truman Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I read this statement. It seems the council is building a bridge elsewhere. So I'll continue to boycott the produce of Sam Smith's. . I bet Smiths are getting the administrators lined up already ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 It's amazing he find time to combine brewing ale and having a top international singing career (now Oscar nominated no less) And now you want him to faff about with bridges? Give the man a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 I bet Smiths are getting the administrators lined up already ... So in other words you are prepared to castigate someone without hearing their side of the story and with evidence solely from some organisation with an axe to grind. Me I'd prefer to know the whole details before a trial by media... Actually it is my choice what I drink. There are plenty of breweries I can give business to without putting my pennies the way of this one. If at some stage information comes to light that they have been badly done to in this matter I might change my mind. But I'm pretty sure that I'll not be alone in giving The Old Brewery a wide berth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Actually I never said it wasn't your choice now did I? So please take your faux outrage elsewhere. (along with your populist claptrap) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nagel Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 That Tadcaster has remained unspoiled over the years by insensitive development is down to one man, Humphrey Smith owner of Sam Smiths. He owns a lot of the town and prevents inappropriate development. I haven't looked into it much, but on the news last night Sam Smith's were saying they feared that the footbridge would become permanent if built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxy lady Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 Actually I never said it wasn't your choice now did I? So please take your faux outrage elsewhere. (along with your populist claptrap) It is my choice what I post on here, so why don't you take your keyboard and stick it where the sun doesn't shine or find another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Someone else doesn't like people having the temerity to disagree with them I see ---------- Post added 15-01-2016 at 17:13 ---------- That Tadcaster has remained unspoiled over the years by insensitive development is down to one man, Humphrey Smith owner of Sam Smiths. He owns a lot of the town and prevents inappropriate development. I haven't looked into it much, but on the news last night Sam Smith's were saying they feared that the footbridge would become permanent if built. Hence my point above about them wanting to be sure that the council wouldn't go for a grab of the land. Unlike foxylady I live a lot closer to the bridge in question and I've got better ears on the ground. I know why they were objecting - hence my post about them and alch's one that was "left" out of the news reports "accidentally on purpose" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStar Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 A few years ago I did the Sam Smiths brewery tour and one thing they told us is that the water they used they pulled up from an underground lake below the brewery itself; Given that fact alone is good enough reason for them shudder at the thought of a piling rig rocking up anywhere near their premises and potentially altering the taste of their unique brewing water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Should we boycott Sam Smith's Brewery? Sam Smith's Brewery and its’ owner are once again causing controversy. This time it is by not allowing land owned by the brewery to be used to accommodate a temporary footbridge to allow Tadcaster residents to cross the river whilst the road bridge is rebuilt. This isn’t the first time Sam Smith’s have caused controversy. A few years ago a microbrewery was prevented from selling bottled beers for a forces charity because they claimed they owned the Yorkshire “white rose” trademark. http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=653215 I also seem to remember their refusal to allow school kids to use a footbridge to get to school when some other road scheme was being completed. There is already a petition asking Sam Smith’s to reconsider their policy regarding the bridge. https://www.change.org/p/samuel-smiths-brewery-allow-a-temporary-pedestrian-bridge-in-tadcaster-to-be-placed-on-land-owned-by-sam-smith-s-brewery But in the meantime I will not set foot inside any Sam Smith’s pub or buy any of their bottled beers. The Brewery own the land ,and its up to them weather they allow their land to be used . They have done nothing wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassity Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 The Brewery own the land ,and its up to them weather they allow their land to be used . They have done nothing wrong. Surely you mean 'nowt'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now