Portland wins Homeview appeal

Despite massive local opposition, Portland Bookmakers today won their appeal at Bromley Magistrates Court. As a result, the Homeview Video site on Brockley Road will become a.n. other bookmaker in SE4.

In announcing his verdict, the judge made it clear that none of the arguments against Portland's plans mattered - under the current legislation, the community have no say in whether a bookmakers is allowed to set up shop. Unless it can be demonstrated that the applicant will serve under-18s or encourage people with mental health problems to gamble, there are no grounds to refuse a license.

So that's it. Portland Bookmakers will be opening. The only question now is how much custom they will generate. Given the relatively low rents and the number of potential customers in Brockley, it seems a forlorn hope that they will be forced to close through lack of trade.

We look forward to them making good on their pledge to play a positive role in the local community...

175 comments:

Headhunter said...

Just goes to show that if developers push hard enough, eventually they get their way and local people get dumped upon from a great height

Anonymous said...

Much as I hate bookmakers, the look of them, the people that go in them etc. etc. - I'm glad the judge didn't decide to refuse the application on NIMBYism. Bookmaking is a legitimate (if seedy) enterprise in the UK, and is thus afforded the same protection that kooky delis and cafes recieve, and so should it until the law decides otherwise.

Brockley Nick said...

You have a point. But there are a number of reasons why this is a real shame, over and above simple NIMBYISM.

Firstly, it is clear that the Council were tricked in to granting a change of use for the shop in the first place. They thought they were getting an estate agent, not a bookmaker.

Secondly, in an ideal world, there would be some balance. Having some bookmakers is fair enough, having bookmakers outnumber virtually any other business is destructive to the economic and social life of the area.

Thirdly, the prominence of the site makes it a prime location in Brockley terms. It is a real shame that, given how many grotty shops currently go unused in Brockley, that this one has fallen to a bookie, that will block up its windows with tacky crap. I hope the Council will enforce the planning restrictions for the conservation area to the letter and we residents should campaign to ensure that they do. One of the woert effects of Bookmakers is to ruin the look of a street (which of course puts of other businesses).

Finally, we know that Brockley is the location for a large number of centres for the vulnerable. Putting lots of bookies and lots of these centres in the same place seems like very poor planning. But great for the bookies, no doubt.

Ed said...

If enough of us bet against closure they might pack up shop and cash in!

Headhunter said...

Of course bookmakers are a legitimate business, but why do we have to have so many in 1 place? As we have discussed before, why should 1 business type be allowed to monopolise Brockley? It would be nice to have facilities which reflect the wider nature of Brockley's population - we already have Costcutter, Tesco, fried chicken joints etc etc, so why can't we try to swing things in favour of another side of local society, ie people who look beyond a dinner of fried, battery farmed chicken and chips and a night throwing money down the toilet at a bookies?

However, on the other hand, it is better to have some kind of business in that spot rather than ANOTHER empty retail site. There are already 2 or 3 empty spots opposite, so if Portland had been refused, who would have moved in?

Anyway, I was hoping that something interesting may open on that site to attract me down that way. As it is I barely ever head in that direction except when sweeping past on my way to Dulwich/Crystal Palace on the bike. Doesn't look like I'll ever have reason to actually stop there!

Anonymous said...

I agree on the point of there already being too many of them - but again we must enforce that rule across the board. We have dandelion blue and degustation - how would BC readers feel if the next application for a bread and cheeserie got the cold shoulder?

As for 'the vulnerable' - I'm going to take a slightly 'right' view here and suggest that unfortunately they're going to have to take responsibility for their actions, although situating such centres close to each other as you say may frustrate the people working in such scenarios (or keep them also gainfully employed...!)

The market will, as always, decide what's best for itself.

Headhunter said...

But the whole point is that vulnerable people are just that - vulnerable and as such, may have addictive personalities and therefore be unable to resist temptation. Let's face it, if these people were able to take responsibilty for their actions they probably wouldn't be in some kind of centre/hostel/institution

Certainly the market in this case may be deciding what's best for portland's shareholders/owners, but surely not for these vulnerable individuals and the wider Brockley population

Anonymous said...

Well at least they'll be less complaints about Brockley gentrifying

Brockley Nick said...

If ever the talents of Brockley's anonymous bard were needed, it's now.

Anonymous said...

Well, it begs the question, what affect will this have on the area? Will Moonbows close?

If so, it will be a sad loss and the cafe/bar to bookies ratio will change and alter the character of Brockley.

I don't see that this has anything to do with market forces at all. It is a grand project by the government to secure income from gamblers. They have done this by skewing the planning and licensing laws in their favour at the cost of blighting our shopping areas with far too many of this type of business.

Cheers Gordon.

Brockley Nick said...

To be honest, I always assumed that was a bit of a bluff, to try and help the 'anti' campaign. As we know, it's not like there aren't other bookies very nearby.

There is Starbucks in between anyway and bookies are generally soulless, dead-looking places - so in that respect it will be no different from the current empty shop. I don't see that it changes anything for them.

Moonbows does great business, is a well-loved institution and it would seem odd to let themselves be forced out of the site, because of a bookie.

APP&P Big Bad (and somewhat ugly) Troll said...

Maybe Moonbrows should relocate to a different premises near the station perhaps?

I remember a certain APP&P troll once saying that that end of Brockley will suffer abit.. oh, and look whats happening!

In terms of people's compliant about there 'being too many bookies'. Quite simply, we live in a free market society - if they make a loss, they close. If they stay open, then you have the choice to move. Either way, its the ultimate local demand which will keep a business trading or not.

In addition, what this proves is that this particular business 'knew the law' and 'had a plan' before they got to the council.

Businesses and Bloggers take note: do your research, plan for the long term and for god sake sometimes this means making UNPOPULAR decisions in the short term.

So stop supporting NIMBYISM and start thinking like your head is screwed on in the right place.

Anonymous said...

If Portland have any measure of success attracting gamblers, no doubt they will be looking for somewhere to quench their thirst. So Moonbows can look forward to some new clientelle.

Brockley Nick said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
APP&P Big Bad Troll said...

How quick to judge Nick, well done.

Why do you think a business like this has chosen to open in Brockley in the first place? Its abit ignorant of you to imply that they aim to 'not make a profit' and wish to open here for other reasons.

It's incredibly ignorant to suggest that this is, and I quote a 'simple legal issue'. It just goes to show your somewhat lack of awareness of wider issues.

Try to think abit more about the wider community, and not just outside your front door.

Brockley Nick said...

Andy your "predictions" are consistently wrong and your last post was incoherent. This has got nothing to do with the east london line, it's an issue that has been going on for over a year and is a simple legal case.

And we don't live in a wholly free market society, we live in a regulated society, where certain laws exist to serve the greater good. Sometimes those laws are an ass.

APP&P Troll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Brockley Bard(ge) reporting for duty!

