Swindon AdvertiserAdvertiser is set to find a new home (From Swindon Advertiser)

Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us

Advertiser is set to find a new home

Swindon Advertiser: The Swindon Advertiser building in Victoria Road back in its heyday The Swindon Advertiser building in Victoria Road back in its heyday

AFTER 150 years on the same site the Swindon Advertiser is selling its Old Town building and relocating to a different site.

The three-storey building in Victoria Road has been home to the daily newspaper – which was founded by William Morris in 1854 – and its sister titles since the late 19th century, after the business outgrew Morris’ father’s shop in Wood Street.

During that time the building has been a hive of activity. It even ran its own printing press on the ground floor until the late 1990s, when production was moved to Oxford.

Over the years, advancements in technology, including switching to computers from typewriters have meant fewer personnel have been needed, leading to the shrinking of the workforce.

Today, only the top floor is occupied by the business, leading to the decision to relocate somewhere else in the town.

Shamus Donald, the regional managing director of Newsquest, which owns the newspaper, said: “The offices in Victoria Road, Old Town, have been home to the Swindon Advertiser for 150 years.

“Although we are planning to move to more appropriate premises to meet the changing needs of our business, the Swindon Advertiser remains fully committed to remaining at the heart of life in Swindon.”

“We recognise that Newspaper House is an important part of the Old Town landscape and our agents have been in careful consultation with Forward Swindon to ensure that whatever happens on the site after we move on is in keeping with this special part of the town.”

The sale of the property is being managed by property consultants, Alder King,who think the building will be most suitable for buyers looking to convert the offices into retail facilities combined with offices or flats.

The building is a 3,260sq m space, and any future development design would need to be appropriate to the local Conservation Area.

James Gregory, a partner at Alder King, said: “We have had some initial expressions of interest in the property and I think it is most suited to buyers who want to convert the building into retail on the ground floor and flats or offices on the second and third floors.”

To arrange an inspection of the building, contact James Gregory of Alder King on 01793 428106 or email jgregory@alderking.com or Martin Baker on 01793 428102 or email mbaker@alderking.com.

Comments (49)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:03am Mon 14 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

“We recognise that Newspaper House is an important part of the Old Town landscape and our agents have been in careful consultation with Forward Swindon to ensure that whatever happens on the site after we move on is in keeping with this special part of the town.”.........
So more flats it is then.......
James Gregory, a partner at Alder King, said: “We have had some initial expressions of interest in the property and I think it is most suited to buyers who want to convert the building into retail on the ground floor and flats or offices on the second and third floors.”.......
Ooh more flats. What a complete surprise.......
Score -620👎
“We recognise that Newspaper House is an important part of the Old Town landscape and our agents have been in careful consultation with Forward Swindon to ensure that whatever happens on the site after we move on is in keeping with this special part of the town.”......... So more flats it is then....... James Gregory, a partner at Alder King, said: “We have had some initial expressions of interest in the property and I think it is most suited to buyers who want to convert the building into retail on the ground floor and flats or offices on the second and third floors.”....... Ooh more flats. What a complete surprise....... Score -620👎 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: 3

8:40am Mon 14 Jul 14

Old Town Comment says...

It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer.
Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill'
It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer. Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill' Old Town Comment
  • Score: 40

8:46am Mon 14 Jul 14

Old Town Comment says...

remember this is unlikely to be the last iconic building that could change use soon. SBC wish to consolidate art at a town centre site. For good or bad that will leave the Museum & Gallery as another interesting building that should be considered and reintegrated into Old Town life.
remember this is unlikely to be the last iconic building that could change use soon. SBC wish to consolidate art at a town centre site. For good or bad that will leave the Museum & Gallery as another interesting building that should be considered and reintegrated into Old Town life. Old Town Comment
  • Score: 40

9:56am Mon 14 Jul 14

Klinkerhoffen says...

Forward Swindon is a self elected talking shop with no mandate from the people of this town. If anyone can point me to anything positive or concrete which that body (which we tax-payers help fund, incidentally) has actually achieved, I'll be stunned and amazed. They do a good line in talking about themselves and making vague pronouncements about working with people, but I've seen scant evidence of any delivery on those words.

Frankly, I fully expect to see yet another building left empty during months of wrangling, before some greedy developer converts it into yet more flats with insufficient parking provision, saying that whilst it was empty 'the building became too damaged/unsuitable to be used for any other purpose'. Of course, all anyone is really thinking about is trousering some dough during the residential property boom.

