lets get this pizza shop shut down

[ElstreeBlue]

no im not where did i say that? also they are getting paid for the services to our club not mugging our club off when our fans prob eat there if there was a ACCIDENT which made them have to leave i ould not care

I'm normally quite happy to engage in sensible debate with people I disagree with, but I find your views totally repulsive. Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of SUFC and the Pizza Man, I take extreme offence at what you're saying/suggesting:

1 The fact that someone is called "Mohammed" does not make him a foreigner. Regardless of his name/colour of skin, he may have been living in the UK since birth. Or are you objecting to his religion? Someone called "John" may be American, Australian, Irish, etc - they may be more "foreign" than "Mohammed".

2 Does it matter whether he is a "foreigner" or do his parents/grandparents' place of birth make him a "foreigner" also? If so, how sure are you that your parents, grandparents and further back were all 100% born in the UK? Did you have a great-great-great-great-grandparent born anywhere than in the UK? Are you a "foreigner" too?

3 Even if he's a foreigner, so what? I don't see the relevance. Does that make him some sort of vermin?

4 I've seen nothing to say that he's trying to "mug us off". Like anyone else, he's under no obligation to sell his property. Like anyone who has a business or home etc, no one is under an obligation to sell AT ANY PRICE, unless legal process has been gone through - ie the club/Sainsburys can apply for a compulsory purchase order and require him to leave through the courts. It's like us trying to hold on to Barney and possibly sell at the best price - would Leeds, Coventry, etc want to cause an accident to Roots Hall because we're "mugging them off"?

5 I object to your mob rule mentality. No one has suggested the guy has done anything wrong. The club is suggesting we simply don't buy his pizzas to put COMMERCIAL pressure on him to make him think twice. Whether or not people on here agree with that tactic or think that's being a "bully boy", I do not think anyone else is advocating causing him an "accident".

6 If there is an "accident", I think the police will know who to call on first!

 

[McNasty]

You really aren't doing yourself any favours.

It has been noted.

 

[yogi bear up the cagire]

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think I do. I use the term 'random' in that I have no personal interest in it. My point is that I'm not going to hold one point of view just because it concerns the football club I support but would hold a different one if it had involved my own house/business.

Have to say that, looking back, I regret one or two of the things I have written. Perhaps I am sorry to have contributed to what is, in all, a rather nastily conceived thread. Perhaps, as a little businessman, I was frustrated about not being able to go out and earn my living this weekend, due to the snow.
On rereading the OS article I don't see it as that offensive and not really employing 'bull-boy' or 'Rachman like' tactics.............I can understand that some will, or will not, find it amusing. What is uncontestable and worrying, is the unsavoury reaction it has created from some people........
........rather nasty things crawling out of the woodwork, that I certainly wouldn't want to ba associated with.
I think some of the information provided on here shows that the situation may not be quite as simplistic as it first seemed and it is always difficult to debate things for which we don't have the full facts.
However, just for argument sake!.............I didn't quite understand your stance on CPO's. You don't seem to like them much.........and I have to agree, that I don't find them very palatable. What I found odd was your discriminating approach to them. On the one hand you seem loathed to employ them in order to allow the development of a supermarket but, on the other hand, you would be more accepting of them being used to help improve traffic circulation. Thus, to follow your argument through, you are favourable to knocking down houses and businesses if it is to make way for polluting traffic.........but not for building a supermarket. :)

 

[CC51DAS]

Have to say that, looking back, I regret one or two of the things I have written. Perhaps I am sorry to have contributed to what is, in all, a rather nastily conceived thread. Perhaps, as a little businessman, I was frustrated about not being able to go out and earn my living this weekend, due to the snow.
On rereading the OS article I don't see it as that offensive and not really employing 'bull-boy' or 'Rachman like' tactics.............I can understand that some will, or will not, find it amusing. What is uncontestable and worrying, is the unsavoury reaction it has created from some people........
........rather nasty things crawling out of the woodwork, that I certainly wouldn't want to ba associated with.
I think some of the information provided on here shows that the situation may not be quite as simplistic as it first seemed and it is always difficult to debate things for which we don't have the full facts.
However, just for argument sake!.............I didn't quite understand your stance on CPO's. You don't seem to like them much.........and I have to agree, that I don't find them very palatable. What I found odd was your discriminating approach to them. On the one hand you seem loathed to employ them in order to allow the development of a supermarket but, on the other hand, you would be more accepting of them being used to help improve traffic circulation. Thus, to follow your argument through, you are favourable to knocking down houses and businesses if it is to make way for polluting traffic.........but not for building a supermarket. :)

Yogi, do you honestly think that it never occured to club when they put this on the OS (having had limited reaction to sismilar comments in Ron's blog), that this would not stir up problems for the pizza guy?