The nature of this thread had just made me
Think of a solution that could aid thee
To fund the Brockley Max,
Let's not raise Council Tax
...Put a ton on Old Dobbin at Aintree!

APP&P Troll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Given that the local council, commercial landlords, large retailers and government planning policy all affect the viability of the shops in Brockley. I don't see what is 'free' about the market. It is constrained, regulated, skewed and invites a spiral of decline that blights the area. The evidence is there to see.

If Adam Smith looked down on the Brockley shopping areas do you think he would feel a warm glow of satisfaction at the prospect of unhindered market forces at play?

Open your eyes pudding boy.

Brockley Nick said...

Could you show me a quote where I said that a bookie wouldn't be in it for the money?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Anonymous said...

I think what Andy's saying (and if so, I agree with him) is that the alruistic ambitions of most companies are usually similarly limited, and this is not in itself a bad thing.

Brockley Nick said...

If so, that's like saying water is wet. Who on earth would argue against the proposition that companies exist to make money. And I've not heard anyone say (least of all me) that the profit motive is inherently bad.

What I and many others have said is that there are some businesses that benefit the community through the nature of their work more than others.

Anonymous said...

Nick I am sorry to say this but I am so fed up of reading Andy's posts, the divisive nature, pitting Brockley one side of Brockley against another.

That remark about the Brockley Fayre being about bric-a-brac, it's typical snide manner in which he posts her.

I suppose it's to be expected as he actually delights in being a 'troll'

APP&P Not so Troll like said...

Your last post said it was a 'simple legal issue'. By reasoning, it means that you have disregarded all other factors and yes, one of them is the ELL (in an indirect context).

It means you dis-regard the fact that the business obviously thought there was a opportunity here to make profit.

To make profit, it means there must be local demand. If there is local demand then there isnt really much we can do, legally, apart from picket outside the premises (and even that may not be allowed now).

I think what you tried to say is that the law was changed to de-regulate betting services, well yes, that is true. But that is not a simple legal issue - it effects the wider economy.

And just to clarify, I dont want the bookies here either. I hope they make a loss and prove to other potential bookies that brockley is well served at present.

APP&P Troll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Brockley Nick said...

Ah, now I see the problem. You didn't actually read / understand the article, in which I specifically say that I expect the new bookmakers to find enough customers to make a profit.

APP&P Troll said...

I skim-read the article, that is true. But i do generally find that sometimes people try to over-simply things and that often results in bad/wrong decisions being made.

Maybe I was also quick to judge you, if that is true then i apologise.

APP&P Troll said...

"I specifically say that I expect the new bookmakers to find enough customers to make a profit".

Actually, you dont.

Anonymous said...

"Given the relatively low rents and the number of potential customers in Brockley, it seems a forlorn hope that they will be forced to close through lack of trade."

APP&P Troll said...

Ok, I read alot of legal documents. That sentance is the opposite to Nicks comment above.

From www.m-w.com (online dictionary):

Expect: "to consider probable or certain"

Forlorn Hope: "a desperate or extremely difficult enterprise"

And Nick thinks I am the one who cannot read or understand?

Anonymous said...

Bit easier to say "whoops, I missed that bit" than to descend into semantics...

Anonymous said...

God help your company then, because that is a very simple sentence and you genuinely seem not to get it. This isn't just more of your trolling.

Nick says:

"it seems a forlorn hope that they will be forced to close through lack of trade."

So, to take your dictionary definition:

"it seems [desperate to] hope that they will be forced to close through lack of trade."

Therefore, he thinks that they won't be forced to close through lack of trade.

Therefore, he expects [considers probable or certain] they will make enough to stay open.

Suddenly all your wierd posts make more sense now.

What company do you work for?

Anonymous said...

Andy I get the impression that you just like to stir it up - in one comment you accuse us all of Nimbyism and tell us that we need to get our heads screwed on...and in another you say that you didnt want the bookies here either.

If you have an opinion fine - but increasingly, like someone else said, I think you just like to rile the others who blog here.

APP&P Troll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I'm not a bard, but I can sometimes supply an apposite quote

"Never argue with an idiot. They will only drag you down to their level, and beat you by experience."

This applies to trolls.


Ignore the troll.

APP&P Troll said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

So when is MJs leaving then?
or was that just more emotional dribble as so often is posted?

betting bob said...

I think the bookies will bring business to the road what do you want Nick a mini Mayfair this is Brockley mate S.E London, home of the working class, and yes I like a bet and will be going in there so have my slip ready!!

barryls said...

what a shame

Anonymous said...

Is Moonbows closing now?
as thet publicly said they would if the bookies opened.
Can Nick find out if this is so,
as the bookies are opening.

Anonymous said...

Let's look at the local organisations and indidivuals who will benefit from this

* Council sweeping services - sweeping up old slips and litter strewn out of the door

* Cashier staff and cleaners in the bookies itself

* The fried chicken shop (gotta eat)

* Staff working in the home for recovering gamblers (as pointed out, keeping them in a steady stream of employment)

* The letting agent letting the propery out

* The bookies owners

* The punters who win and walk away

* The people who supply the fixtures and fittings for the shop...

All seems very community conscious to me :)

Anonymous said...

Moonbows regularly post on the site don't they. So I'm sure they can tell us themselves. The topic's already been discussed if you scroll up.

JPM said...

Win some lose some.

I'm currently dealing with four developers, which is time consuming. And if I beat them, like Arnie, they'll be back. That's fine. It's the game. And interesting (if you've got the time and energy for it). The council should not be so blind next time. (Mind you... I suspect that some of these things are all 'squared' up in chapter.)

However, is it too much to ask that Portland might think twice about the colour it paints the building. (Its other shop looks hideous to my NIMBY eyes.)

Is that corner in the Conservation Area?

Monkeychap said...

....sigh. It's very touching that folk seem to think that the 'free market' will regulate itself. Perhaps it will....look at northern rock.

bit pissed, going to bed.

Anonymous said...

News Flash - Robots go Gambling in Portland Bookmakers

Marisa said...

Gordon Brown would be so proud of Portland...just 'cause he is gambling the entire economy of Britain into oblivion doesn't mean we in Brockley are stupid enough to follow suit....

Anonymous said...

There is nothing to stop further bookies opening up, given the limited grounds for objection.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008/jan/12/consumeraffairs

Though there is finite amount of money in the gamblers pocket.

They will either have to draw gamblers from the other bookies in the area and further afield or encourage new people to develop a gambling habit.

If they are successful it will encourage other bookies to set up shop nearby in competition.

If only these gamblers would learn to use the internet, maybe our shopping areas would get some proper shops instead of these amusement arcades.

Anonymous said...

Why not see the betting shop as an opportunity and turn the area into the gambling centre for South East London?

Mayfair and Monte Carlo seem to have faired well with gambling.

APP&P Troll said...

I can only suggest that if people do not want the bookies to be here, then dont use it.

