Join me, I propose SMBC charge full business rates

[Rudolph Hucker]

Mmmmm, Poynton. I believe it has (in no particular order) a Co-op, an Asda and a Waitrose spread variously along a pretty full High Street; with a variety of shops including, unless I am mistaken, a Green Grocers right bang smack next to Asda. And a few charity shops. Not sure what the population of Poynton is but there isn't a lot of tumbleweed there.

Similarly Whaley Bridge's Tesco doesn't seem to have decimated that village.

Just a thought....

RH.

[designhouse]

What utter rubbish.  Local people have spoken!!   We have so many takeaways, hairdressers newsagents etc because local people use them, these business are opening knowing there is no market.


You might fondly believe Marple is a village, with 23000 people and want only a village shop but the rest of us know we live in a suburb of Stockport.

Some people in here can remember what Marple village was like ...not that long ago .....
The number of charity shops and takeaways is ridiculous ...I am saying we need shops which offer a variety.

We are still a village ..just because the population has increased ..and the borough boundaries have changed over the years ...we are no different than new mills or poynton
Both of which offer a better shopping....




 of shops

[Duke Fame]

I certainly don't think the state should dictate the shops we have but the point remains that hte charities are exploiting a loophole in hte tax law and pretty much in the same boat as Starbucks, amazon etc.

[wheels]

What utter rubbish.  Local people have spoken!!   We have so many takeaways, hairdressers newsagents etc because local people use them, these business are opening knowing there is no market.


You might fondly believe Marple is a village, with 23000 people and want only a village shop but the rest of us know we live in a suburb of Stockport.

[designhouse]

To charity shops, the place is awash with them and they are using loopholes to reduce their costs and drive out the businesses that are playing fair.

I think you have a very good point here...and it has a direct link to the issues facing marple regarding the supermarket proposals....i would even extend the list not only to include charity shops
but hairdressers,take aways...after all we are a village..how many do we need -be honnest ...people in the village should have more say on what shops are required ...
next thing we will have is payday cash shops .....

The Coop is also a example,they are taking over the village,they have the supermarket,banking,cafe,chemists..next thing we wll have is a coop petrol station ...we will all be working for them soon
for this reson i want a supermarket...

the supermarkets situation is not on my top of the list ...i would like good shops,a vareity..themn maybe we would all support our village more





landlords should be forced to repair
some of the shops too...

[Harry]

No it's not ...

Oh yes it is ...

[designhouse]

Far better than empty shops though?

No it's not ...

[My login is Henrietta]

You may see empty shops but you rarely see empty charity shops. The charity shops are of benefit to everyone in Marple and this includes existing shopkeepers. The number of cafes in a small centre such as Marple shows that a lot of people come to shop at the existing retailers in Marple and meet up with friends while they are doing it. While they are here they have a drink and a browse for anything of  interest in the charity shops: the fact that Marple has an affluent population means that goods donated to the shops are of a fairly high quality. Everyone benefits: better to have a charity shop with customers coming and going for the whole time than boarded up empty shops which can quickly become covered in graffiti. Charity shops do not put existing shops out of business: nor do they replace them. They are alternative users for what would otherwise be empty premises which allow clothes, books and other items to be recycled and raise money for a good cause.  Nothing detracts from an area more than boarded up graffitied shops.

In fact, many charities occupy premises which are let to them at preferential rents by landlords who prefer to have their property occupied than standing empty at no rent at all. Don't know about the Marple shop but I believe that in some areas Cancer Research UK own the property their shops occupy.

[Duke Fame]

Not good for the landlord business then Duke

Perhaps not but i think will result in more shops operating as open shops.

The other side of it for landlords is it is going to be easier to return shops to residential which will give them a chance to get income

[wheels]

Not good for the landlord business then Duke

[Duke Fame]

You may see empty shops but you rarely see empty charity shops. The charity shops are of benefit to everyone in Marple and this includes existing shopkeepers. The number of cafes in a small centre such as Marple shows that a lot of people come to shop at the existing retailers in Marple and meet up with friends while they are doing it. While they are here they have a drink and a browse for anything of  interest in the charity shops: the fact that Marple has an affluent population means that goods donated to the shops are of a fairly high quality. Everyone benefits: better to have a charity shop with customers coming and going for the whole time than boarded up empty shops which can quickly become covered in graffiti. Charity shops do not put existing shops out of business: nor do they replace them. They are alternative users for what would otherwise be empty premises which allow clothes, books and other items to be recycled and raise money for a good cause.  Nothing detracts from an area more than boarded up graffitied shops.

Still not the point, they are forcing up rents for proper businesses that normally would provide a living 7 employment for staff & owners.

I don't want charity shops banned, just want them to pay the same rate as another business and yes, perhaps the landlords may receive less money but it would be fair. 

[marplerambler]

You may see empty shops but you rarely see empty charity shops. The charity shops are of benefit to everyone in Marple and this includes existing shopkeepers. The number of cafes in a small centre such as Marple shows that a lot of people come to shop at the existing retailers in Marple and meet up with friends while they are doing it. While they are here they have a drink and a browse for anything of  interest in the charity shops: the fact that Marple has an affluent population means that goods donated to the shops are of a fairly high quality. Everyone benefits: better to have a charity shop with customers coming and going for the whole time than boarded up empty shops which can quickly become covered in graffiti. Charity shops do not put existing shops out of business: nor do they replace them. They are alternative users for what would otherwise be empty premises which allow clothes, books and other items to be recycled and raise money for a good cause.  Nothing detracts from an area more than boarded up graffitied shops.

[Duke Fame]

To charity shops, the place is awash with them and they are using loopholes to reduce their costs and drive out the businesses that are playing fair.

Owners of premises are in business themselves and empty premises don't make money. It's better for the landlords and the community to have charity shops doing business than to have shops boarded up. There are enough closed shops in Marple as it is.

It is also a sad fact of life that there are people in the area who need to be able to buy teeshirts for £1 and a winter coat for a fiver and at least the money goes to good cause (well, usually - we'll leave out one rather dubious establishment in the area) so the shops serve two useful purposes. It's unlikely that the charity shops are driving out "the businesses that are playing fair" by taking their customers as they serve a different demograph.

Is there perhaps a little snobbery and NIMBY-ism here? Perhaps there are those who feel that charity shops "lower the tone" of the village?

Your first point that landlords are profit maximisers is quite right, I'm saying that charities can pay more becaus eof their status.

Yes, few landlords will want an empty shop, in many cases, landlords will even give their shop away for nothing just to avoid the rates bill. However, charity shops skew the market.

There is no snobbery from me, I just think there should be a level playing field.

[My login is Henrietta]

To charity shops, the place is awash with them and they are using loopholes to reduce their costs and drive out the businesses that are playing fair.

Owners of premises are in business themselves and empty premises don't make money. It's better for the landlords and the community to have charity shops doing business than to have shops boarded up. There are enough closed shops in Marple as it is.

It is also a sad fact of life that there are people in the area who need to be able to buy teeshirts for £1 and a winter coat for a fiver and at least the money goes to good cause (well, usually - we'll leave out one rather dubious establishment in the area) so the shops serve two useful purposes. It's unlikely that the charity shops are driving out "the businesses that are playing fair" by taking their customers as they serve a different demograph.

Is there perhaps a little snobbery and NIMBY-ism here? Perhaps there are those who feel that charity shops "lower the tone" of the village?

[Tricky]

just noticed an anagram of duke fame is.... make feud.