Jump to content

Peacocks To Close?


Manx1Bloke

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

stopped even going in there to look for gents stuff, all they had was just stuff like ripped jeans and hoodies, I think I bought a pair of socks once so won't miss it if it goes phut !

 

I'm sure any of their staff who end up on the dole will be relieved that you won't miss the shop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

stopped even going in there to look for gents stuff, all they had was just stuff like ripped jeans and hoodies, I think I bought a pair of socks once so won't miss it if it goes phut !

 

I'm sure any of their staff who end up on the dole will be relieved that you won't miss the shop.

 

but if their buyers had their heads screwed on and not concentrating on 'yoofs' they may have had more business !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Bonmarche said they are closing because, and I quote, "The rent here is twice what it is in London and then you add the cost of transport......"

 

I have heard that Strand Street is owned by 3 people. It is they who are destroying the town by demanding such high rents.

 

Should there be an independant body to assess each property and rent cap it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a few shops were owned by the church of England, which would possibly explain why those particular shops don't open on Sundays.

Churches open on Sundays.... and are happy enough to take your money in the collection plate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a few shops were owned by the church of England, which would possibly explain why those particular shops don't open on Sundays.

Churches open on Sundays.... and are happy enough to take your money in the collection plate

 

Yes but they want you to be in church with your money, not out spending it in shops from which their rent is collected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard that Strand Street is owned by 3 people. It is they who are destroying the town by demanding such high rents.

 

 

I have heard similar things, i.e. that the vast amount of Douglas (in particular) retail property is actually owned by a very small number of individuals/concerns. Makes one wonder if the same thing applies to other towns and retail areas around the island, certainly if it is true, then some of these individuals or concerns must have done extremely well out of the rents that they have picked up over the last 20-30 years. But looking at the state of some of said properties and areas, e.g. the much maligned Strand/Castle/Duke Street, one might well wonder about how much investment has been ploughed back into the upkeep and improvement of these premises? Where is our shopping centre to attract the WAGs of our saviour HNWI?

 

If one digresses into the Registered Buildings issue (e.g. the Castle Mona), registering a building from architectural/historical interest is one thing, providing that the building has seen a modicum of maintenance in recent history and times.

 

Registering a building out of sentiment, that has quite simply been neglected and/or allowed to decline through no more than the bare maintenance required to keep it going is another issue. I'm sure that this could be directed at a great many Public Houses on the Island that perhaps now/currently enjoy Registered Status but in the past 30-odd years have seen no more than new wallpaper and the odd new carpet thrown down on the drinking room floor whilst the rest of the building is left to rot.

 

For example, in Ramsey, let's look at Nightlife (The Saddle) that the Brewery couldn't sell once any prospective buyers became aware of its true condition and The Central (there must be plenty of others in Douglas and around the Island). This means that they are simply unattractive to developers who are legally constrained to trying to preserve the features of a otherwise largely unserviceable building (I appreciate that the Spectrum/Crescent development may be the exception in this, Lord knows what extra it cost to incorporate the old frontage)

 

Registering needs to subject to a lot more critique of the building condition rather than just history IMHO. In too many cases quite simply there has been no investment by the owners, just profit in recent years, any basic maintenance or improvements would have appear to have gone by the wayside in the short term rush to the trough and the buildings have been left to suffer.

 

We are left with, in too many cases, dilapidated and derelict buildings that cannot be improved or even demolished (except for the odd mysterious fire), even though they are unserviceable, through registration orders applied via rose tinted glasses from a sentiment point of view.

 

Nothing is forever - even long-standing buildings come to the end of their life, even if their demise is accelerated (even wilfully and deliberately) through neglect. If we're not going to enforce basic maintenance on buildings that we have credited with Registered Status then we have to be prepared to move on and say bye bye to these buildings, we need to recognise this....?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything in competition with the internet is probably fucked. In the medium to long term anyway.

 

Depends how long term you mean. Long distance delivery of goods based on mass consumerism and ever increasing growth will eventually become unsustainable and need will have to be met more locally and traditionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...