If they dont have any trade, they will close. Simple.

Monkeyboy said...

So AP&P your solution to planing regs is not to have any? Just let any bussiness open and allow them to sink or swim according to demand? So bring on more fast food outlets, massage parlours, tyre fitters etc, pronographic book stores etc, etc....

Tressillian James said...

Andy - when did bookies ever survive on local trade only - from those who live in the community?

Portland will be relying on those who pass by along the Brockley Road in their cars - and others who will drive here to place bets.

Marisa said...

I strongly feel that Portland have got their market wrong in Brockley.
In the first hearing under the old legislation they did no research on demand, so they haven't got a clue. You'd almost believe they could be vulnerable themselves on a good day!

The market will dictate whether they survive. Either Corals will close down or Portland. Corals could sustain a loss for a long period but can Portland?

patrick1971 said...

I think there are potential issues with the usage regs which really need addressing by the council. We had this same problem in Deptford. A well-liked cafe shut down, only to be replaced by a bookmakers, with similar local opposition. The council spokesman who came to the meeting I attended said that, as far as planning regs went, a cafe and a bookmakers were exactly the same thing, i.e. they were in the same usage group. No change of usage application needed to be submitted. Now I'm no planning expert, but that does seem like an odd grouping to me.

As far as Moonbows moving goes, will be interesting to see. They have shut down branches before that were doing well (New Cross and Catford, no idea why they shut these down, New Cross one in particular was always busy). And outside a bookmakers you're always going to get people standing around, smoking and waiting for their race to be run. Possibly not the most pleasant pavement environment. Moonbows may well want to move closer to the station.

As others have said, though, surely you get to saturation point with bookmakers? Just how many gamblers are there in Brockley? Maybe this will prove one too many.

Hugh said...

'In announcing his verdict, the judge made it clear that none of the arguments against Portland's plans mattered - under the current legislation, the community have no say in whether a bookmakers is allowed to set up shop. Unless it can be demonstrated that the applicant will serve under-18s or encourage people with mental health problems to gamble, there are no grounds to refuse a license.'

Did anyone on the opposition side bother checking the legislation before going through all this?

Brockley Nick said...

@Hugh

Yes, they did - the focus of the opposition was on the proximity of centres for the vulnerable. They didn't successfully prove that was a sufficient risk.

patrick1971 said...

@james: "Portland will be relying on those who pass by along the Brockley Road in their cars - and others who will drive here to place bets."

Really? But who would need to drive somewhere to place a bet? There are bookmakers shops EVERYWHERE these days, plus of course the Internet. Maybe I'm being naive, not being a gambling man, but how would it be possible for a bookmakers to make money on a business model dependent on people driving specifically to get to that one particular outlet?

Not meaning to have a go at you, I just don't understand how that could be.

Anonymous said...

What's wrong with tyre fitters? Where do you go when you need a new tyre?

(And for that matter, fast food, massage parlours and pornographic books!!)

Tom said...

Tyre fitters are a scourge of society!

On bookies, it's sorry to see more of these money-extracting venues opening up. They leech on the vulnerable (go to Forest Hill and look at the people outside the bookies there if you disagree).


I worry for 'middle Brockley' - other than MJ there's very little now worth visiting. It seems all the positive development is around the station and Crofton Park.

Bea said...

The opposition was fighting on the grounds that Portlands is located 50m from a centre for recovering addicts with associated mental health issues thereby addressing the fact it would "encourage people with mental health problems to gamble".

I guess the judge’s definition of encourage is different to the opposition’s.

Maybe Portlands would have to put posters in its window encouraging under 18 year olds and people with mental health problems to gamble before they are denied consent to open shop?

Anonymous said...

Its a very londoner attitude to seperate brockley into 'station', 'middle', and 'crofton park' ends - being as they are virtually within visual (and easy walking) range of each other. But if we must split the area up into micro-boroughs, then surely the middle part gets Hilly Fields?

Tressilliana said...

'I worry for 'middle Brockley' - other than MJ there's very little now worth visiting. @

The chemist's shop, the hardware shop, Sid's, the upholsterer's, the newsagent, the dry cleaner's, the convenience store and the florist. That's ignoring the fast food shops, the estate agent, the funeral director (as I trust none of us need to visit it regularly) and the place that sells fridges and cookers (ditto).

The coffee at Moonbow Jake's is awful so I personally am not too bothered if they go or if they stay. There appears to be demand for a place like that so presumably if they go somebody else will have a go at running a coffee shop on or near the site.

I don't think the new bookmaker will last twelve months. One or other will go, and my money would be on Coral which has been there for donkey's years.

Monkeyboy said...

anon@9:49...

Nothing wrong with all of the above (although if we call the mucky book store a 'Contemporary Erotic Bookseller' we may increase it's chances with the organic olive brigade) but not unreasonable that the council should have some control over the mix of shops in an area rather than leave it to a free for all.

Right, I'm off to work on my hangover

Tom said...

I live about equidistant from the station area and the 'middle area', but always go to bit around the station because there's actually stuff there I use (and yes, I do buy everything from local shops).

Crofton Park is certainly not just as close, it is quite a trek (20-25 mins?) to walk there.

I - like pretty much everyone else - choose convenience over geographical sentimentality.

And yes, it is a Londoner attitude! I live in London (and always have done!) and Brockley is in London. Should we adopt a non-Londoner attitude when in London? Nonsense!

Headhunter said...

Despite what someone said earlier about Portland not relying on passing trade to keep them afloat, they surely must be. I sincerely doubt there's enough bookie business in Brockley to support all of them and this is just it, opening yet another bookies in the area is encouraging people to drive to Brockley for their gambling, rather than supporting any kind of local requirements or encouraging a local community feel.

Someone else said this is Brockley home of the "working class", not Mayfair. First of all I doubt most Brockley-ites are "working class", more like lower middle class. Although Brockley may not be Mayfair, it has a growing population of people who work hard in central London and demand more than bookies and fried chicken, and this judgement blatantly ignores their local needs.

We are no longer a community purely of students and slackers on the rock n roll...

Hugh said...

Anyone seen that gaff on Wickham for 1.75 million odd? Lush.

Brockley Nick said...

I don't think bookies need huge volumes of customers to do a decent trade - they're more reliant on a regular customer base, from whom they are quite good at hoovering up money.

And I think you underestimate the local market. Betting shops discourage you from looking inside, by blocking up their windows, but there are a lot of people in Coome's in Brockley Cross, most times I go past.

I'll be happy to be wrong, of course.

Headhunter said...

Anyway, enough about bookies. Que sera, sera as they say... ow back to real estate... Is this the one you mean Hugh? Thinking of sticking in a cheeky offer are we?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-17769949.rsp?pa_n=1&tr_t=buy

Anonymous said...

As bookmakers and the hostel for vunerable people already exist close to each other wouldn't the impact of the betting shops on the hostel residents be evident?

Anonymous said...

