Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I can think of a few but not many by name. There's the pizza place preceded by the veggie Indian. The Cherry Tree pub,Green & Blue, the little gift type shop opposite and down a bit from the GE. There are many others I'm sure. The Patch?


What I'm curious about is who invests so much money in something that fails so quickly? Unless you have money to burn you must surely think about what you are doing. It seems many don't. Who are these people and why do they think they will succeed, as surely they must?


Just a thought, but I reckon the minds of the forum would be able to come up with a business model in ED that would last,if not the money for it.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/64965-why-do-businesses-fail-in-ed/
Share on other sites

Sadly the restaurant business is hard one to be in.


Discussed this at length before with friends in the business and the following quote taken from http://www.restaurantowner.com/public/Restaurant-Failure-Rates-Recounted-Where-Do-They-Get-Those-Numbers.cfm may provide a better insight.


"Several years ago, researchers at Cornell University and Michigan State University conducted a study of restaurants in three local markets over a 10-year period. They concluded the following: After the first year 27% of restaurant startups failed; after three years, 50% of those restaurants were no longer in business; and after five years 60% had gone south. At the end of 10 years, 70% of the restaurants that had opened for business a decade before had failed."


The truth is any new business has the capacity to either succeed or fail and it's often not one thing or the other that makes the difference.


It's sad to see someone's hopes and dreams vanish when their business fails but for every failure there is often a great success story at a different startup.

G&B were thier own worst enemy. I know they tried, but too many directional changes, along with a mardy front of house guy

Toasted have made a much better go at the space



That aside, how long would the Fat Greek place have lasted without the forum. I know they hung themselves with some fairly dodgy own goal postings. But, it would have possibly have dragged on for a fair while longer I reckon

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

    • Bit nerdy. But the traditional form of England/Wales local government was based on committees with themehmbers in proportion to the respective political parties numbers.  Blair government introduced for councils that chose it cabinet structure where the majority hold roles covering each of  former committee would decide/confirm. Additionally a Blair option for a super council leader Mayoral role such as Lewisham rather than ceremonial mayoral role who chairs council Council Assemblies of all councils. A number of councils have since moved from exec Mayoral role to cabinet basis.  Without Councillors being elected via a Proportional Voting system I personally would prefer to see a return to committee decision making structure. It ensures all Councillors have to know what they're doing rather than the ruling party leaving it to a few cabinet members and the rest just voting at Council Assemblies how they/re told. Just a personal view. 
    • With the elections coming up soon, it's interesting to note that residents over the boundary in Lewisham have a different system of local government than Southwark. Lewisham has a directly elected Executive Mayor while Southwark has kept a traditional local authority structure. Nothing is perfect, but I think Lewisham made a mistake with the Executive Mayor in that it blurs the legislative branch and executive branch of governance, and makes serious scrutiny of decisions less likely to happen - especially in a Borough like Lewisham which is essentially a one-party state. None of the political parties are offering any major reforms of local government for London, which is very disappointing since it seems obvious that having 33 local authorities - all with their own internal administrations - is not a good way to run things, when most of them are struggling even to maintain basic services.
    • My  understanding is that all developments whatever size, have to have an element of social housing…affordable housing… council housing..No longer sure of percentage but clearly less than years ago.. The point is house builders clearly make a profit or they simply would not  continue building what I refer to as modern  boxes!  Putting housing condensed or what originally was one house with land attached.  Huge development going on in Beckenham - 200 social housing and rest open market.. sited over several houses now demolished… up the road from the park on way into town centre.. might even be completed by now.. haven’t been that way in last year… certainly can’t miss it.. So, for example, let’s say a developer builds houses and flats on a site… social housing I assume would be in a separate block to other flats and I assume house as well. Ie to put it bluntly, away from main site.. Nothing wrong in that at all.  Many years ago, near Borough a developer built flats divided into blocks. . Price range £300/400,000. Social housing was in a different block…. Can’t remember how many… so families , couples etc got a brand new flat with modern kitchen and bathrooms, flooring etc  and could not even keep common parts clean.. trash thrown out and left including out of windows etc..total disregard for community and certainly not  grateful for brand new property and a home.. I hasten to add, not every flat in the social housing sector but certainly a fair few behaved that way.      
    • Please name all of the shops.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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