Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Perhaps they think it's chicken feed?
Tags for Forum Posts: Ball, ChickenT0wn, Loan, Tottenham
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
It's been pointed out to me that unless they allocate the money from this fund soon, they'll have to give it back to central government. Anyone got any good business ideas based in Tottenham that a bank wouldn't touch?
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Please read the article Justin has linked to. The two people quoted so want this enterprise to fail.
-
-
I think it's because of a very cynical Anna Minton theory that posh businesses are allowed in by councils with incentives not available to other businesses with the sole purpose of pushing out the not very posh businesses.
Personally I am not sold on this theory. I think it's just desperation to spend grant money and a savvy London entrepreneur or three.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Which of Anna Minton's published books/articles are you referring to, John? I usually find her stuff both helpful and evidenced-based. So I'd be interested to where you think she's got this wrong.
Earlier this evening Zena and I went to another of a series of talks at the LSE on Planning and "so called" regeneration. Anna Minton wasn't there. But plainly it's not just her notion that councils may be choosing to favour certain types of businesses with public funds while discriminating against others. All on not very clear or firm grounds.
But it seems likely you're right. And that savvy entrepreneurs see the councillors coming and are happy to take their spare any public cash offered.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
JOHN, one of things that struck me about the appearance of CT was how smart it looks.
The facade as a whole would not look out of place in Knightsbridge. This is not a criticism in aesthetic terms, although it was taxpayer money that paid for the hip style and elegance.
However at a glance, for possible passing trade, this could suggest that their prices are expensive and punters might not look closer. If passers-by understand that this is a commercial enterprise offering a service – I don't think it's obvious – they may be put off by an impression of exclusivity.
I can see that there may have been an intention to push out non-posh custom: but not very posh businesses too?
-
-
So people who live in the poorer parts of the borough don't expect a pleasant environment to eat in? Thanks for clearing that up.
-
-
Michael that's misrepresenting what I've said. I'm talking about the external facade and the impression given to potential customers, not about the internal environment.
If this was a commercial operation (funded with private capital), more attention might have been given to the actual business operation rather than to styling (the facade is truly elegant). I suspect the appearance is so posh that it will deter custom because it looks (too) expensive.
Some folk, like me, feel more comfortable in the so-called greasy spoon cafe.
-
-
Your post was astonishingly patronising Clive. Working class people like attractive places just as much those in Knightsbridge. Really, if the debate on this place has ended up with claiming that people are put off using it, for which you offer no evidence, because it looks nice I despair. By the way good design costs the same as poor design and probably lasts longer
-
-
I did not say it looked "nice", I said it looked expensive. Some of us are in income brackets for which such considerations matter.
I'm trying to look at this from a commercial point of view. In my opinion, it's just one of a number of factors that are questionable: however it's probably less important than the dubious location, that is well set back from the main road and not close to other commerce. I'm not trying to slight working class people, as you imply. The good design may well last longer than the current tenancy.
-
-
So what do you want them to do? Disfigure a listed building so that it doesn't look "expensive". The question of whether or not this enterprise is right or value for money is a legitimate one but comments like these are childish and spiteful as are those in the newspaper article
-
-
Michael I'm sorry you think my comments are spiteful (NB I do not know the promoters and have no axe to grind on a personal level).
Some Councillors remain concerned about how large sums of taxes are spent.
I understand that long-serving Tottenham Cllr. Sheila Peacock has also expressed reservations about CT.
I'm keen that genuine local business succeeds.
If this particular one was a private enterprise, with private capital at stake, I'd privately think this was a dubious enterprise. As it is, a huge slug of scarce public money has been sunk into it.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Justin Hinchcliffe on
-
There really is no need to be so personal -- or feel the need to dominate every thread (on that latter point, the same applies to Mr Stanton). Amazed at how pro-Haringey Council you are these day - one could be forgiven for thinking you were on their payroll.
-
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