I think the ' middle Brockley' point is valid enough. I feel the same way. Although I don't completely agree with APPP about the death of that end of Brockley, the bookmakers at Homeview has now prevented the chance of having a shop, bar, or something that we don't currently have giving that area a boost. Brockley is well served with bookies already. I think now the chance of having a decent independent business moving into the old cafe neu is very slim because they'll naturally look at who their neighbours are. Had homeview become a restaurant it may have encouraged more of the same. Portland doesn't sound the death knell of middle Brockley, but it has certainly given it a bloody nose.
PJ

Anonymous said...

According to the Housing Minister you'll be able to get the Wickham Rd gaff for £1.5 this time next year.

Mind if the there's a lot of 'passing trade' in Brockley it could be a nice little earner as a bordello?

Anonymous said...

Brockley working class? The big houses of the conservation area were originally built for well heeled city workers.

All the working class were housed on the low ground.

A lot of the big houses did get taken over by squatters in the seventies and eighties and various public housing organisations and charities bought into the area to house their disadvantaged clients.

But how many of them were working, that is another matter.

Brockley is an interesting mix of rich and poor.

Now Deptford, that is totally working class.

Headhunter said...

Exactly Anonymous 16 May 2008 11:50, Brockley has never been working class, I always find it amusing that some people try to pin the "working class" badge to themselves with enormous smugness!

Most people in London haven't done a working class work day in their lives. Industry and manufacturing has all but gone from London and it never existed in Brockley!

We're all a bunch of middle managers, paper pushers, delivery people, estate agents etc etc. No one acually works in a factory as their father did before them and his father before that!

However perhaps members of the oldest profession at the proposed bordello could be categorised as working class?

TM said...

I find myself somewhat bemused by the quite vitriolic hostility towards Bookies and Portland in particular shown by bloggers on this and other threads. Is this because some of them are closet gambling addicts and they are afraid of too much temptation?

Personally I am more ambivalent and have no views either way as to their desirability or otherwise but having a few bookies hardly makes the area a no go den of iniquity. What I would say is that having a functioning shop of any sort is preferable to an empty derelict one such as we have had for about 15 years at the end of Tyrwhitt Road. Portland would welcome to come in there by me.

I have to say Nick’s comment about the council being “tricked” into granting change of use is a bit strange. Class A2 Financial services covers all sorts of things from Estate Agents, Banks and Building Societies through to Bookies. Once A2 use was granted any one of those occupiers could go in there without further recourse to the council. The Council would surely have been aware of that.

Interestingly Moonbow Jakes will have an A3 Cafes and Restaurants use and you can change that to A1 or A2 without needing permission. If M Js does close it will be a nice opening for Paddy Power or William Hill……….

Anonymous said...

Odd comments from TM....

Anonymous said...

Now if Brockley had somewhere classier to gamble the night away, it would be a different matter. Sadly bookies tend to sad, dingy affairs full of dodgy geezers. The question is does Brockley have enough gamblers to support another bookies? Those addictive gambling machines are ruthlessly efficient at extracting the lolly from punters very quickly.

Not sure why Coombes is busy, I suspect there is more going on in there than meets the eye.

Headhunter said...

TM - I don;t think there's much "vitriolic" hostility here. I think, as has been outlined again and again, what it boils down to is that we were all hoping for something more varied for that stretch than a sea of bookies. It doesn't have to be an organic deli or a flash restaurant, but just something else. We've got bookies up to our gills and don't need yet another...

Anonymous said...

We were all hoping that a business that would be useful to the wider community would occupy that prominent site.

Monkeyboy said...

'middle Brockley' is that like Tolkein's 'middle earth'? You know, where the trolls live?

Anonymous said...

this is a real shame... especially if the states of the other ones are anything to go by

Anonymous said...

I keep hearing about these supposed businesses that 'help the wider community', but whenever someone tries to substantiate what that actually means it usually involves eating unpreserved bread and mouldy cheeses...

Anonymous said...

Bottom line - I want the WC'S to move on. Deli, deli, deli, wine bar, wine bar, wine bar!!! OUT WITH THE UNDERCLASS!!

APP&P Troll said...

Guys, please. This is not a wealthy area. Even the houses in the conservation area are mostly converted into flats. This is the whole point of the ELL afterall - to act as a 'catalyst' for future re-generation.

Monkeybpy - yes of course regs matter, anything like that - the state, taxes, etc.. distort makret forces for better or worse. My objection was to Nick saying 'it was a simple legal issue', well it isnt.

We will wait and see how brockley road develops, I personally think there is a good chance MJ will move, but this takes time. They will wait and see what effect the bookies have on business for making a decision.

Bea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bea said...

This is how the website UpMyStreet defines SE4.

As the site says "This is a description of the type of neighbourhood to which this postcode has been matched, it is not a description of the postcode. The overview describes characteristics frequently found in these neighbourhoods. Since most postcodes include a mix of people we don’t expect everyone there will fit the description perfectly."

However, I still think it relects Brockely fairly acurately. So how many of these "types" are going to hang out in a bookies?

"Often, many of the people who live in this sort of postcode will be young, living in converted flats, in multi-ethnic areas. These are known as type 18 in the ACORN classification and 1.14% of the UK’s population live in this type.

Neighbourhoods fitting this profile are almost exclusively a London phenomenon, with high concentrations in most inner and outer London boroughs. Here is an overview of the likely preferences and features of your neighbourhood:

Family income: High
Interest in current affairs: Very high
Housing - with mortgage: Low
Educated - to degree: Very high
Couples with children: Low
Have satellite TV: Low

These young multi-ethnic communities are primarily found in London, with many living in houses which have been converted into flats.

Most people are in their twenties and thirties and there are only a few, very young children. The population is diverse. On the whole they are well qualified. Many are in professional and managerial jobs, with good incomes. Others have lower level qualifications and are likely to be office and clerical staff. There are also a significant number of students.

The majority of people are renting their homes privately. However, there is also a high proportion living in Housing Association property.

Public transport is by far the most popular method of travelling to work or study. Residents are also happy to walk, and only a minority see the need for a car. At this stage in their lives this type are not really thinking about investing their money. They will spend their spare money on travel, and will take long haul trips as well as European holidays.

They like exercise and sport, as well as more contemplative pursuits such as the theatre, the arts and self-improvement classes. They are also very interested in current affairs and read The Guardian and Independent as they commute to work."

However, I read Metro & London Lite ...

APP&P Troll said...

Bea,

Point to note. Family income 'high' - Yes, fine.

It does not mention 'wealth'. Wealth is the accumulation of capital, income is the per annum increase.

In an area of regeneration, such as Brockley, you would expect to have 'high income' and 'low wealth'.

Brockley is still not a weathly area, despite having high income.

High income - good sign for future regeneration - Developers take note!

Anonymous said...

@Andy

Not another attempt to dig yurself out of a hole with semantic contortions.

