Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have written directly to Iceland twice about this store closure and have yet to receive a reply. I have also contacted James Barber about finding a way to encourage Iceland to open a similar sized store in the local area, which to be fair seems unlikely as people such as Waitrose and Morrisons are still on the hunt for limited retail space. I am not mourning the passing of a chain store, I'm more concerned about the future of the staff who a lot of local people have have built a great relationship with over the years, and indeed the knock on effect of removing a low cost supermarket and replacing with a more expensive food store that those Iceland customers are less likely to visit. I can contact M&S directly too if that will help, or maybe James Barber would be able to contact them?


Louisa.

If the staff in Iceland are so brilliant I'm sure they'll find other jobs.


There's nothing to stop these 'great relationships' with Iceland staff continuing - why not meet them in a pub if they're your best friends?


I, for one, hope that Iceland do not open another store in the area. A Waitrose would be far more welcome.

But how many up market supermarkets does one area need mcnipper? Surely you can appreciate my point that those people on a budget are less likely to drive and less likely to have the funds to travel to visit a cheaper supermarket. And equally, a lot of elderly people who rely on the shop may not be able to walk long distances to other low cost stores. Wouldn't it be better if we at least kept one budget shop within walking distance of our high street rather than encourage the likes of Waitrose who will equally be out of reach for a huge section of our community.


Louisa.

*Bob* Wrote:

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

> MS and Iceland are two ends of the same shitty

> shick; both play to the worst instincts of their

> different demographic.

>

> I'd rather have a Lidl.


Yeah, agree with this.

I spent three days at Iceland's HQ for training in 1998. A very progressive company and I enjoyed telling everyone I was in Iceland for a few days. Ho ho. I turned down going to the usual suspects.


What I found was a very progressive company, who picked up execs from the usual suspects and at the time were almost single handedly keeping the high street going (days before cheque cashing shops and poundland).


They were the first (and probably) only chain to shift to organic veg - sadly a home goal as their demographic didn't want organic. I still have difficulties going into the shop due to the horrid branding - sounds a bit shallow, but I expect many of you can outcompete me there. Where I work they have to have Pret a manger's both side of the street to save people crossing the road, and the queue's are out of the door at lunch time. Meanwhile the independents are just managing.


It's a load of twonk really.

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

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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