looked quite good.

Most people there were there for drinks.


Sonia

Teething Problems.. A common Excuse.. NOT excusable.


Any new business needs to get it Right from day One.


If not they should be offering an introductory Price.


It is not likely to get any Better. It will probably get more expensive.


However, I do not think the poor quality of Food or Service is likely to put many people off.


Selling Beer at ?6.20 will insure that a certain element of E.D. folk will be queuing around

the block to drink there.


?6.20 will be the new norm. Others will follow once they realise they can get away with it.


DulwichFox

I asked if I could book a table for a group tonight via twitter last week...was given a standard line about no bookings being taken...i replied, but surely for a group, its embarrassing to take a big group of people to a place and not be able to sit or eat....nothing. nada. No response whatsoever. After going in and being unable to find anywhere to sit last week, a disinterested waitress saying 'just find somewhere' and waiting so long at the bar and giving up and walking out hungry and thirsty...followed by the management's lack of response, and the dire reviews on here (pay for bbq sauce - do one!), I'm not even going to bother trying to go back to the best sounding joint in the area. Sad times.

DulwichFox Wrote:

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


> Selling Beer at ?6.20 will insure that a certain

> element of E.D. folk will be queuing around

> the block to drink there.

>

> ?6.20 will be the new norm. Others will follow

> once they realise they can get away with it.

>

> DulwichFox


So how much is a bottle of wine? ?3.99? ?5.99? ?15.99? See, it doesn't make any sense. Believe it or not, some beer is better than other beer and very often you have to pay more for it. If they sell London Pride for ?6.20, I won't buy it. If they sell Stone's Arrogant B*stard for ?6.20, I'll have some. And as it's 7.2%, I suggest buying it by the half.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • 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.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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