The stock of wealth in the area (and you've no proof of your claims about wealth) doesn't have much bearing on a coffee shop, a deli or even a bookmakers. It's disposable income that counts.

You were wrong.

Headhunter said...

Exactly Bea, not a flat cap in sight. Now lets have a few more delis and organic virgin olive oil shops and enough of these ridiculous bookies. Nu Brockley does not want bookies

APP&P Troll said...

Someone said something about Brockley being a wealthy area. It isn't. I did not mention deli's.

Its not my fault you don't understand the difference between wealth and income.

Tressilliana said...

'Most people are in their twenties and thirties and there are only a few, very young children.'

I think UpMyStreet is wrong there. Anyone who has tried to get their child into a primary school in SE4 or just over the postcode boundary in SE8 or SE23 could tell you that schools are bursting at the seams. Every toddler group and other child-focused activity we've engaged in over the years in this area has also been very well patronised. Years ago I remember hearing that Lewisham was the borough with the single highest number of under-5s. Don't know if this is still the case but you only have to look at Hilly Fields on a Saturday morning to see how many children live locally.

Bea said...

APP&P – wealth is relative. Brockley is not as wealthy as Mayfair but wealthier than Whitechapel and definitely wealthier than parts of some cities “up North”. If the opposite of wealth is destitution then I think it is wrong to describe Brockley as such. Neither is Brockley poor.

Bea said...

Tresilliana – I agree. I think the survey must have been done a while back and does not reflect some of the population changes that have been taking place in the SE4 postcode. The same website has a link to population changes in Lewisham and you can see there is a spurt in the under 4 age group. However the largest age group is still the 25 to 39 years olds.

The graph can be found here:

http://www.upmystreet.com/local/my-neighbours/population/l/SE4.html

Headhunter said...

Also there is a fairly high percentage of young singles and couples who have dispable wealth that they like to spend on "luxuries" at delis and Mr Lawrence etc, although they may not be rich, they don't have kids. MINTs in marketing-speak.

Bea said...

However, should have added that the data is taken from the 2001 census so may be somewhat out of date now.

Tressillian James said...

Bea - if anything there has been an increase in singles and young couples with disposable incomes, and couples with one child - (things happen in those 7 years since they published the report) - and you only have to hang around Brockley station and St Johns to see this.

I'm also very glad that, at last, someone has come back to the point that Brockley - although working class in the post war years - was always a middle class suburb. Look on the 1901 census if you need confirmation - so it could be say that the middle classes are reclaiming the turf - and instead of gentrification, there is a return to Brockley as it was. So let's not have any class war stuff anymore, we are all trying to live together here.

Oh, and Andy Pandy..whatever... you point about wealth and flats doesnt stand. I live in a 3/4 bed flat in the conservation area - plenty of others live in 2 bed plus - it's not all bedsitter land. And Bea is right about wealth. Brockely is a mixed area - and there is certainly a lot of upper income people around, if you look at things on a national average.

Tressilliana said...

It surprises me that there's been a spurt since the turn of the century. My children are teenagers and I have the impression that there's always been a solid core of families with children in the area, in addition to the floating population of younger, childless people who come for a shortish period and quite often move on eventually. I think, though, that as a childless person living in Brockley in the 80s I was much less aware of how many people there are who grew up in Brockley or adjacent areas like Ladywell and Catford and have never moved away. Then when my children went to Gordonbrock I met lots of parents and teachers who had themselves gone there or to Brockley or Stillness or other local schools as children.

I think that's perhaps a particular feature of the Heath Estate, though (the roads between Brockley Grove and Chudleigh Road, which is SE4 but probably unknown territory to many people living north of Adelaide Avenue). The houses there are ideal family homes and far less likely to have been subdivided into flats than the bigger houses to the north.

APP&P Troll said...

Ok, firstly, please visit:

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk. This is a government website where you can actually see 'thermal' maps of various different measures of wealth and income.

The Telegraph hill ward has more social economic AB (higher professional) then Brockley does. But Telegraph Hill also has more social econ E than Brockley.

You can also compare to the rest of London. Brockley 'ward' is in line with the average wealth of lewisham council area. But lewisham council area, on average, is a poorer area of london.

I really cant believe we are disputing this.

If you want to see a wealthy area, go to places like West Hampstead.

brockley mutha said...

I too get thorougly sick of this Brockley - working man's manor - crap. No its not, nor was it ever. 10-15 years ago there were enough parents around here sending their kids to the dulwich independent schools for them to organise their own mini bus.

my most immediate neighbours - most of whom have been here for 9 years + are a mixed bag - a landscape designer, a sculptor, a painter and decorator, a mother and her two university student children, a black-cab driver, a university lecturer. None of these people are newbies, not one. Me and my family - at nine years - are the newcomers. That's brockley folks - a mixed bag - most of whom don't bother to shop around here because there isn't much for us.

So the suggestion .. trotted out endlessly ... that somehow the bookies and chicken shops are a representation of the needs and desires of the predominently working class community is rubbish.

And if places like cafe neu, or any of the delis don't survive - its not necessarily because they have missed their audience - it's because there aren't yet enough of them to build up the critical and varied mass of shops that would make it worthwhile for most of us to shop around here.

And it's not nimbyish to object to yet another bookmaker. No one really protests about Coral the little place directly across the road from the site of the new Portlands. The objection is to having four bookies all within spitting distance of each other.

Anonymous said...

ninety nine

TM said...

What odds would you have got that this thread reached one hundred not out...

Anonymous said...

/

Anonymous said...

tanners hill estate is Brockley ward and i would not describe that area as middle class by any means or is it just the big C we are talking about?

Bea said...

Tanners Hill estate is not all of Brockley Ward either - just a part of it.

Thanks to the interesting link provided by APP&P it is possible to find out that in 2001 in Brockley Ward there were a totally 4,156 people working (out of a total population of 13,697)

Of these:

- 782 were higher managerial and professionals (of this 116 were large employers and higher managerial occupations and 666 were Higher professional occupations);

- 1,394 were lower managerial and professional;

- 429 were intermediate occupations;

- 462 were small employers and own account workers;

- 215 were lower supervisory and technical occupations;

- 406 were semi-routines occupations;

- 254 were routine occupations, and

- 214 are not classified.


Also, in 2006 there were 3,000 children for whom child benefit was being claimed (the size a not-so-small rural village)

In terms of households in 2001 the figures break down as follows:

All Households (Households, Apr01)1: 5,846

Owner occupied: Owns outright (Households, Apr01) 10.85%

Owner occupied: Owns with a mortgage or loan (Households, Apr01) 24.63%

Owner occupied: Shared ownership (Households, Apr01) 1.88%

Rented from: Council (local authority) (Households, Apr01) 26.07%

Rented from: Housing Association / Registered Social Landlord (Households, Apr01)16.71 %

Rented from: Private landlord or letting agency (Households, Apr01)17.11%

Rented from: Other (Households, Apr01)2.75%

This breakdown would seem to indicate that in fact Brockley Ward consists largely of owner occupiers and of those who work they are mainly professional worker.