What a shame that the Adver management doesn't have the imagination to convert the lower floors into spaces suitable for local entrepreneurs and business set-ups. That way, it could stay in the heart of the community and make the empty space pay for itself whilst supporting the local community, (and hey, maybe even generate a few stories into the bargain.)

Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual.
Forward Swindon is a self elected talking shop with no mandate from the people of this town. If anyone can point me to anything positive or concrete which that body (which we tax-payers help fund, incidentally) has actually achieved, I'll be stunned and amazed. They do a good line in talking about themselves and making vague pronouncements about working with people, but I've seen scant evidence of any delivery on those words. Frankly, I fully expect to see yet another building left empty during months of wrangling, before some greedy developer converts it into yet more flats with insufficient parking provision, saying that whilst it was empty 'the building became too damaged/unsuitable to be used for any other purpose'. Of course, all anyone is really thinking about is trousering some dough during the residential property boom. What a shame that the Adver management doesn't have the imagination to convert the lower floors into spaces suitable for local entrepreneurs and business set-ups. That way, it could stay in the heart of the community and make the empty space pay for itself whilst supporting the local community, (and hey, maybe even generate a few stories into the bargain.) Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual. Klinkerhoffen
  • Score: 50

10:06am Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

Old Town Comment wrote:
It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer.
Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill'
Retail on the ground floor and flats above would seem appropriate as most of the street is already retail.

The public only have access to the ground floor reception now, so I don't see why they would expect greater access in the future.

As long as the façade is retained, what's the problem?
[quote][p][bold]Old Town Comment[/bold] wrote: It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer. Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill'[/p][/quote]Retail on the ground floor and flats above would seem appropriate as most of the street is already retail. The public only have access to the ground floor reception now, so I don't see why they would expect greater access in the future. As long as the façade is retained, what's the problem? MrAngry
  • Score: -30

10:12am Mon 14 Jul 14

trustnopolitician says...

Klinkerhoffen says...

Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual.

I could not agree more Forward Swindon = more destruction.
Klinkerhoffen says... Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual. I could not agree more Forward Swindon = more destruction. trustnopolitician
  • Score: 45

10:21am Mon 14 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

As long as the building is put to good use I don't see the problem? The buyer can do what they like with it within reason.
As long as the building is put to good use I don't see the problem? The buyer can do what they like with it within reason. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -4

10:26am Mon 14 Jul 14

AMSOSA says...

How long before the Adver announces that its going to become a weekly newspaper, and then how long before it vanishes from our streets?
How long before the Adver announces that its going to become a weekly newspaper, and then how long before it vanishes from our streets? AMSOSA
  • Score: 10

10:38am Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

trustnopolitician wrote:
Klinkerhoffen says...

Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual.

I could not agree more Forward Swindon = more destruction.
How is a piece of heritage being lost? The building will be retained. How many people even realised that the ground floor is currently unused? The printing presses moved out 20 years ago, so the building is already office space.

The public currently only see the outside and have no idea what goes on inside. Nothing will change.

The building also has lots of parking space to the rear. The Adver used to operate a fleet of delivery vans from the site. There is more than enough parking for a few flats.
[quote][p][bold]trustnopolitician[/bold] wrote: Klinkerhoffen says... Goodbye yet another long enduring landmark, hello yet another lost piece of heritage. Business as usual. I could not agree more Forward Swindon = more destruction.[/p][/quote]How is a piece of heritage being lost? The building will be retained. How many people even realised that the ground floor is currently unused? The printing presses moved out 20 years ago, so the building is already office space. The public currently only see the outside and have no idea what goes on inside. Nothing will change. The building also has lots of parking space to the rear. The Adver used to operate a fleet of delivery vans from the site. There is more than enough parking for a few flats. MrAngry
  • Score: -33

10:43am Mon 14 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

The building has a plenty of parking to the rear and essentially has its own access road, which is quiet and little used. Nobody will, or would even be physically able to, access it from Victoria Road, so no additional traffic or parking problems at all.

As others have said, I'm not really sure why people are so against flats in this instance. The frontage will have to be retained by law and the public has no real right of access to the building as it stands in any case.

This is one instance where more flats is actually the most sensible use for the building, especially if something decent takes out the commercial space on ground level. In fact, if it was turned into a higher quality restaurant then the public will actually get to benefit from actively using one of our more iconic and attractive looking buildings.