They have certainly deflected attention away from their lack of success in strenghtening the squad this week and have started to line up a new 'villan' to blame for all our problems. Personally, I am not buying any of this and feel we should keep the pressure firmly on the man who has made all the promises - he is Mr Wizz when it comes to business so surely one little guy cannot stand in the way of all his carefully prepared plans.

 

[WestRoadShrimper]

What I found odd was your discriminating approach to them. On the one hand you seem loathed to employ them in order to allow the development of a supermarket but, on the other hand, you would be more accepting of them being used to help improve traffic circulation. Thus, to follow your argument through, you are favourable to knocking down houses and businesses if it is to make way for polluting traffic.........but not for building a supermarket. :)

Well, putting it that way I think you may have a point!!!

I don't have the first clue about the intricate ins and outs of how/why CPO's can be used, but the way I look at it is they are an incredibly powerful tool at the councils disposal and should only be used when there is going to be an improvement to the local environment and/or quality of life for the residents. The example I have in my head of a good use of these is when Brentwood Council used one to obtain a strip of my parents front garden so a pavement along a main road could be extended.

Now, granted, traffic could be argued either way. I'm thinking of how bad the A127 gets from Rayleigh Weir to all the way past Cuckoo Corner during the rush hour - I know traffic is polluting but I think it could be argued there is more CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere from the stationary vehicles than there would be if they were moving freely, so it would be a net gain. How many of us would be over the moon if we didn't have to sit in that every day? This, I would say, would be a good use of CPO's.

Along the same lines, given there are already three big supermarkets in the immediate area (along with the medium sized Sainsbury's already in town) I don't see how building another supermarket would give us anything extra, and don't find this a particularly savoury use of the CPO.

 

[turkishm]

no im not where did i say that? also they are getting paid for the services to our club not mugging our club off when our fans prob eat there if there was a ACCIDENT which made them have to leave i ould not care

You are sailing very close to the wind feller with that remark.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Along the same lines, given there are already three big supermarkets in the immediate area (along with the medium sized Sainsbury's already in town) I don't see how building another supermarket would give us anything extra, and don't find this a particularly savoury use of the CPO.

But Sainsburys cannot compete with Tesco as things stand, they have a clear intention to close the one in town and replace it with the one at Roots Hall. Supermarkets are continuously competing and Sainsburys would not be happy sitting as the 4th choice one in a place like southend. It is one of the few retailer areas still worth a punt as an investor, we are entirely co-dependant on each other if we both want to grow and compete on a wider scale.

As I suggested before, if it was a little old lady who'd lived in her house for 70 odd years or whatever then I'd have every sympathy, but it isn't, and as both Beefy and I have said, there's plenty of other places in the not too distant vicinity which would be equally as good a place for their enterprise.

Ron Martin, Sainsburys and the Council won't be held to ransom by some two bit pizza operation that's not even part of a national chain.

 

[EastStandBlue]

Has that article really sparked 6 pages of arguments?

 

[Andyhsufc]

no im not where did i say that? also they are getting paid for the services to our club not mugging our club off when our fans prob eat there if there was a ACCIDENT which made them have to leave i ould not care

How do you know that they are mugging the club off as such?? As far as we know, Ron could have offered them a fiver and a packet of fags! They own that land and are therefore entitled to hold on to it until they they recieve what they consider to be a reasonable offer!

I obviously hope that we do manage to come to a deal with them but I think we all have suspicions that there is more to this story than just a pizza joint!