APP&P Troll said...

Bea, you need to compare it with other wards to make it meaningful.

I didn't want to do so much analysis, the way i'm received on here no doubt someone would be waiting to pick a hole in it.

You really need to do run a proper statistical regressional model on al the numbers, for all wards in London.

PaddyOmichael said...

OH MY GOD - this country is an absolute disgrace! After all the residents campaiging etc... and with one swipe of a pen its approved and the judge says we had no right to protest to start with. I am DISGUSTED! Sux Luxton what is going on in this bloody borough?!

Anonymous said...

This is bad news for Brockley. Why does the council pay so much attention to the redevelopment of the pigs ear that is Lewisham yet they seem oblivious to the demise of other 'towns' in the area.

Anonymous said...

Sigh, protesting against something doesn't mean you have an automatic right to it being changed.

JPM said...

"NIMBY"?

Definition: NOT IN MY BACK YARD - NO NEVER, GEEZER.

Translation: No delis. No wine bars. No gentrification. No regeneration. No no, no, no...whatever.

JPM said...

Oh, forgot to say...

Any investor choosing an unlikely location to do business may not actually 'fail'. What if a business syphone the profits from a succesful location into the losses of an unsuitable one?

One another note, and with a chuckle. Nick, did you realise that one of your Google ads is for one 'Portland'? Certainly shows the dangers of mentioning a trade name can be a bit of a gamble. (Mind you that one was for holidays, so phew.)

APP&P Troll said...

JPM, they can only subsidise with losses in the short term, if they do this in the long term then the whole group will become insolvent and wind down.

They will still close, just may take abit longer!

Anonymous said...

APPP That not true. It would depend of the figures. If you want an exaggerattd example. Chelsea FC make huge losess every year but because Ambramovitch makes so much money from his other businesses he can keep it going. Chelsea would never cripple him because the losses are peanuts (in fact the whole club is peanuts) to his wider empire. Sorry to be pedantic but just pointing out that what what you said is not true.

Anonymous said...

Bea 16.38/16th

"This breakdown would seem to indicate that in fact Brockley Ward consists largely of owner occupiers and of those who work they are mainly professional worker."


need to do your sums again,
rented adds up to 62.64%;
with the shared ownership of 2.75 %added as this is still part rented and often the hosing ass own more than half.

Then from the mortgage 24.63% we do not know how much is rent to buy; that would be interesting to know,
SO Mortgage and rented add up to
87.27%
seems not so many home owners after all
starts to give a new "view point" to this wealthy area and its not just Tanners hill, Turnham est is also part of Brockley, lets be brave and look further than the C which in fact holds the minority of residents,

Brockley has many high density poor areas,why not check out the
Joseph Rowntree Foundation for some real figures, you may be shocked by what you see.

jon s said...

you're also assuming that the objective of the bookie is to make money in the short term.

This may not be the case and Portman's could be setting up here a loss leader with the purpose of rebranding, expanding market share, penetrating a new segment, etc.

This reminds me of the three blind men arguing over what an elephant is.......

brockley mutha said...

@ anon 18.37.

I would agree that brockley isn't wealthy. I think the point that is being made is that Brockley is not the great working class citadel it's constantly held up to be.

Tressillian James said...

I agree with Brockley Mutha. We also must remember that the figures come from 2001 - in 2006-2007 a lot of the 'right to buy' properties came onto the market - it would be interesting to see some recent figures.
And ANON I think adding mortgage to rented is disingenious. Most of us with mortgages think we are home owners

b. said...

I live in comerford road. I'm really looking forward to walking past 2 bookies within 10 seconds of each other any time I go anywhere. Coral is bad enough as it is (Sunday mornings there are a disgrace).

The fact that the communities strong opinion on the matter has no legal standing sickens me.

Anonymous said...

B,

The community has a right to have its voice heard. So does the proprieter. Justice was, indeed, served as the proprieter will be running a legitimate enterprise. You can't stop planning based on a vocal minority - and it is a minority.

Again, I won't use them, and I hate the thought of bookies and those that use them, but I will defend to the death their right to operate to the full extent of the law, as should you.

Westside warrior said...

Andy are you now posting under Anonymous?

I think the numbers who signed the petition show that they represented the community.You'll never know the majority opinion unless you have a referendum - and think we can safely say the protesters represented a large part of this community.

You have conversely no evidence that the majority of people felt otherwise, just because they are silent.

I think we all realise that the bookmaker's have a legitimate right to operate - we have seen the judgement.

We also have a legitimate right to say the law's an ass.

Anonymous said...

the guys from the juice bar Brockley cross were happy about the bookies when I popped in and told them and there was about 15/20 of them there at the time.

Anonymous said...

This step in the wrong direction makes it clear that Brockleys high street is going to always be a tip and any chance of some decent shops is as distant an idea as ever. Flipping bookies and fried bone shops attracting chavs and weridos to the area as well as causing so much litter and bone on the streets. These businesses dont care about the area they operate, they only want money.

Anonymous said...

i hope they make no money here and have to shut down - i wont support them as i am sure they wont bother supporting Brockley - i can just imagine it now, Portland bookies hosting a music event in the BMAX...

Anonymous said...

Let Portland have their say on what they're going to contribute.

If you want a better 'standard' of business have you ever thought of opening up shop yourself? Otherwise, what do you expect estate agents to do? Sit there until yet another deli comes along?

Anonymous said...

good point why don't all those wealthy home owners get together and buy the shops and make a deli heaven !!
if this was such a wealthy area the shops would not remain vacant for so long, did't see many shops up for grabs last time I was down
Bond st!

APP&P Troll said...

The trouble is, people actually who live here will tend to 'think the world' of Brockley as to them, it is better than average, or wealthy - otherwise they wouldn't of moved here. The truth is somewhat different.

Its kind of like patting themselves on the back.

APP&P troll said...

@westside warrior,

No - that wasn't me. I will always use my alias.

Anonymous said...

Lots of issues are getting mixed up here. Yes, most people who live in Lewisham and Brockley are not particularly wealthy, BUT just because you haven't accumulated loads in the bank doesn't mean that you don't appreciate and want the better things in life.

Most people want to do better in life, it's called progress. Many of us wanted better for Brockley, by having a good range of shops, but alas that part of Brockley is going to be a gambling hotspot. Because Portland don't understand or care about the people or the community around here.

They have shown utter contempt for this area and the popular will. By their determination to plonk their gambling den in a prime spot on the corner of the high street.

Who does a bookies appeal to? Women (in general) don't go in there, kids can't, working people if they gamble will tend to do so online.

Thanks for excluding so much of the community Portland.

APP&P troll said...