The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much.
The building has a plenty of parking to the rear and essentially has its own access road, which is quiet and little used. Nobody will, or would even be physically able to, access it from Victoria Road, so no additional traffic or parking problems at all. As others have said, I'm not really sure why people are so against flats in this instance. The frontage will have to be retained by law and the public has no real right of access to the building as it stands in any case. This is one instance where more flats is actually the most sensible use for the building, especially if something decent takes out the commercial space on ground level. In fact, if it was turned into a higher quality restaurant then the public will actually get to benefit from actively using one of our more iconic and attractive looking buildings. The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: -34

10:46am Mon 14 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

Pants
Pants Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -4

10:47am Mon 14 Jul 14

Klinkerhoffen says...

'The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much.'

Look at out town.

I mean seriously

LOOK AT SWINDON

'Clouded judgement' about developers!!!!????
'The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much.' Look at out town. I mean seriously LOOK AT SWINDON 'Clouded judgement' about developers!!!!???? Klinkerhoffen
  • Score: 44

10:51am Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

QUOTE - 'The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much.'

Exactly. It is these people who are holding our town back.
QUOTE - 'The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much.' Exactly. It is these people who are holding our town back. MrAngry
  • Score: -38

10:52am Mon 14 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

" The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much"........
Not half as much as being a blinkered politico councillor of ChannelX standard
" The blind hatred some people have for 'developers' sometimes clouds their judgement a little too much"........ Not half as much as being a blinkered politico councillor of ChannelX standard Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: 0

10:53am Mon 14 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

Shouldnt tasteful housing developments on existing sites be encouraged? It beats building on fields doesn't it? I'm sure any flat conversion will be tastefully done.
Shouldnt tasteful housing developments on existing sites be encouraged? It beats building on fields doesn't it? I'm sure any flat conversion will be tastefully done. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -1

10:57am Mon 14 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Would somebody care to explain what difference flats would make to the building?

It will look exactly the same from the outside (it will have to, it's protected by law) and it may well end up that the public will be able to get some use out of the street-level floor.

Also, it's quite clear that the Adver hasn't spent any money on cosmetic maintenance of the building for quite some time, this will almost certainly be attended to by any developer putting flats into the building.

While I completely agree that Old Town, and the town on a wide scale, has been fouled by developers in numerous instances, this does appear to be one case where things could end up more positive.

It's just stupidity to insist that everything any developer touches must always involve it being ruined.

It makes me wonder what the people who hold that view live in... caravans?
Would somebody care to explain what difference flats would make to the building? It will look exactly the same from the outside (it will have to, it's protected by law) and it may well end up that the public will be able to get some use out of the street-level floor. Also, it's quite clear that the Adver hasn't spent any money on cosmetic maintenance of the building for quite some time, this will almost certainly be attended to by any developer putting flats into the building. While I completely agree that Old Town, and the town on a wide scale, has been fouled by developers in numerous instances, this does appear to be one case where things could end up more positive. It's just stupidity to insist that everything any developer touches must always involve it being ruined. It makes me wonder what the people who hold that view live in... caravans? Sandor Clegane
  • Score: -34

11:00am Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

QUOTE:- It makes me wonder what the people who hold that view live in... caravans?

Or caves.
QUOTE:- It makes me wonder what the people who hold that view live in... caravans? Or caves. MrAngry
  • Score: -39

11:24am Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

My Dad worked at the Adver for 40 years. I used to visit as a child and did some casual work there as a student. I know the building very well.

It is essentially a pretty façade with a large factory space on the ground floor. Imagine how much space the printing presses used to take up and the amount of space required for delivery and storage of giant paper rolls.

I can remember watching the type setters prepare the text for the paper on little metal plates. My Dad used to maintain the printing press, so I can remember when it first went digital and when they first introduced colour.

It was an exciting place to visit, as the place would be almost silent with staff standing around it anticipation before suddenly springing into action and completing the whole paper run in a few hours. Papers would start whizzing around on conveyor belts up walls and across the ceilings. The smell of oil and ink in the air. One team loading up the paper, another printing and another frantically trying to bundle up papers and get them out the door.

As the process became more automated and less labour intensive, it became possible to print several papers in Oxford, instead of one paper per town. One printing press, less overheads, cheaper paper.

The paper has undergone many changes in its 150 year history. Like any business it has to adapt to survive. This proposal is the latest in a long line of change.
My Dad worked at the Adver for 40 years. I used to visit as a child and did some casual work there as a student. I know the building very well. It is essentially a pretty façade with a large factory space on the ground floor. Imagine how much space the printing presses used to take up and the amount of space required for delivery and storage of giant paper rolls. I can remember watching the type setters prepare the text for the paper on little metal plates. My Dad used to maintain the printing press, so I can remember when it first went digital and when they first introduced colour. It was an exciting place to visit, as the place would be almost silent with staff standing around it anticipation before suddenly springing into action and completing the whole paper run in a few hours. Papers would start whizzing around on conveyor belts up walls and across the ceilings. The smell of oil and ink in the air. One team loading up the paper, another printing and another frantically trying to bundle up papers and get them out the door. As the process became more automated and less labour intensive, it became possible to print several papers in Oxford, instead of one paper per town. One printing press, less overheads, cheaper paper. The paper has undergone many changes in its 150 year history. Like any business it has to adapt to survive. This proposal is the latest in a long line of change. MrAngry
  • Score: -25

11:55am Mon 14 Jul 14

Klinkerhoffen says...

