ECCOnoob

I suspect like most similar establishments, at 1:00 a.m. with the beer goggles on most customers will think it like the Savoy Grill. I don't exactly recall the fondly remembered Chubbies or Pepes either being the height of cleanliness and hygiene ratings but when you have had 17 vodka redbulls and crave your cheeseburger with cheesy fries, needs must.

24 hours - since when?

What do you mean by entertainment space?

Based on nothing then other than a load of unsubstantiated, unverified, irrelevant bull spewing from your keyboard. Irene is that you dear?

The concept idea from Arup just to win some trinket is just a dream. Personally I think it nonsense that a public healthcare facility on a shopping street creates economic uplift. We already have them on George Street and Rockingham Street and I don't exactly see much economy moving as a result of it. In fact, it may even damage it by encouraging addicts or delinquents to congregate around the area. Whilst I would love to see another large department store moving in, I can't see that happening in view of the already decline of such shopping generally. I did get wonder if Marks and Spencer would consider moving now that JL has shut down and they no longer need to be in their eye line. However, the whole Debenhams store might be a little bit too big for the M&S s style of layout. Another idea could be expanding out Atkinsons who always seem to be running out of room and squeezing things in their current store. Take it right back to how they used to be years ago when they had multiple branches around the city. Keep the furniture and homeware in one store and then do a great expansion of their fashion, beauty and lifestyle stuff into another store, making it a bit more premium, etc. but again probably unlikely as they would not want to overreach themselves nor lose the convenient parking. So to me the best thing is splitting to maybe two or three units and trying entire some smaller store brands to take up space. Something like a Uniqlo and maybe a Sephora could do well captive given the large student population on the doorstep.

Based on what?

In theory, yes, it's a wonderful idea. But as has been discussed before, where exactly its supposed to go is a far more difficult thing to achieve given our roads and natural geography. Let's take the Hallamshire for example. Obviously there would need to be some spur off the existing tram tracks but where is it going to go? Are we going to get some tracks along both sides of Weston Bank fighting with the already manic traffic. A modern day supertram system is 35m long and certainly won't fit down something like Beech Hill Road or Claremont Place. Even if it went along Glossop Road it will still hit a barrier of trying to cross over something like Fulwood Road. The northern general is similar. It might be feasible to bring the tram up and over Herries Road but you certainly would not be able to get it onto the NG site itself as theres not enough room and where would it carry on to because I can't see it fitting down the already narrow residential streets in firvale. It's very different these days to be old-fashioned at tram system which was nothing more than the size of a bus with tram stops precariously shoved in the middle of the road on narrow island kerbing. Now everything has to be low level, wide access, disabled friendly... In a ideal world the whole thing should have been put underground but 30 years on is far too late for that. Whilst I would like to see the network expand, I think the mayor's dreams are just that. It's all an ego and publicity exercise like the airport. If any routes were developed it's going to take decades. We all know the hassle, complaints, disruption when the thing was first built and all the expense and effort just to try and get a tiny extension out to Rotherham using existing railway. To start seriously majorly expanding it across residential areas and narrow streets will barely get off the drawing board before the Mayor is out of office and long gone. That's before we even talk about the budget, which as we all see all the time is as totally fickle could disappear tomorrow at the stroke of a civil servants pen.

Let me try and break it down into simple steps for you. The current in National minimum wage for people over 21 years old has just had a 9.8% increase to £11.44 an hour. So any unskilled worker doing the most menial of tasks could potentially be earning equivalent full-time of over £22,000. So, if an envelope stuffer and floor cleaner is earning potentially £22k how much more do you think is reasonable for a skilled Administrator to earn? An office manager? A qualified analyst or planner? A social worker? A department manager? A qualified lawyer?..... Do you see where this is going.... Like I said, a chief executive in charging an entire sector or division of a large organisation comes with a certain salary.

Just because you shout it doesn't automatically make it correct.

Bull. As I have tried to get into your thick skull, there are mid-level service managers on nearly £60k project managers and HR advisors earning nearly £50k. Even pen pushing business support officers earning over £30k. You serious to think a head of a division with responsibility for high level policy, strategy, legality, compliance, overseeing hundreds or thousands of staff and a multi-million pound budget is going to be paid £5k - £10k more than some mid-tier manager employee??? Join the real world.

It's not "a few quid". Taking the example that was discussed earlier, that extra 10% is equivalent to £50,000. Buying back bulk amounts of properties or constantly applying that extra 10% you think is so trivial, could equate to millions. You really haven't a clue.

Nothing absurd about it. Just how much in your world do you think they should be paid then? Within the council there are pen pushers and administrators earning high £20,000s. There are business support officers and analysts and even security guards earning mid-high £30,000s. There are HR advisors and project managers earning almost £50,000. So therefore, is it really that 'outrageous' for an executive of an entire division to be expecting a salary £100k plus? Hardly.

Are you going to magically pull the money out of your backside to cover the cost of that 10% extra? They are working to a budget. They're not plucking some figure out of thin air.

What adult does? that's why there are a verity of apps used plenty by grown adults as well as kids which make fart noises, play games with cartoon birds blowing up and create selfies with silly distorted characterises or animated filters on top. That's why people can get smartphone covers/cases/decoration in anything from barbie pink, to dinosaur green to furry dice or little jewelled trinkets hanging off them. The device is just a tool. Like I said earlier kids shouldn't need a 'special phone' all of the things you mention above are already available. Parents can choose to download and/or block any app they choose. They dont need a bespoke 'intranet' because facility already exists to make internet access child friendly. Nearly all Internet Service Providers have had such facilities for decades and schools do it all the time. What parents need to do is pull their heads out of their backsides and actually take responsibility to understand the tech, set it up properly and continually monitor it before they give it to their child. I can guarantee having two tier types of mobile phones will not solve the issue. Kids are not stupid. If one phone is a mocked as a toy and the other is deem a 'proper phone' its obvious what peer pressure and bullying will follow.

Maybe. But don't forget with any big project like this, there's lots of prep work in the background before any spades start hitting the ground. There's all the costs of consultancy, design, planning, architects, plant, utilities, surveyors, insurances, legal fees, project management, contracting, procurement.... That 200k per house is not simply for materials and labour.