Lets just wait and see shall we. I actually do not know much about the company other than it appears to have very few branches (maybe only 1 other) and that they seem to think there is enough local demand, outwidth the reach of this blog to warrant expansion.

I am just so glad it doesn't appear to be a big chain betting shop, as at least we can try and approach the owners about contributing towards the area which is amazing hard to do in large corporates.

If I'm down that side, I will certainly go in and see what I can find out. Don't forget, didn't they promise some sort of 'revolutionary' experience? with a cafe or something?

APP&P troll said...

I just typed in Portland Bookmakers in google and found the shop front of their abbey road branch. It actually looks better than the Speedycars one, and half the ones around Brockley road (station end).

It certainly is better looking than the e coombes one.

So maybe we should try and look on the positive side, it could even benefit the area even more than we think.

Anonymous said...

Looks like Syndenham have been through almost the exact ordeal with Portland

http://www.sydenham.org.uk/betting_shop.html

JPM said...

'Ap&p' and 'Jon s'. Just seen your responses. Accountancy is not my strong point, which is why I'm confused.

Losses can lead to profits, or a 'loss leader'?

At the moment I'm conducting research into a company (unconnected) which has 'made losses year on year since its inception'.

But I don't understand how the director has taken $3 million out in one year, and similar amounts in others. How is that possible if it's losing money? (A bit off-thread but perhaps relevant later.]

Anonymous said...

Sometimes I dislike capitalism, for market forces to have led to 3 bookies in such a small area, with vulnerable people in close proximity, despite vocal and vociferous local opposition tis a real shame.

Anonymous said...

Anon 17.05
There's been several allusions on this blog about Portland supporting a music event during B Max. Care to elaborate?

Anonymous said...

There are no plans for Portland to support the BMAX. It seems very hard to believe that they would.

I think the point is that, when people say "oh businesses are all in it for themselves, there's no difference between this place and Moonbow Jakes" others have pointed to the fact that many businesses, like MB, the broca, Jam Circus, etc do support things like the MAX. Of course, it's probably good for business that they do, but that's irrelevant.

Headhunter said...

It's a shame that planning regulations allow developers like Portland to apply and appeal again and again until they finally get their way, yet the local community is not allowed the same privilege. Now that Portland has been given the right to build it's bookies, WE should have the right to OUR appeal against the decision... But no...

Anonymous said...

I heard that the organisers of B Max were planning to shoot a music video in Homeview, until several people pointed out that it it may not go down too well with the local community.

Anonymous said...

This made me laugh. How many "scuppies"-Socially Conscious Upwardly Mobile Persons, do we have in Brockley then?

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article3907909.ece

Anonymous said...

Far too many in my opinion - see the 'Organic Olive Brigade'

Headhunter said...

Excellent, that's what we need. Scuppies in the Brockley Jack driving out the pseudo working class proles, delis and organic food....

Bea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bea said...

APP&P: I wasn’t actually making a point about the wealth of Brockley (hence no comparison with other wards across London). Instead was trying to point out what kind of workers there were in Brockley Ward in 2001. Also, how many and what kind of households and how many children.

As I’ve posted before – wealth is relative. Having lived in both White Chapel and Hackney - trust me - Brockley is not destitute! (Of course, wealth within Brockley itself is relative too – a pile by Hilly Fields going for 1.75m vs. a studio flat above a shop for 150k.)

What the statistics indicate is that 53% of workers are management where as 17% of workers are in routine or semi-routine occupations and lower supervisory and technical jobs.

37.36% of housing is owner occupied where as 26.07% is rented by the council and 17.11% housing associations (43.18%).

From this I concluded that Brockley is not a “working man’s enclave” and the debate about gentrification is actually ludicrous. I would like my environment to improve - as would I imagine anyone. A further betting shop doesn’t, in my opinion do this.

Anonymous said...

business is business, a shop in use looks better than an unused shell, 3 betting shops in such a wide area is also acceptable, why should Portland face discrimination because there is already 2 bookies would you say no to 3 delis?

Anonymous said...

Yes we would, what most people want in Brockley is a good mix of shops, catering for as many people as possible. If you read this blog regularly you'll see comments from people, welcoming the delis but also wanting mid range offerings too. People need to eat, gambling in a betting shop is a leisure activity that is niche, it excludes so many people in our community. When I attended the Brockley assembly last week, a recurrent theme were kids saying there isn't enough to do.

Say what you like about Homeview at least kids were allowed in, and could spend a little time browsing, that option does not exist with a bookmaker.

What all this tells me is that this area could really do with a town planner with some power who can regulate things.

jon s said...

@JPM

Yup, off topic so I won't go into much detail.

1. Who says a directors salary is linked to a companies profit? Also if the director is selling equity they own in the company that has nothing to do with profits.

2. Of course a business wants to make money over all, but may decide in order to expand market share to run a branch at a loss, e.g. to take out the competition or enter a new market before its competitors.

I was merely stating that Portmans may not be worried if this branch does not amke profit for the next few years if it closes a competitor.

Tom said...

Sometimes companies are set up and run with the sole aim of being bought out by a larger competitor.

As such, losses in the low thousands can be acceptable if a brand is built up that can be sold on for a six- or seven-figure sum.

Back on topic: Brockley is one of those typically London places where there are many wealthy people AND poor people in the same postcode.

So it hardly makes sense to try to argue either/or.

Many of the wealthy people seem to be saying here they spend more of their money locally if the right businesses were established, and some (Broca, Dandelion Blue, to think of two), seem to have found the correct formula.

But these are yet to achieve critical mass (as someone above noted), something that - for instance - a good classless bar/pub in the north of Brockley would help (I like the Wickham, but it has nothing on say, The Herne where I went to a real ale festival on Saturday).

Until these businesses keep larger amounts of wealth within SE4, then people will continue to drink in town (or E Dulwich, Blackheath, Greenwich, or wherever), and shop at the big supermarkets.

Anonymous said...

Blackheath and greenwich have a lot more to offer than Brockley,
Greenwich is fab!! great park lots to see and do,night life, river...
Blackheath; common to chill out on with a nice cool beer while looking over the Docklands, some good spots for eating the Indian and thai are great,Hare and Bilet long term fav .
Brockley;Hilly fields great view but cold and windy nowhere nice to eat loads of chicken shops !!!!

Anonymous said...

"Blackheath and greenwich have a lot more to offer than Brockley"

And the award for stating the obvious goes to...???

Anonymous said...

And they have also got a great open market every and wonderful christmas market!!
and organic shops and a super little old time sweetie shop !!
if only I could afford to live in Greenwich but alas Budget Brockley was all I could afford....

Anonymous said...

Greenwich is also heaving with tourists and some of its shops sell awful tourist tat at rip off prices. Its restaurants also find the temptation to hike prices and suggest everything is organic difficult to resist.

Greenwich has its gems and you can have a decent night out there, but I would not get too carried away. Tourist money has a corrupting influence.

Anonymous said...