The point is I guess that a building which was used for a particular purpose for 150 years could quite happily go on being used for that same purpose - its called tradition, culture and heritage. If the Adver doesn't need the extra space, and its economically viable to covert some of it for other uses, why aren't they doing it themselves and they could still stay on site? 150 years of something snuffed out because a Newsquest accountant has worked out a way to turn a quick profit is one thing, but to sell off a building with that amount of history to chuck in some flats seems like a real shame and lost opportunity both for them and the town.
The point is I guess that a building which was used for a particular purpose for 150 years could quite happily go on being used for that same purpose - its called tradition, culture and heritage. If the Adver doesn't need the extra space, and its economically viable to covert some of it for other uses, why aren't they doing it themselves and they could still stay on site? 150 years of something snuffed out because a Newsquest accountant has worked out a way to turn a quick profit is one thing, but to sell off a building with that amount of history to chuck in some flats seems like a real shame and lost opportunity both for them and the town. Klinkerhoffen
  • Score: 32

11:58am Mon 14 Jul 14

Al Smith says...

Old Town Comment wrote:
It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer.
Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill'
How are flats not part of the community?-They will house the very people who make up the community!

Shops will be part of the community as they will provide services for the community.

Restaurants will provide services for the community and hence be part of the community.

Offices will just retain the existing use of the building.

This is a privately owned building and as such there has never been a public right to enter it. So why should there be one now?

If you want to see where the obsession with the community and public access leads go down to the MI.
[quote][p][bold]Old Town Comment[/bold] wrote: It is hugely important that reuse of such an iconic building in the centre of Swindon is regenerated as part of the community. This means open public accessible frontages at least on the ground floor. We should also look behind at the opportunity to rejuvenate Little London and the hill. The community should be involved in the development process, not just the disengaged or external influence of a non-local developer. Forward Swindon did cooperate on the most recent plans for the Corn Exchange, can we see a similar approach here where we look at the whole space and do something with long term benefit for the whole of Old Town and for business at the top of 'Vic Hill'[/p][/quote]How are flats not part of the community?-They will house the very people who make up the community! Shops will be part of the community as they will provide services for the community. Restaurants will provide services for the community and hence be part of the community. Offices will just retain the existing use of the building. This is a privately owned building and as such there has never been a public right to enter it. So why should there be one now? If you want to see where the obsession with the community and public access leads go down to the MI. Al Smith
  • Score: -30

12:25pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

Why do similar views have totally opposite votes cast against them? Yes it's a rhetorical question.
Why do similar views have totally opposite votes cast against them? Yes it's a rhetorical question. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 28

12:58pm Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

Klinkerhoffen wrote:
The point is I guess that a building which was used for a particular purpose for 150 years could quite happily go on being used for that same purpose - its called tradition, culture and heritage. If the Adver doesn't need the extra space, and its economically viable to covert some of it for other uses, why aren't they doing it themselves and they could still stay on site? 150 years of something snuffed out because a Newsquest accountant has worked out a way to turn a quick profit is one thing, but to sell off a building with that amount of history to chuck in some flats seems like a real shame and lost opportunity both for them and the town.
It hasn't used for the same purpose for 150 years. The building used to print a newspaper, but hasn't done for 20 years.

It used to house photographers dark rooms and photo archives amongst other facilities. These have been digital for many years. The industry has changed and will continue to change.

Perhaps the accountant isn't chasing a quick profit. Perhaps he is trying to cut costs to allow the business to survive for another 150 years.

