Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Do other people share my frustration with 'laptop squatters' who colonise coffee shops, especially Cafe Nero in Lordship Lane. They buy a single cup of coffee and then spread themselves out, over 2 or 3 chairs, for several hours while using their laptops.


They are selfish - taking space that could be used by many others who actually want to buy drinks and food - and then find somewhere to sit down to consume them, without having all day to do so!


These squatters cannot be great for business - spending practically nothing themselves - and would-be customers turn away when they see that there is no space! In Cafe Nero there will often be around 10-12 laptop squatters in occupation at any time. Please can they go somewhere else to freeload or perhaps should be charged a commercial rental for their use of space?

First of all, how the hell do you know how many cups of coffee they've purchased? Are you some sort of weird stalker coffee cup watcher? Stop watching them - eeeeuwww.


Secondly, I know when I was self-employed and when I was looking for a job, I often took myself out to work in places like this with good wifi, because it was entirely demotivating sat in your gaff all day all night on your own. Give them a break.


Thirdly, I now work for one of the largest suppliers and retail trainers of specialist food & drink retailers, and I promise you, having decent working wifi and attracting people to use it does NOT have an adverse effect on their business, it's almost entirely the opposite. For one thing, they are probably more likely to drink more cups of that coffee you talk about, than you.


And fourthly, I agree with the others, just ask if you can sit next to them, afterall, you might be even able to help them with their work :)

NewWave Wrote:

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

> they are welcome to do it in a big chain like cafe

> Nero...BUT... it REALLY annoys me when they do it

> in small independent coffee shops that rely on a

> turnover of food and coffee for their survival.


Yeah, put a sign up banning them or a notice saying "NO wifi, go to Cafe Nero", see how long that pays off for them.

Starbucks, McDonalds, Nero, all the big chains have free wifi. That's because their analysts have advised them it's good for business. Ie good for making money. Independents usually, wisely, follow the learnings of these big chains. Free wifi is to encourage people to linger. Lingerers are more likely to repeat purchase coffee and food. Nero wants their business and encourages it. Having said that, it's always rude to take up more space than you need, especially when demand is high. Just ask them to budge over.
Totally, I work in the trade and it's proven to increase sales - and not just for chains. Just as having sofas and chairs along with free wifi in a women's clothes shop is proven to increase sales; men sit and browse while women stay put in the shop up to 5 times longer. no brainer really.

Beej Wrote:

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

> NewWave Wrote:

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

> -----

> > they are welcome to do it in a big chain like

> cafe

> > Nero...BUT... it REALLY annoys me when they do

> it

> > in small independent coffee shops that rely on

> a

> > turnover of food and coffee for their survival.

>

> Yeah, put a sign up banning them or a notice

> saying "NO wifi, go to Cafe Nero", see how long

> that pays off for them.


Pubs will kick you out if you don't keep drinking.


But I seem to fit the criteria for free drinks so can't complain :)


I still can't believe the guy having a disciplinary in Costa.

Beej Wrote:

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

> I have never seen anyone kicked out of pub for not

> keeping drinking, is this an old wives tail you're

> spinning us ;-)



Maybe they don't now - as I haven't tried it - can make a pint last almost 1 hour.


In my youth happened all the time - maybe just me and my group :).

Chief Wrote:

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

> Do other people share my frustration with 'laptop

> squatters' who colonise coffee shops, especially

> Cafe Nero in Lordship Lane. They buy a single cup

> of coffee and then spread themselves out, over 2

> or 3 chairs, for several hours while using their

> laptops.

>

> They are selfish - taking space that could be used

> by many others who actually want to buy drinks and

> food - and then find somewhere to sit down to

> consume them, without having all day to do so!

>

> These squatters cannot be great for business -

> spending practically nothing themselves - and

> would-be customers turn away when they see that

> there is no space! In Cafe Nero there will often

> be around 10-12 laptop squatters in occupation at

> any time. Please can they go somewhere else to

> freeload or perhaps should be charged a commercial

> rental for their use of space?



go round the corner to the Brick House Bakery- the coffee's MUCH better

keano77 Wrote:

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

> The modern equivalent of tramps keeping warm and reading newspapers in libraries.


As a former librarian, I see absolutely nothing wrong with homeless people coming into public libraries to read a newspaper in a warm place, any more than with senior citizens who can't afford to heat their homes. Incidentally, libraries in Southwark now all provide free wifi, though no sign of a caramel latte...

East of Dulwich Wrote:

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

> keano77 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The modern equivalent of tramps keeping warm and

> reading newspapers in libraries.

>

> As a former librarian, I see absolutely nothing

> wrong with homeless people coming into public

> libraries to read a newspaper in a warm place, any

> more than with senior citizens who can't afford to

> heat their homes. Incidentally, libraries in

> Southwark now all provide free wifi, though no

> sign of a caramel latte...


Mr. East O'Dulwich esq.


Thank you for adding a touch of humanity to our day. We are all human beings, let's show love to one another where we can :)


(Sorry, very soppy and nothing to do with the thread).

East of Dulwich Wrote:

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

> keano77 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The modern equivalent of tramps keeping warm and

> reading newspapers in libraries.

>

> As a former librarian, I see absolutely nothing

> wrong with homeless people coming into public

> libraries to read a newspaper in a warm place, any

> more than with senior citizens who can't afford to

> heat their homes. Incidentally, libraries in

> Southwark now all provide free wifi, though no

> sign of a caramel latte...



Here here! Although some Southwark libraries now have cafes attached. The Canada Water one I can particularly recommend!

East of Dulwich Wrote:

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

> keano77 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The modern equivalent of tramps keeping warm and

> reading newspapers in libraries.

>

> As a former librarian, I see absolutely nothing

> wrong with homeless people coming into public

> libraries to read a newspaper in a warm place, any

> more than with senior citizens who can't afford to

> heat their homes. Incidentally, libraries in

> Southwark now all provide free wifi, though no

> sign of a caramel latte...



In the 80s the train stations were heated - so the homeless people went there.


That's when all train stations stopped being heated.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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