"budget Brockley" hahahaha serves you right.

Anonymous said...

ANON.09.29

Tourist money has a corrupting influence......

I can see why developers avoid Brockley I bet the Judge is still laughing at the arguments that must have been put up against the bookies if tourist money is also under speck!!!
lucky London bridge is not local hence this may be pulled down for attracting tourist's, watch out the Brockley Jack!!!

Greenwich is lovely.........and the people are not scared of being corrupt by touist's money, ...
That's so funny I'am going to laugh all day now...

Anonymous said...

The way house prices are going may soon be 'bargian basement Brockley'
but at least we will be free from tourist money corruption!!
hahahaha

Bea said...

Comparing Greenwich with Brockley is like comparing chalk and cheese! Greenwich is a World Heritage site with architecture by Christopher Wren. Hardly something humble ol’ Brockley can aspire to.

However, what is wonderful is that we have such a beautiful location on Brockley's doorstep. We get all the benefits but don't have to contend with the thousands of tourists and hassle of finding somewhere to park on a daily basis.

Anonymous said...

There seem to be far less bookies in uptown Greenwich and Blackheath.

I think maybe these places need an area where few other businesses are viable, so the rents are lower.

Bookies are one of the types of business that are an indicator of poverty and social problems.

Cheap pubs, poor quality takeaways, plastic cafes, badly run street markets, charity shops, public services dealing with crime and addiction, hostels for serious social problems.

Brockley can go in this direction or it could prosper and attract new shops, bars and restaurants.

Brockley walks a tightrope. Recently we have seen some gains and some losses. Looking on the bright side, gaining one big bookie might lead to the loss of smaller ones.

What are the odds?

Anonymous said...

Well it's very sad for someone who has bought a place to live an area they don't like and for the apparent budget prices to then fall to bargain basement prices, as it just makes it that much harder to trade up.

Brockley will be ok, we have a film /cinema nights coming, a refurbished theatre, an art gallery fingers crossed, the Brockley common fingers doubly crossed, the tube, that will have a great affect. But best of all we have a large tranche of socially responsible and active people. We have fun runs, fayres, which all help foster a great community.

We can handle a bookmakers. It was heartening to see that almost all of us are on the same page in attitude towards the lastest bookies, so we might be grumbling, but at least we do it as a community. YEAH!

Anonymous said...

we have a film /cinema nights coming,

well that's sold the Brockley to the masses........

Anonymous said...

It's your choice to focus on the negative.

Anonymous said...

I lived in Greenwich ten years ago and moved to Brockley about four years ago, when i was priced out. I took comfort in remembering how great Greenwich used to be, before the DLR brought in a bunch of transient Docklands w*nkers, and Greenwich Uni relocated to the old Naval college and brought with it hoardes of loutish students. I'd pretty much worked out how to avoid the tourists: its these others who tipped the balance. Most of the restaurants in greenwich are absolute rubbish, i keep expecting to see them on ramsay's kitchen nightmares.

Brockley Kate said...

I love Brockley for what it is, I wouldn't want to live in Greenwich. I moved out of Camden because it was too busy and not green enough.

Glenda said...

I lived in Greenwich and then moved to Brockley and I so much prefer Brockley. I think in general the people in Brockley are much more creative, artistic and have a better sense of humour!

Glenda said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Headhunter said...

Greenwich is nice, as is Blackheath, but neither is much more than a walk away so why pay the ridiculous rent/prices? Live in Brockley and drop in on Greenwich when you want to.

Brockley Nick said...

@hh - definitely true that Greenwich is a short walk away if you live at the northern end of Brockley but I used to use the "It's near nice places" argument for living in Charlton and it didn't really work. I think your immediate environment is really important. Luckily, Brockley's a lovely place to live.

Headhunter said...

Exactly Nick, if Brockers were a hell pit on earth, then I would up sticks, bite the bullet and pay higher rent/prices, but it isn't so I'll stick with the big B

lb said...

I agree about Greenwich and Blackheath; Greenwich in particular is overpriced, considering how few really nice bits there are.

I have to admit I never quite understand people citing the 'creativity' of their neighbours as a reason for liking somewhere. As long as they're friendly and aren't into brandishing firearms about, I don't really care what people do; hell, they could even do something really socially unacceptable and I wouldn't mind that much. Hedge fund management, perhaps. On the other hand, I've met plenty of egregious 'creatives'.

Sian (not Green Sian) said...

I think that Google is secretly monitoring this site and posting irreverent but oddly relevant ads... at the bottom of this thread there's an ad for on-line betting............
weird but strangely interesting... and on another note, is it acceptable to say that I live in Brockley simply because I am happy here?

Anonymous said...

You can, just don't walk around with a beautific smile on your face or people will think you are on medication.

Sian (not Green Sian) said...

ah, so that's where I've been going wrong!!! I'll try to frown a bit more from now on. Which of course I would if I were a betting lass because I've never won a bet in my life! Portland will love me....

Headhunter said...

Sian - Google ads monitors keywords in our discussions and tailors ads around them. As we are all talking about betting and betting shops, it assumes that we're all fans and are looking for the nearest place to waste our money. It's not intelligent enough to know that most of us think they are a scourge.

Google mail is the same - it monitors words in your emails and tailors the banners to what it thinks you're interested in.

All a bit Big Brother really...

Sian said...

which is exactly why my new site www.locallife.co.uk/lewisham is so good.. it only gives you what you are actually looking for, where you actually want to find it! update to Nick on that coming shortly!

Do dah said...

Went past the old Homeview today and Portland have begun to root in. They've slapped some plastic posters over the Homeview name, advertising what they do.
"Gambling at it's best" and listing gambling deals.

It looks like they are going to be really in our faces.

I feel so fricken annoyed.

Anonymous said...

JUST WATCHING ROYAL ASCOT ON BBC. BIGGEST BETTING DAY OF THE YEAR PLACE IS FULL OF LOW LIFE GAMBLERS.DONT KNOW HOW THEY HAVE THE NERVE TO BE SEEN ON TV.WOUDNT HAVE ANY OF THEM IN MY AREA.RACING REALLY IS FOR THE LOWER CLASSES.

Amanda said...

Ascot is a special occasion, they dress up, it's an event. Portland will be there day in day out, in the largest and most prominent spot on our high street.

Then there's the issue that there are several other bookmakers nearby. People here want and to certain extend need more variety.

Tressilliana said...

If it really says 'Gambling at it's best' that's terribly offensive. Grocer's apostrophes in Brockley! Whatever next!

Anonymous said...

Brockley Newsflash: Portland is being installed as we speak. The front windows have come out and the vans are parked outside as the builders move in.

No representative of portland was available to comment on the design of any potential shop signs.

tj said...

But if they are wrong, I'll complain

Latest Tweets

Brockley Central Label Cloud

Click one of the labels below to see all posts on that subject. The bigger the label, the more posts there are!