If it was about tradition, the Adver would still print a pink football paper, but no one would buy it because they could get instant football results on their mobiles and laptops. At what point should progress stop? Should we have stopped progress in the 80's? Why not the 60's or 20's? The site wasn't a newspaper office for substantially longer than it was (by several million years). How do you define tradition? When did the clock stop ticking and time stand still?
[quote][p][bold]Klinkerhoffen[/bold] wrote: The point is I guess that a building which was used for a particular purpose for 150 years could quite happily go on being used for that same purpose - its called tradition, culture and heritage. If the Adver doesn't need the extra space, and its economically viable to covert some of it for other uses, why aren't they doing it themselves and they could still stay on site? 150 years of something snuffed out because a Newsquest accountant has worked out a way to turn a quick profit is one thing, but to sell off a building with that amount of history to chuck in some flats seems like a real shame and lost opportunity both for them and the town.[/p][/quote]It hasn't used for the same purpose for 150 years. The building used to print a newspaper, but hasn't done for 20 years. It used to house photographers dark rooms and photo archives amongst other facilities. These have been digital for many years. The industry has changed and will continue to change. Perhaps the accountant isn't chasing a quick profit. Perhaps he is trying to cut costs to allow the business to survive for another 150 years. If it was about tradition, the Adver would still print a pink football paper, but no one would buy it because they could get instant football results on their mobiles and laptops. At what point should progress stop? Should we have stopped progress in the 80's? Why not the 60's or 20's? The site wasn't a newspaper office for substantially longer than it was (by several million years). How do you define tradition? When did the clock stop ticking and time stand still? MrAngry
  • Score: -26

1:14pm Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

QUOTE - If you want to see where the obsession with the community and public access leads go down to the MI.

Good point. I am 46 and have lived in Swindon all my life. For most of my life the Mechanics Institute has a been a derelict eyesore. I can't remember it as anything else. It is part of my heritage and culture and should be preserved in a derelict state because I am opposed to change.
QUOTE - If you want to see where the obsession with the community and public access leads go down to the MI. Good point. I am 46 and have lived in Swindon all my life. For most of my life the Mechanics Institute has a been a derelict eyesore. I can't remember it as anything else. It is part of my heritage and culture and should be preserved in a derelict state because I am opposed to change. MrAngry
  • Score: -31

1:23pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Seriously, if the building looks exactly the same from the outside and the public has little or no right to access in any case, what difference does it make what goes on within the walls?

The heritage of the building itself doesn't change just because the Adver has decided to move to more suitable premises.

As it stands now, the public has no real reason to ever use the building. Under the new proposals people will be able to live there and use shops/restaurants there. Surely it's better that the public get to use our most historic buildings rather than just the remaining few Adver journalists and telesales staff?
Seriously, if the building looks exactly the same from the outside and the public has little or no right to access in any case, what difference does it make what goes on within the walls? The heritage of the building itself doesn't change just because the Adver has decided to move to more suitable premises. As it stands now, the public has no real reason to ever use the building. Under the new proposals people will be able to live there and use shops/restaurants there. Surely it's better that the public get to use our most historic buildings rather than just the remaining few Adver journalists and telesales staff? Sandor Clegane
  • Score: -20

2:14pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Oldtownmum says...

I'm not Swindonian born and bred so take little interest in most of the newspaper, I just pop on-line daily for the headlines. I can't imagine who'd physically buy a paper now, when it's already old news by the time it reaches the shops. The only downside to reading online is the comments section which gets commandeered by moaning men with too much time on their hands who seek to bicker with eachother over every single article. It could be amusing if it wasn't so pathetic and childish. My two young sons behave better than the silly old fools on here!
I'm not Swindonian born and bred so take little interest in most of the newspaper, I just pop on-line daily for the headlines. I can't imagine who'd physically buy a paper now, when it's already old news by the time it reaches the shops. The only downside to reading online is the comments section which gets commandeered by moaning men with too much time on their hands who seek to bicker with eachother over every single article. It could be amusing if it wasn't so pathetic and childish. My two young sons behave better than the silly old fools on here! Oldtownmum
  • Score: 45

2:33pm Mon 14 Jul 14

outlaw2 says...

As well as moving to a more appropriate site, isn't it about time the "advert" had a new name - something that represents 21st century Swindon and not a name that implies a paper that specialises in advertisements?
As well as moving to a more appropriate site, isn't it about time the "advert" had a new name - something that represents 21st century Swindon and not a name that implies a paper that specialises in advertisements? outlaw2
  • Score: 3

3:52pm Mon 14 Jul 14

GalaxyMan says...

I have an empty shed in the garden if the Adver bods would like to relocate there. Should more than suit their requirements.
I have an empty shed in the garden if the Adver bods would like to relocate there. Should more than suit their requirements. GalaxyMan
  • Score: 18

5:47pm Mon 14 Jul 14

MrAngry says...

Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down.

Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.
Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down. Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in. MrAngry
  • Score: -4

5:48pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Al Smith says...

