Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I used to enthusiastically support every pub in Dulwich when I was a young Turk. Back in the day before the day we'd spend all Friday night in the Foresters and all Saturday afternoon in the EDT, maybe ten or twenty people. Later it was the Dog. I should have my own blue plaque.


Anyway. Does that still go on?


In Dulwich?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/45338-lost-weekends/
Share on other sites

I think it does. I happened to hang out with a 74 year old former boss of mine after funnily enough a Blue Plaque ceremony locally. By 5 am I was done, whereas the 74 year old headed off to the Bussey Building for a bit of early morning clubbing with other equally 'not youngsters'!!!


Old habits die hard in some :D

I think thr main problem is money. Even if I was free to have those weekends again (as in single with only myself to spend my wages on, and sharing a flat with a couple of mates), I couldn't afford it anymore.


In my mid 20s I'd do about ?120 on a Friday night. At today's prices I'd need ?250 - ?300, and my wages haven't climbed at anywhere near the same pace as the booze.

Well, let's see. I clearly remember buying a round of cocktails in the Black Cherry about ten years ago and the bill came to ?56 and that was for only six or seven drinks. If I remember correctly a Zombie was ?9 and most of the other cocktails were about six or seven quid. It soon goes. Bit tight are you, *Bob*?

As Jah has said, if you get a big round in it's very easy for big money to get spend. Back when The Black Cherry opened it was ?7 for one cocktail, If you're in a group of 8 - 10 people that's quick money.


But back then we all tended to have a pint and a shot, so basically each round meant two drinks for everyone. Then the inbetweeny shots.


It was when there was no responsibility, and my body could take a ludicrous amount of abuse (so I tested it's limits). Couldn't do that regularly now, and wouldn't want to.




Although one big night a month would be nice, but can't even afford that anymore.

I don't want to labour the point, Otta, but the point of a round is that it more or less all works out (apart from the tightarse - there's always one). But even so. One week maybe you get hit by a big round, but the next week not.


But if everyone's average spend on booze is genuinely ?200 in one night - ten years ago - then they're all drinking 80 pints or 40 cocktails or whatever else.


Taxis, clubs, food, extras.. yeah, but ?200 just on booze? Each? Come on..

Otta Wrote:

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

> cle Wrote:

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

> -----

> > There is a fairly large elephant in the room

> here

> > in regards to a ?200 spend on a night out. Come

> on

> > guys...

>

>

> If you're getting at what I think you're getting

> at, Jah Lush did say "and that's before getting

> any gear in."



Right you are, missed that first time.

I did this on nights out with certain colleagues.

You would wake up with a headache, memory loss and loads of money gone :)


If you remember where it went - you weren't drinking.


*Bob* Wrote:

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

> I don't want to labour the point, Otta, but the

> point of a round is that it more or less all works

> out (apart from the tightarse - there's always

> one). But even so. One week maybe you get hit by a

> big round, but the next week not.

>

> But if everyone's average spend on booze is

> genuinely ?200 in one night - ten years ago - then

> they're all drinking 80 pints or 40 cocktails or

> whatever else.

>

> Taxis, clubs, food, extras.. yeah, but ?200 just

> on booze? Each? Come on..

The worst round to fall for was always the post-club pub round.


Surfing at the crest of the crowd with your new bezzies, jollied along by feelings of chemically-induced elation, you empty your wallet on drinks for a dozen strangers.


You get one back but then everyone gets a bit tired and buggers off.

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

    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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