Jump to content

Recommended Posts

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> I always liked their impartial restaurant reviews

> - they really cut through the dross and you knew

> that an accolade from them was worth at least a

> Michelin star..

>

> oh no, wait....


Now you just pack it in there SM, Living South gives us reviews of this sort of calibre and is undeserving of your scorn.


Posted by: Ted Max January 12, 03:00PM



"Salad leaves us green with envy"

Snuggled in between a local hardware store and an undertakers might not be the obvious place for a vegetarian restaurant on Lordship Lane but we were more than happy to chance our arm on a wet Tuesday night.

A warm welcome ushered away any thoughts of a depressing experience and we were soon ooh-ing and aah-ing over the menu. Beansprouts in a chili tang and Bluegrass Pancakes whisked away any thoughts of the usual veggie fare, and we were soon looking forward to our main courses. Bean curd failed to live up to its rhyming slang and tasted delicious in a Shitake mushroom sauce, whilst my partner's Roast Tuber Roast was rich and warm. Puddings were delicious too and shooed away any thoughts that veggies can't have fun too. We shared a yoghurt and honey layer cake which was absolutely. Our groaning stomachs decided against coffee. I predict a bright start for this neighbourhood newcomer. **** ?? :0)) ???

I checked out their website. I did not realise they were now owned by the Archant Group - who own loads of magazines, in particular all the "county" magazines. (We get "Yorkshire Life" here). I clicked on "contact us", hoping to find an email address where I could enquire about current distribution, and found instead an invitation to buy a subscribtion. Yeah right.

Media Pack here.


Lots of guff about reader research, targeting of ABC1 homes etc, but no audit (ABC, BPA) information that I can see, which basically means they can claim what they like. At the moment they are claiming LS goes to 53,000 homes across Anerley, Brixton, Brockley, Camberwell, Crystal Palace, Dulwich (East, West and Village), Forest Hill, Herne Hill, Kennington, New Cross, Norwood, Peckham, Penge, Sydenham and Tulse Hill.


If the circ is audited, then I apologise to Archant. You'd expect to see that in the media pack, though.

It also serves as a tool of middle class oneupmanship against visitors from other parts of the captial. When inquired by their curious guests they lie and say they never read it.


"Ooo, Cressida, what's this?"


"Oh it's just a monthly circular about south London, me and Ptolemy never bother with it."

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...