Instead of down-voting people you disagree with en-mass (and vice versa) may I suggest that people put forward a coherent argument as to why the site shouldn't be converted into shops or flats.

Out of interest who will pay for the building's "public use" and "community use" future and how?

As for preserving the building in aspic I wonder if that includes the former print works at the back of the building on Albert Street? You know the really ugly buildings. Have a look on google streetview.
Instead of down-voting people you disagree with en-mass (and vice versa) may I suggest that people put forward a coherent argument as to why the site shouldn't be converted into shops or flats. Out of interest who will pay for the building's "public use" and "community use" future and how? As for preserving the building in aspic I wonder if that includes the former print works at the back of the building on Albert Street? You know the really ugly buildings. Have a look on google streetview. Al Smith
  • Score: 1

6:22pm Mon 14 Jul 14

roberto5 says...

This should get snapped up pretty quickly, its prime real estate, in an excellent location. Could be used for anything really. Wonder how much they are asking for it? And is it listed?
This should get snapped up pretty quickly, its prime real estate, in an excellent location. Could be used for anything really. Wonder how much they are asking for it? And is it listed? roberto5
  • Score: -2

7:27pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

MrAngry wrote:
Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down.

Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.
The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment.
The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless.
[quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down. Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.[/p][/quote]The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment. The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 8

8:42pm Mon 14 Jul 14

daws says...

Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too! daws
  • Score: -4

8:54pm Mon 14 Jul 14

roberto5 says...

daws wrote:
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Oh dear
[quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too![/p][/quote]Oh dear roberto5
  • Score: 12

12:48pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
MrAngry wrote:
Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down.

Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.
The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment.
The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless.
What's the point of voting for comments anyway?.....
Score +256 👍
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down. Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.[/p][/quote]The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment. The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless.[/p][/quote]What's the point of voting for comments anyway?..... Score +256 👍 Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: -2

12:58pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

Ollie Dognacky wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
MrAngry wrote:
Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down.

Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.
The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment.
The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless.
What's the point of voting for comments anyway?.....
Score +256 👍
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.
[quote][p][bold]Ollie Dognacky[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: Interesting how all of the comments which had +8 thumbs up at lunch time have suddenly changed to -40 thumbs down. Perhaps all of the anti-progress brigade like a lie in.[/p][/quote]The voting system will only work if people get 1 vote per comment. The way they are abused on a daily basis makes them completely pointless.[/p][/quote]What's the point of voting for comments anyway?..... Score +256 👍[/p][/quote]None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 1

2:15pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Al Smith wrote:
Instead of down-voting people you disagree with en-mass (and vice versa) may I suggest that people put forward a coherent argument as to why the site shouldn't be converted into shops or flats.

Out of interest who will pay for the building's "public use" and "community use" future and how?

As for preserving the building in aspic I wonder if that includes the former print works at the back of the building on Albert Street? You know the really ugly buildings. Have a look on google streetview.
Exactly.

How does having 5 or 6 young journalists in an otherwise empty office really preserve heritage or history? In fact, we often see people moaning that the Adver reporters are too Old Town-centric (due to their physical location).

As it stands, the public get no use out of the building at all. Other than looking at it - and how many people actually do that as they walk or drive past - it could be anything going on in there and nobody would notice.

Much better to have a decent bar, restaurant or combination of the two such that the public can enjoy one of our few remaining historic buildings that isn't falling to pieces.

Take a look at Bath, Oxford, Bristol etc. it's the natural progression of towns and cities to have their historic urban buildings change in usage over time and nobody would claim those cities haven't maximised their heritage far more than Swindon has.

The problem, as I mentioned above, seems to be that some people see the words 'developer' and/or 'flats' and immediately start foaming at the mouth and thinking the world's coming to an end.

I'm actually looking forward to what they do with the commercial space at street level. What they do above that - to the floors that nobody has access to in any case - is completely irrelevant.
[quote][p][bold]Al Smith[/bold] wrote: Instead of down-voting people you disagree with en-mass (and vice versa) may I suggest that people put forward a coherent argument as to why the site shouldn't be converted into shops or flats. Out of interest who will pay for the building's "public use" and "community use" future and how? As for preserving the building in aspic I wonder if that includes the former print works at the back of the building on Albert Street? You know the really ugly buildings. Have a look on google streetview.[/p][/quote]Exactly. How does having 5 or 6 young journalists in an otherwise empty office really preserve heritage or history? In fact, we often see people moaning that the Adver reporters are too Old Town-centric (due to their physical location). As it stands, the public get no use out of the building at all. Other than looking at it - and how many people actually do that as they walk or drive past - it could be anything going on in there and nobody would notice. Much better to have a decent bar, restaurant or combination of the two such that the public can enjoy one of our few remaining historic buildings that isn't falling to pieces. Take a look at Bath, Oxford, Bristol etc. it's the natural progression of towns and cities to have their historic urban buildings change in usage over time and nobody would claim those cities haven't maximised their heritage far more than Swindon has. The problem, as I mentioned above, seems to be that some people see the words 'developer' and/or 'flats' and immediately start foaming at the mouth and thinking the world's coming to an end. I'm actually looking forward to what they do with the commercial space at street level. What they do above that - to the floors that nobody has access to in any case - is completely irrelevant. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 15

