Tesco buy all nine Shoprite supermarkets- Monopoly?

[Major Rushen]

Shoprite shelves very bare…….

[NoTailT]

1 hour ago, Major Rushen said:

Shoprite shelves very bare…….

Blame the boats!

[Major Rushen]

Not all boats. Rundown of Sainsbury’s stock, and Iceland frozen foods and Shoprite supplied stock being replenished by Tesco stuff - that’s the boat bit.

[StCatherine]

I thought they were quite good earlier. They don’t know what they want to be, Sainsburys ,Tescos and other random shite. 

[darenisepic]

it's expected that they will reduce the "old stock" as it wont be a secret that they want to sell it off.

[mollag]

13 hours ago, John Wright said:

Except it’s not just that area. The flood plain extends up to Cronkbourne Road and Kirby Meadow.

If you look a the map Roger has posted, one page back, the area marked Ropewalk is on the flood plain. There are cliffs marked, escarpment. The area marked lake. I mentioned the meandering branches of the Glass. That’s shown. The area marked with field numbers 2930/2/3/4 was in effect an island, with the river on each side. It was a marshy swamp. As was The Lake.

Small river, small flood plain. Big river, etc.

There was a stream running behind the Garages in Hills Meadow, behind where Robinsons was, parallel to the main road, a scrap yard I think now, it ran under the access ramp. Those units below Peel road would flood up to 2 foot, I was involved raising the height of the electrical outlets to 3 feet in my brothers welding shop. [late 70's]

[Happier diner]

20 hours ago, Happier diner said:

A warning is not a flood. When did tesco last flood. By tesco I mean the store, not a puddle in the car park. I honestly don't remember.

@daisy confused again? Surely not. Its very simple. 

[CrazyDave]

4 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

@daisy confused again? Surely not. It’s very simple. 

Daisy’s constant confused reactions, always make me think of the woman of Facebook whose only ever contribution is “Gawd”

[daisy]

4 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

@daisy confused again? Surely not. Its very simple. 

Confused by your lack of understanding of flood plain.  Confused that you dont recall the Lake Road site being flooded ... Tesco, the actual 'shop', may not have been flooded ... but access to it was and I think they had to close early because of it.  https://www.facebook.com/EnergyFMIOM/posts/update-report-of-flooding-lake-road-and-tesco-car-park-douglas-parliament-square/10152188056874341/ Hey ho .... apparently you know better

[daisy]

3 minutes ago, CrazyDave said:

Daisy’s constant confused reactions, always make me think of the woman of Facebook whose only ever contribution is “Gawd”

For 'Gawd' read 'Idiot' ... there isn't always an appropriate emoji

 

[Happier diner]

37 minutes ago, daisy said:

Confused by your lack of understanding of flood plain.  Confused that you dont recall the Lake Road site being flooded ... Tesco, the actual 'shop', may not have been flooded ... but access to it was and I think they had to close early because of it.  https://www.facebook.com/EnergyFMIOM/posts/update-report-of-flooding-lake-road-and-tesco-car-park-douglas-parliament-square/10152188056874341/ Hey ho .... apparently you know better

I don't know better. If you bother to actually read back the subject was that Tesco was at risk of flooding. Yeah the flood plain was a side discussion and I simply questioned it. 

So, is Tesco at risk of flooding or not. I think it is but because it's high up it stands above the flood plain. Like any building close to a river there is a risk of course. Quantitying that risk it complex. I'm sure when it was built it was raised purposefully and the risk of flooding would have been modelled. 

I don't understand the key in the flood hub website arc GIS but I think it's in a lower risk location than around the quay.

Still confused?

[Happier diner]

41 minutes ago, daisy said:

For 'Gawd' read 'Idiot' ... there isn't always an appropriate emoji

 

There is only one idiot in this debate and it's not me nor @CrazyDave 

[John Wright]

5 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I don't know better. If you bother to actually read back the subject was that Tesco was at risk of flooding. Yeah the flood plain was a side discussion and I simply questioned it. 

So, is Tesco at risk of flooding or not. I think it is but because it's high up it stands above the flood plain. Like any building close to a river there is a risk of course. Quantitying that risk it complex. I'm sure when it was built it was raised purposefully and the risk of flooding would have been modelled. 

I don't understand the key in the flood hub website arc GIS but I think it's in a lower risk location than around the quay.

Still confused?

I’m confused. Because that’s not what the discussion was about. Mollag suggested that Lake Road would have been better used for housing. I suggested it was better not to build on it because it was on the River Glass flood plain.

You then repeatedly denied the existence of a River Glass flood plain. No one, apart from you, ever raised the spectre of the store itself having flooded, yet you are still banging on about it. Gladys explained the store itself was higher than the road and a lot of the car park.

The only person on here confused is you, because you’re in geographic denial.

[Mercenary]

2 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 I suggested it was better not to build on it because it was on the River Glass flood plain.

Closing for a few hours once every 10 years with no damage is worth writing off a prime site in Douglas for?  

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

I’m confused. Because that’s not what the discussion was about. Mollag suggested that Lake Road would have been better used for housing. I suggested it was better not to build on it because it was on the River Glass flood plain.

You then repeatedly denied the existence of a River Glass flood plain. No one, apart from you, ever raised the spectre of the store itself having flooded, yet you are still banging on about it. Gladys explained the store itself was higher than the road and a lot of the car park.

The only person on here confused is you, because you’re in geographic denial.

I'm not confused. It was a discussion. I questioned it and accepted the reply. I merely said it's not what I visualised a flood plain to be. 

Another question. If a building or area that is within a flood plain is raised to a level at which it never floods, is it still within a flood plain or does it become surrounded by a flood plain. Question. Not banging on?