 

[Thorpe Groyney]

A fair bit of it has been reasoned debate, yes, which has been eminently readable. Some of it has been tongue-in-cheek suggestions. Sadly, though, a tiny element has contained incitement to commit crime on the basis of religious hatred and it's that nasty little bit that has soured it for everyone.

 

[Swiss Tony]

But Sainsburys cannot compete with Tesco as things stand, they have a clear intention to close the one in town and replace it with the one at Roots Hall. Supermarkets are continuously competing and Sainsburys would not be happy sitting as the 4th choice one in a place like southend. It is one of the few retailer areas still worth a punt as an investor, we are entirely co-dependant on each other if we both want to grow and compete on a wider scale.

As I suggested before, if it was a little old lady who'd lived in her house for 70 odd years or whatever then I'd have every sympathy, but it isn't, and as both Beefy and I have said, there's plenty of other places in the not too distant vicinity which would be equally as good a place for their enterprise.

Ron Martin, Sainsburys and the Council won't be held to ransom by some two bit pizza operation that's not even part of a national chain.

That two bit business you refer to,is that mans living ffs,what does he care about FF or Sainsbury and the Council,he wants whats best for his income,some people don't give a **** for football you know.

 

[Pak Power]

As far as I can tell the power of want is greater then the power of need.
We want to obtain the freehold of the property more than they need to sell it !

As always in theses situations the main ( and less time consuming) tool at RM's disposal is the brown envelope. It's just a question of how fat that envelope is.
Trying to apply political pressure to the owner (whatever nationality he is) is a childish, misguided policy.

So Mr. Martin, you want the property, do what you have always done if you want a property, and do not resort to some stirring hate campaign. We do not know this guy's affairs, he may have some capital gain liability to pay, his solicitors costs etc.
In this regard a 10% on top of 'market value' would soon be gone.

 

[OldBlueLady]

That two bit business you refer to,is that mans living ffs,what does he care about FF or Sainsbury and the Council,he wants whats best for his income,some people don't give a fyck for football you know.

I know that, but as we keep saying it's not dependant on him being THERE. He will lose most of his clientele anyway and there are plenty of similar places in perfectly suitable locations where he can trade. I don't know how long he has been there, but shouldn't think it's long enough to have any real loyalty or affinity to the place, in which case he is just holding out for the big pay off.

 

[Beefy]

With the block of flats going, it's a good time for him to be getting out anyway. The only reason I can think of for him to be digging his heels in is to make more cash. His prerogative, of course.

 

[Beefy]

Trying to apply political pressure to the owner (whatever nationality he is) is a childish, misguided policy.

It's only misguided if it doesn't work.

 

[McNasty]

If I had a business that someone wanted me to sell and vacate the premises I would hold out for as much as possible and how many of you would take the stance you relate to if a property developer wanted you to go and find somewhere else to set up your business and living accommodation ? Not many I bet.
Just because this relates to the football club you love , do not let that cloud your judgement.

 

[Beefy]

If I had a business that someone wanted me to sell and vacate the premises I would hold out for as much as possible and how many of you would take the stance you relate to if a property developer wanted you to go and find somewhere else to set up your business and living accommodation ? Not many I bet.
Just because this relates to the football club you love , do not let that cloud your judgement.

Absolutely. The guy is digging in for as much money as possible. That's his choice and he' certainly not a victim. He'll come out of this quite nicely I imagine. At the same time, I don't think a bit of gentle posturing by the Club is going to do much harm and if his matchday takings drop by half now then maybe that'll make the difference.

It's not like Ron Martin has sent the heavies round. He put a light-hearted story on the OS which we could all read between the lines of.

 

[borientater]

Ron Martin, Sainsburys and the Council won't be held to ransom by some two bit pizza operation that's not even part of a national chain.

Seems as if they already are !!

 

[TrueBlue]

I know that, but as we keep saying it's not dependant on him being THERE. He will lose most of his clientele anyway and there are plenty of similar places in perfectly suitable locations where he can trade. I don't know how long he has been there, but shouldn't think it's long enough to have any real loyalty or affinity to the place, in which case he is just holding out for the big pay off.

I am loyal to the place come back when you know what your yacking on about

 

[grassroots]

Just spin methinks and it appears to be working a treat. There is no way that a developement of this size is being held up by these few shops.