7:40pm Tue 15 Jul 14

messyits says...

Perhaps you should do a little research on other cities properties and how they have changed--and major buildings in disrepair in them.
Your last 2 comments appear to support being given a place on the planning committee.
Perhaps you should do a little research on other cities properties and how they have changed--and major buildings in disrepair in them. Your last 2 comments appear to support being given a place on the planning committee. messyits
  • Score: -5

7:52am Wed 16 Jul 14

messyits says...

Davey Gravey says
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.

Yes--a childish game that amuses some.

The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.
Davey Gravey says None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Yes--a childish game that amuses some. The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear. messyits
  • Score: -5

12:52pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

It is a beautiful building that is a focal point of Old town but the reality is all the people that work there could fit into a single floor of the building.
Journalists could and probably will work remotely as surely the stories are not in the office.
I know the business will go from strength to strength sad to see allot of bitterness on here from people I can only presume have had negative stories written about them......I can only say if you had carried out something negative it would not of been reported.
Good luck Advertiser people all the best in your new home.
It is a beautiful building that is a focal point of Old town but the reality is all the people that work there could fit into a single floor of the building. Journalists could and probably will work remotely as surely the stories are not in the office. I know the business will go from strength to strength sad to see allot of bitterness on here from people I can only presume have had negative stories written about them......I can only say if you had carried out something negative it would not of been reported. Good luck Advertiser people all the best in your new home. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -2

1:02pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

messyits wrote:
Davey Gravey says
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.

Yes--a childish game that amuses some.

The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.
No surprises who?
[quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: Davey Gravey says None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Yes--a childish game that amuses some. The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.[/p][/quote]No surprises who? Davey Gravey
  • Score: -2

1:24pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
messyits wrote:
Davey Gravey says
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.

Yes--a childish game that amuses some.

The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.
No surprises who?
Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern.
Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: Davey Gravey says None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Yes--a childish game that amuses some. The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.[/p][/quote]No surprises who?[/p][/quote]Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern. Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -2

1:46pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Davey Gravey says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
messyits wrote:
Davey Gravey says
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.

Yes--a childish game that amuses some.

The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.
No surprises who?
Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern.
Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events.
They must be that stupid as they manipulate them. They even do it when everyone knows what they are doing which makes them even more stupid.
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: Davey Gravey says None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Yes--a childish game that amuses some. The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.[/p][/quote]No surprises who?[/p][/quote]Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern. Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events.[/p][/quote]They must be that stupid as they manipulate them. They even do it when everyone knows what they are doing which makes them even more stupid. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -2

2:11pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
Davey Gravey wrote:
messyits wrote:
Davey Gravey says
None really, they're a waste of time.
I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article.
Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away.

Yes--a childish game that amuses some.

The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.
No surprises who?
Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern.
Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events.
They must be that stupid as they manipulate them. They even do it when everyone knows what they are doing which makes them even more stupid.
I dont understand.
IF people are swayed by this we have a far bigger problem.
I suspect those doing the fiddling are the ones with issues that really need to be challenged.
Someone that has a position of responsibility in say a local council that acts in this petty manor should have a full health check both physical and mental health. Believing that they can influence the opinion of people through an online annon forum could just be the tip of an iceberg of health issues, issues that cannot be part of anyone with responsibility.

Showing a complete lack of professionalism and a frightening lack of human qualities these are not the things that should be deciding for people and should not be making decisions that will effect the town for years to come.
Complete lack of transparency within the council allows these "people" to hide.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: Davey Gravey says None really, they're a waste of time. I'd go further and limit people to 1 comment per article. Would wipe out tit for tat rows straight away. Yes--a childish game that amuses some. The tit for tat rows can ultimately expose a troll with ulterior motives of political advantage--easily proved by checking in this case a claimed councillors declarations and committees on--plus personal profile as an IT bod--fits just one person of many names--job done--the law is clear.[/p][/quote]No surprises who?[/p][/quote]Surely if a persons political allegiance can be swayed by the number of thumbs up or not is a bigger concern. Are people really that stupid that thumbs on what is a small enough community would make any difference to wider events.[/p][/quote]They must be that stupid as they manipulate them. They even do it when everyone knows what they are doing which makes them even more stupid.[/p][/quote]I dont understand. IF people are swayed by this we have a far bigger problem. I suspect those doing the fiddling are the ones with issues that really need to be challenged. Someone that has a position of responsibility in say a local council that acts in this petty manor should have a full health check both physical and mental health. Believing that they can influence the opinion of people through an online annon forum could just be the tip of an iceberg of health issues, issues that cannot be part of anyone with responsibility. Showing a complete lack of professionalism and a frightening lack of human qualities these are not the things that should be deciding for people and should not be making decisions that will effect the town for years to come. Complete lack of transparency within the council allows these "people" to hide. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -3

5:27pm Wed 16 Jul 14

daws says...

roberto5 wrote:
daws wrote:
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Oh dear
Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown
[quote][p][bold]roberto5[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too![/p][/quote]Oh dear[/p][/quote]Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown daws
  • Score: 0

7:31pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

daws wrote:
roberto5 wrote:
daws wrote:
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Oh dear
Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown
I do hope not.
If I want that experience I go into town.
[quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roberto5[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too![/p][/quote]Oh dear[/p][/quote]Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown[/p][/quote]I do hope not. If I want that experience I go into town. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

7:32am Sat 19 Jul 14

M4 Bypass says...

My vote goes for ground floor to be retail if possible, with flats on the upper floors. I too am fed up seeing the old buildings being left derelict they are an eye sore, the owners should be given a year to start to renovate (with a reasonable end date) or quickly demolished them. Leave the memories of vibrant buildings to those who perhaps are no longer with us. I have been in Swindon 30 years and my memories of the buildings, are reflecting a rotting Swindon let's move on and smarten the town up.
My vote goes for ground floor to be retail if possible, with flats on the upper floors. I too am fed up seeing the old buildings being left derelict they are an eye sore, the owners should be given a year to start to renovate (with a reasonable end date) or quickly demolished them. Leave the memories of vibrant buildings to those who perhaps are no longer with us. I have been in Swindon 30 years and my memories of the buildings, are reflecting a rotting Swindon let's move on and smarten the town up. M4 Bypass
  • Score: 1

4:24pm Sat 19 Jul 14

daws says...

Badgersgetabadname wrote:
daws wrote:
roberto5 wrote:
daws wrote:
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Oh dear
Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown
I do hope not.
If I want that experience I go into town.
Some of their recent acquisitions have been monumental in design and finish, they would do the same here too, believe me!
[quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roberto5[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too![/p][/quote]Oh dear[/p][/quote]Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown[/p][/quote]I do hope not. If I want that experience I go into town.[/p][/quote]Some of their recent acquisitions have been monumental in design and finish, they would do the same here too, believe me! daws
  • Score: 0

10:26am Sun 20 Jul 14

Badgersgetabadname says...

daws wrote:
Badgersgetabadname wrote:
daws wrote:
roberto5 wrote:
daws wrote:
Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too!
Oh dear
Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown
I do hope not.
If I want that experience I go into town.
Some of their recent acquisitions have been monumental in design and finish, they would do the same here too, believe me!
No doubt they look nice Weatherspoons do retro fit buildings really well I find Old town pubs (well the ones I like) to be more intimate than what I would associate with the larger super pubs in town.
It may be just me but big pubs with loads of people drinking just isnt my thing, I dont mind going in for a pint or two if I am in town but no more.
[quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgersgetabadname[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]roberto5[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daws[/bold] wrote: Weatherspoons could turn it into a cracking bar, would make a good job of It too![/p][/quote]Oh dear[/p][/quote]Heard on the vine they ve set the wheels in motion, at last there could be a real decent bar in oldtown[/p][/quote]I do hope not. If I want that experience I go into town.[/p][/quote]Some of their recent acquisitions have been monumental in design and finish, they would do the same here too, believe me![/p][/quote]No doubt they look nice Weatherspoons do retro fit buildings really well I find Old town pubs (well the ones I like) to be more intimate than what I would associate with the larger super pubs in town. It may be just me but big pubs with loads of people drinking just isnt my thing, I dont mind going in for a pint or two if I am in town but no more. Badgersgetabadname
  • Score: -1

4:11pm Mon 21 Jul 14

The Jockster says...

Derby Road recycling centre?
Derby Road recycling centre? The Jockster
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree