Happy birthday Early. Go crazy mate! :)

I win. Why? Because I'm from Manchester.

Nope. Keep trying! :D

But Manchester's largest arena is larger than the largest arenas in Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool combined. ;)

So? Kylie is an inferior act. Truly great performers need much larger stages than basketball arenas. Michael Jackson played 200,000 at Aintree, Oasis 250,000 Knebworth, REM 350,000 in Rio. To show the greatness of our city, we have the greatest performers in the world shoved in a circus tent on a derelict windswept dock. The prissy ones get stuck in the pissy Royal Court (Oasis 3 years ago, REM, Green tour).

http://www.**************************/popsseacombe.jpg

Now that we have proven our superiority and overtaken the Mancs, can we please dispense with this Earlycunt thread!? :laugh:

It is designed to keep the other threads Earlybird free. Like mothballs in a wardrobe keep clothes moth free. :)

Fair enough. Hopefully it will keep it contained. :crazy2:

So? Kylie is an inferior act. Truly great performers need much larger stages than basketball arenas. Michael Jackson played 200,000 at Aintree, Oasis 250,000 Knebworth, REM 350,000 in Rio. To show the greatness of our city, we have the greatest performers in the world shoved in a circus tent on a derelict windswept dock. The prissy ones get stuck in the pissy Royal Court (Oasis 3 years ago, REM, Green tour).

The MEN Arena is the world's most active concert venue. :) REM and Oasis have both played there. They've also both played at the City of Manchester stadium. Michael Jackson has played in the city too, though never at the two venues I mentioned, mainly because he turned into a freak paedo before they were built.

xxx

Most tourism attractions in the UK get a large majority of domestic visitors. The Old Trafford tour is one of the few exceptions due to the fact that most United fans have already visited it.

It's not even in the top 20 any more. Lowry and Imperial War Museum North are both in the top 10 now they're actually open.

I'm afraid it was taken from last year's United press releases from their AGM. Feel free to go through them but there are over 600 pages so I'm not doing so.



Ahh, so we have to take your word for it.



I've not seen a single official source defining the Mersey ferries as a tourist attraction.



Here (http://www.staruk.org.uk//default.asp?ID=715&parentid=469)

Major Paid Admission Attractions in the North West 2003

Attraction Visits
Windermere Lake Cruises 1,337,879
Chester Zoo 1,160,234
Mersey Ferries 714,000
Tatton Park 700,000
Blackpool Tower 575,000
Knowsley Safari Park 452,971
Camelot Theme Park 395,000
Blackpool Zoo Park 295,000E
Tullie House Museum & Art Gallery 254,958
Manchester United Museum 230,677

This is the United Kingdom Tourist Survey, the source of data used by the tourist boads and the ONS (http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Product.asp?vlnk=3866). As its homepage (star.uk.org.uk) has it:

LOOKING FOR STATISTICS AND RESEARCH ON TOURISM? START WITH STAR UK

Welcome to www.staruk.org.uk, the official website of the UK Research Liaison Group. The group is made up of representatives of the national tourist boards for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Britain and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.




As I said above, it was taken from a Man Utd press release. I read it because I had shares, but I'm not going through all the hundreds of pages from the AGM to find it.

Ahh so, we'll have to take your word for it then. Again.


The statistic about overseas tourism is an ONS statistics, not a UKTS one. This is the ONS definition of what an overnight stay is and can be found in the documentation they provide to explain every single set of data on their site.


But the ONS use the UKTS figures as I've demonstrated ((http://www.statistics.gov.uk/STATBASE/Product.asp?vlnk=3866). If you have ONS non-UKTS figures, please post them and post a link to the methodolody you so contentiously claim are being used in these ONS, but not UKTS figures that we haven't seen.


Business visitors are officially tourists. It's a fact.


Because their in the UKTS figures? In which case the Mersey Ferries are officially a tourist attraction.

Or if the UKTS not official, as you think that ONS use different statistics to the UKTS figure they demonstrably do use, you will be able to provide us to a link to these ONS (but not UKTS) stats.


Yes, it does show the weakness of using tourist numbers rather than visitor numbers. That's why I prefer to use the 88 million visitors figure for Manchester in 2004.

Source Birdie? The UKTS has 16 million total number of visitors to the entire northwest (including business visitors) http://www.staruk.org.uk//default.asp?ID=715&parentid=469.

You have 88 million visiting Manchester alone. Something's gone horribly wrong for sure.

Ah but Blabbernsmoke, overtaking us only proves your spamming ability NOT quality of discussion!

We couldn'tve done it without Burlyturd. :)

The MEN Arena is the world's most active concert venue. :) REM and Oasis have both played there. They've also both played at the City of Manchester stadium. Michael Jackson has played in the city too, though never at the two venues I mentioned, mainly because he turned into a freak paedo before they were built.Will it still be as busy when Kong's Dick is erected, providing stiff competition. :lol:

The best thing to come out of Manchester.......!







The East Lancs Road into Liverpool. :)

Ah but Blabbernsmoke, overtaking us only proves your spamming ability NOT quality of discussion!

We overtook with a great deal of help from you lot mainly on the LJLA thread.
Bit ironic really being helped to overtake the mancs forum by mancs on the LJLA thread, seeing as scousers help to inflate the passenger figures at Manc airport. :cheers:

The MEN Arena is the world's most active concert venue. :) REM and Oasis have both played there. They've also both played at the City of Manchester stadium. Michael Jackson has played in the city too, though never at the two venues I mentioned, mainly because he turned into a freak paedo before they were built.

Thats funny because the NEC is the busiest events host in Europe ... umm, is Earlybird lying again? :dunno:

Ah but Blabbernsmoke, overtaking us only proves your spamming ability NOT quality of discussion!

Well, both are subjective. But at the end of the day, when you look at that UK forums board- we are now the best- we have demonstrated that we are better than you and it stings you. We have overcome the Mancs in productive force and may this be a microcosm of things to come!

Visited Liverpool last week ...what a shithole at the moment with all the road works in the city centre .May go back in 2008 when everything should be ship shape.Manchester has a much nicer city centre at the moment even with all the developments going on.St georges hall is a bit overrated ..it looks a bit like bolton town hall in the flesh.... but without the clock tower.Royal exchange in manchester is more impressive and it is right in the middle of the beautiful st annes shopping square.Oh I am not a Manc just a neutral who knows a good city when he sees one. Althuogh I should be biased towards Liverpool as it is my nearest big city

Nope, you're from Wigan, woolyback nation. So you are naturally going to be biased towards Manchester.

Visited Liverpool last week ...what a shithole at the moment with all the road works in the city centre

Did you walk up to the cathedrals? After a stressful journey, the light and serenity and colour of the Metropolitan Cathedral is magical. It is just ten minutes from Lime Street. Minutes later you can be awed by the echoes and shadows of the Anglican cathedral, and walk around pristine Georgian streets. And yet you call it a shit-hole. You don't deserve to visit Liverpool, you really don't.

Earlybird - your edgy avatar and Inglewood slant really is the bomb.

He entitled to his opinion Gareth, although it does appear to be a very biassed one. I would say ignorance has more to do with it than anything else. Isn't Oscar not originally from Wigan but has ended up there?

Liverpool's has things that Manchester will never have - monumental cathedrals, street after street of some of the finest Georgian housing in the UK (of which central manchester has precisely none), a far greater wealth of historical architecture in its city centre, the sea, and so on.

Until fairly recently, travel guides and gazeteers would recommend Liverpool as a place to visit far more so than Manchester. It's only been since the 90s that Manchester has been discovered as a place to visit and its shopping, leisure and conference facilities have been such that significant visitors have been drawn to the place at all.

However, Manchester has had greater development in the last ten years and has been spruced up in a way that Liverpool has not been - yet, although it will be.

This alone can be enough for those of a snobbish mindset (and I'd have Oscar for an exiled southerner myself, were I to guess) to latch on to something simple and gratifyingly sneering to the mind of a snob, although uncultured and ignorant as "well, yeah oi used to fink that evrywere up norf was shit, bat maybe Manchester's alright but Liverpool's a shithole". I'd heard the like from ignorant wankers from down south who have got jobs in Manchester, usually before they start on Harry Enfield impressions and talking about crime (whilst unbeknown to them they live in the UK's crime capital whilst Liverpool is one of the safest big cities in the UK).

It'll take a while before uncultured snobs start sucking up to Liverpool perhaps, but when they do, they'll be slagging off other places to try to make them feel better about their lives instead.

I don't mean to pick a fight, but I find it incredibly rich that Liverpolitan is ready to slag Manchester off as a depressing and ugly city, regardless of it's resident's opinions (ie us on the manc forum) yet Oscar makes (an admittedly stupid) post and swish, Liverpolitan marches on a "you don't deserve to visit Liverpool" mantra. Sort your face out, how's it alright for you to slag off Mancs and our city (and thus ignoring the majority of points that were put to you) yet it's totally cool for you to be a prime spastic when the shoe's on the other foot?

Wigan is one of those places from where - within 20 years - we need a majority of people to regard Liverpool City Centre as THE destination for shopping, culture, urban leisure. I honestly believe that will happen, and that within 30 years they will be asking to move from Manchester City Region to join Liverpool City Region. That will really upset EB's "Manchester Population - 16 billion; Liverpool Population - 232" mind-set, as that borough is home to a few hundred thousand people.

I don't mean to pick a fight, but I find it incredibly rich that Liverpolitan is ready to slag Manchester off as a depressing and ugly city, regardless of it's resident's opinions (ie us on the manc forum) yet Oscar makes (an admittedly stupid) post and swish, Liverpolitan marches on a "you don't deserve to visit Liverpool" mantra. Sort your face out, how's it alright for you to slag off Mancs and our city (and thus ignoring the majority of points that were put to you) yet it's totally cool for you to be a prime spastic when the shoe's on the other foot?

When you are sober you will remember I never slagged the city at all - I slagged one particular and dreadful public place in it (which many locals agreed was a complete disgrace and a disaster of regeneration), and the mind-set of a city elite who spend regeneration monies intended for poor areas on opera rather than helping people living in real shit-holes with very little hope. I am a big fan of Manchester, and its city centre, and posted lots of nice pics of it, and of Salford too. And it was me - alone - who offered a positive way forward for the metrolink. Still, if you want to imagine enemies where they dont exist, be my guest.

I have never posted a single pic of Manchester here that I don't think is nice, and that shows what I admired and appreciated about it.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v634/qwerty1234520012000/P2020034.jpg

Wigan is one of those places from where - within 20 years - we need a majority of people to regard Liverpool City Centre as THE destination for shopping, culture, urban leisure. I honestly believe that will happen, and that within 30 years they will be asking to move from Manchester City Region to join Liverpool City Region. That will really upset EB's "Manchester Population - 16 billion; Liverpool Population - 232" mind-set, as that borough is home to a few hundred thousand people.

But Wigan's wool at the end of the day and I think unless mass scouse migration occurs, Skelmersdale style, it always will.

Gareth, a city region needs to be more than the core city: Chester, Warrington and Southport will never be suburbs of Liverpool the way Barking is of London or Bootle is of Liverpool or Stockport is of Manchester. A new urban identity needs to be recognised and valued, one that centres on Liverpool but also incorporates other urban and city-region experiences and perspectives. That already exists I think with places like St Helens and Ellesmere Port and Runcorn. It needs to spread to other places, but its only once the city centre recovers its previous position (basically that it enjoyed until the 1960s) that it will be realistic. It will take place naturally I believe, it wont need to be "manufactured" in the way the Mancs are trying to make their 3.2 million "City Region" so as to be bigger than everywhere else.

Wiganers are Wiganers really (and there's nowt wrong with that) and not Mancs. They've got far more in common with their rugby rivals St Helens really.

From speaking to folk from that part of the world, my impressions are that they weren't naturally biassed to look up to either large city. Their incorporation into Greater Manchester and Manchester's earlier renaissance is such that they may feel themselves to be a satellite of Manc in a way they wouldn't have historically.

Neverthless, a successful Liverpool and Manchester would give the the enviable situation of two great cities to choose from on their doorsteps. No Liverpool annexation of their loyalties as Poli suggests is necessary.

Oh I'm sorry, I distinctly remember you saying you found Manchester to be boring and drab as well as depressing. Yes, you made a sizeable rant about Piccadilly, big whoop. Don't be such a spineless bastard. Are you also going to deny the slagging off of Manchester's working class? Because that'd suit your argument prefectly.

At the end of the day, I don't actually give a shit but I'm not letting you get away with being a hypocritical little fuckwit. And sober up? My my, what a presumptuous and pompous little shit you are.

Sorry to the other scousers for this, however I find Liverpolitan to be quite a disgusting being. So bring it on fat boy.

Anyway, sod you and your bougeois way of life, I'm going to muck out with some tramps who're pissed on White Lightning and dancing outside my house. They may be homeless and smell, but I'm guarenteed to have more fun chatting with them than Liverpolitan.

Oh I'm sorry, I distinctly remember you saying you found Manchester to be boring and drab as well as depressing. Yes, you made a sizeable rant about Piccadilly, big whoop. Don't be such a spineless bastard. Are you also going to deny the slagging off of Manchester's working class? Because that'd suit your argument prefectly.

At the end of the day, I don't actually give a shit but I'm not letting you get away with being a hypocritical little fuckwit. And sober up? My my, what a presumptuous and pompous little shit you are.

Sorry to the other scousers for this, however I find Liverpolitan to be quite a disgusting being. So bring it on fat boy.

You have issues, that is true. But they are not my issues, nor those of anyone except yourself.

It is the neglect of poor Mancunians by a city council that is obsessed with glitz and glamour that I objected to, but you refuse to accept such a criticism. That is your right.

Here is another nice pic from one of our Great Northern Cities - a city I believe to be almost as beautiful and as special as Liverpool in its own way (it's a pity a few people in Manchester imagine it's TWICE as beautiful and TWICE as special as anywhere else):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v634/qwerty1234520012000/P2010003.jpg

Anyway, sod you and your bougeois way of life, I'm going to muck out with some tramps who're pissed on White Lightning and dancing outside my house. They may be homeless and smell, but I'm guarenteed to have more fun chatting with them than Liverpolitan.

Have fun. And don't imagine you know a person because you typed a few words to them, and read a few words they typed.

What a day it's been. Everyone just loves everyone else on SSC these days.

Hello!

You whinged about the unkempt locals littering Piccadilly Gardens. Saying they should be moved off the streets out of the city centre because it made your visit that little more depressing for you.

And I don't claim to know you. I go fof what you give me on here. I don't pretend to know fuck all about you, but what I do base my opinion on is what you type in the public realm, similar to just having a real life conversation. So if you'd have said what you said about Mancs in the presence of somebody, you'd have no doubt been sent back to Liverpool with a rather strange, fist shaped dent to your face. But like I say, I go with what you give on here. Can't really blame me for thinking you're a horrible person now can you?

Bye!

Hello!

You whinged about the unkempt locals littering Piccadilly Gardens. Saying they should be moved off the streets out of the city centre because it made your visit that little more depressing for you.

And I don't claim to know you. I go fof what you give me on here. I don't pretend to know fuck all about you, but what I do base my opinion on is what you type in the public realm, similar to just having a real life conversation. So if you'd have said what you said about Mancs in the presence of somebody, you'd have no doubt been sent back to Liverpool with a rather strange, fist shaped dent to your face. But like I say, I go with what you give on here. Can't really blame me for thinking you're a horrible person now can you?

Bye!

If you read those posts again, you will see that I am saying something else. I complain in it that I have never seen so many poor people in a British city centre, within the context of a critique of a regeneration policy that is obsessed with the city centre and trying to be glitzy and "capital city" of the North. I then go on to explain that there are TOO MANY POOR PEOPLE IN MANCHESTER altogether, not just in the city centre, and that the city council are wrong to concentrate on city centre glitz rather than tackling poverty. You have read into this things you may yourself believe, I don't know, but I sense a bit of projection and self-loathing going on with you.

Manchester does have too many poor people in it. It's a simple fact. They should not be poor. They should be prosperous. I don't think the policies that the City Council there are obsessed with are the best way to tackle generations of worklessness and hopelessness in people living away from the city centre. You know, Manchester has enjoyed fantastic economic growth in the past 20 years, and yet it contains some of the poorest neighbourhoods in the whole country. Whole sections of the population are cut adrift. And you call me a snob for pointing this out?

But Manchester's largest arena is larger than the largest arenas in Birmingham, Leeds and Liverpool combined. ;)

But not as large as the Air Canada Centre or the CNE Coloseum or the yet to be converted Maple Leaf Gardens.

Alright, let's try this from another angle.

You waded in, made your comments and *everybody* had the immediate inkling that you were nowt but a little twat doing some classic city bashing. You had a whole forum of Mancs against you. Now it may've changed since then and fair enough, it has, but do you not see that people were fucked off for a reason? Whether you've changed your mind or whether you meant what you said in the post above this isn't up for discussion (seeing as we now know), but I think you'll find that regardless of what you may say now, you came on there, tits out and being a proper bastard.

Now, like I say, if your viewpoint is different now, cool. If you wanted to call them scum, alright, wrong, but at least you're sticking to your guns. But at the end of the day, that first post you made was quite sickening. People were riled for a reason and it's certainly not some "self loathing" bollocks that any muppet who can spell "psychology" would think. Well done there.

You posted shit about Manc and Mancs. You may've worded the post incredibly badly, but the fact of the matter is that post had serious overtones of silver spoon-ness. And if it's all dandy with you, I'll stick with that opinion because little you've posted since has given me reason to change my mind.

Alright, let's try this from another angle.

You waded in, made your comments and *everybody* had the immediate inkling that you were nowt but a little twat doing some classic city bashing. You had a whole forum of Mancs against you. Now it may've changed since then and fair enough, it has, but do you not see that people were fucked off for a reason? Whether you've changed your mind or whether you meant what you said in the post above this isn't up for discussion (seeing as we now know), but I think you'll find that regardless of what you may say now, you came on there, tits out and being a proper bastard.

Now, like I say, if your viewpoint is different now, cool. If you wanted to call them scum, alright, wrong, but at least you're sticking to your guns. But at the end of the day, that first post you made was quite sickening. People were riled for a reason and it's certainly not some "self loathing" bollocks that any muppet who can spell "psychology" would think. Well done there.

You posted shit about Manc and Mancs. You may've worded the post incredibly badly, but the fact of the matter is that post had serious overtones of silver spoon-ness. And if it's all dandy with you, I'll stick with that opinion because little you've posted since has given me reason to change my mind.

I think you just need an enemy, and want me to be that person, because if I can represent wickedness in the world, it means the world is not that bad after all. You don't like to imagine the real and hidden cynics and snobs and thieves and liars who run large parts of your (and mine, and every) city and social system and who say perfectly agreeable and completely dishonest things every time they open their mouths. You fabricate demons out of people responsible for what you consider to be poorly drafted posts on a Forum about skyscrapers and urban policy/ initiatives, while millions die of hunger, there are hundreds of thousands of murderers at large on this earth, smiling and laughing in the sun each day, and TB is on the rise in our inner cities.

But not as large as the Air Canada Centre or the CNE Coloseum or the yet to be converted Maple Leaf Gardens.
MEN Arena - 21,500
G-Mex - 19,000
Bolton Arena - 8,000
SportCity Arena (construction soon) - 6,500

Air Canada Center - 19,800
Maple Leaf Gardens - 18,000
CNE Coliseum - 11,000

As you can see, once again your facts are wrong. Not bad considering Manchester is a lot smaller than Toronto is it. Want to compare stadia in the cities too? :)

Thats funny because the NEC is the busiest events host in Europe ... umm, is Earlybird lying again? :dunno:

The MEN was the world's busiest in 2003 and 2004, beating Madison Square Garden into second place both years. MEN alone accounts for more than Birmingham's two arenas combined, before you include Manchester's other ones. :)

The MEN was the world's busiest in 2003 and 2004, beating Madison Square Garden into second place both years. MEN alone accounts for more than Birmingham's two arenas combined, before you include Manchester's other ones. :)

Thank you very much for that, now go to bed. :goodnight

Thank you very much for that, now go to bed. :goodnight
If you took all the people from the Birkenhead urban area you could fit them all inside Manchester's stadia and arenas with seats to spare. :)

Air Canada Center - 19,800


That's only for Hockey, a "Full House" (boxing, etc.) is 21,000. Maple Leaf Gardens held 17,000, 18,800 for concerts and 20,000 for boxing. The CNE Coloseum and Varsity Arena held, between them, 23,000. Now not counting local arenas like the Mel Lastman, Hershey, Etobicoke, Scarborough, Brampton, North York, Vaughan, Woodbridge and Rexdale arenas, all with at least 5,000 + capacity, there is also hundreds of small minor hockey facilties holding 2,000 or less, within the GTA. Maple Leaf Gardens holds the distinction and, record, of being the only sports venue to have sold every seat for every Leafs hockey game ever played there. Toronto Rogers Centre (SkyDome), with a fully retractable roof, holds 50,600 for baseball and 53,000 for football and I understand that the record crowd is 62,000 for a Paul McCartney ( a Scouser I believe) concert. Toronto also has the CNE Stadium, Varsity Stadium and the Allen Lamport soccer stadium the Woodbine Thoroughbred Race Track with a harness racing track and the city also hosts a Indy event annually. The Toronto Marathon attracts 10,000. + participants a International film festival, international tennis masters event. The city is home to 4 "Major League franchises; the Maple Leafs of the NHL, Blue Jays Baseball of the American League; Raptors of the NBA and Argonauts of the CFL. The Canadian Golf Open Championship is played at Glen Abbey, Oakville a bedroom community of Toronto. There are more than 60 public golf courses in the GTA. Our bid to host the Olympic games was a realistic one and we were shortlisted and lost in the finals. We have an extensive transit system with subway, LRT, streetcar (Red Rocket), bus and ferry, all run by the municipality and all clean and safe. We have a "Stoop & Scoop" law with fines of $1000.00 that is enforced, hence the reason for no dog shit on our sidewalks. An extensive waterfront with public access to beaches and other facilities. Our city is second only to New York in theatres and theatre productions. Roy Thomson Hall, home of the TorontoSymphony Orchestra (TSO) is acclaimed at being among the top five concert venues world wide and the ultra-modern buildings profile is a tourist attraction in it's own right. Toronto has the second tallest building in the Commonwealth with only the Petronas Towers in KL being taller. And I played 18 holes today at Conestoga Country Club and shot a 88 and the temperature was also 88F degrees (31c). And yet, although our skyline is as distictive and recognizable as that of Liverpools and more dramatic, with taller buildings, than that of Montreal and we, like Mancunians, are always blowing our own horn, we are still aspiring to be world class but, if we have yet to attain that status and eclipse Montreal, just how long do you think it will take Manchester to attain world class status and eclipse Liverpool? :)

Wigan is one of those places from where - within 20 years - we need a majority of people to regard Liverpool City Centre as THE destination for shopping, culture, urban leisure. I honestly believe that will happen, and that within 30 years they will be asking to move from Manchester City Region to join Liverpool City Region. That will really upset EB's "Manchester Population - 16 billion; Liverpool Population - 232" mind-set, as that borough is home to a few hundred thousand people.

:hahaha: :hahaha:

Liverpolitan, you say I dont deserve to visit Liverpool ..why not ..I didnt say I hated the place and I hope it does well out of this capital of culture.I seem to remember you were far more savage of Manchester. What I am saying is I think the place is a bit of a mess at the moment.There are many roadworks and stuff in preperation for 2008 and there are still many shabby buildings around the city centre.I just think Manchester is a better city centre ATM. Look, these are skyscraper forums which is why I read them and Manchester is where it is happening thats why visiting Manchester is exciting seeing beetham rise and cjc etc. I know you are getting beetham west which is great but this world heritage crap for the waterfront isnt going to do you any favours...unless you dont like huge skyscrapers, but I hope I am proved wrong. There is a rendering of beetham manc. placed on the waterfront in liverpool (cant remember where!) and quite a few liverpool forumers ridicouled it ..why ..to me it proved how good the liverpool waterfront could look with some real tall scrapers like that...a few like that and you could have a mini manhattan and fuck to the liverbuildings.. just look at shangia. Oh and liverpolitan I have been in the anglican cathedral a few times 3 or 4 perhaps it is breathtaking inside I love it. I just think some other builings are overrated like st georges hall ...I think royal exchange in Manchester can rival this. I do hope this word heritage status doesnt put the brakes on skysraper plans for liverpool it would be a great shame....Still prefer manchester :)

BAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Typical thats what puts people off liverpool....what a shame

Oh no! If BAAAAAAAAAAAAH puts people off Liverpool, we're all fucked! :puke:

[QUOTE=Bunnyman]Happy birthday Early. Go crazy mate! :)[/QUMANCUNIANS BEWARE!!! ....this thread by bunnylad is just a scouse conspiracy to boost up their post-count!!! AND I might add, as usual it has more than a larcenous hint about it, as it involves the 'misapropriation' (cough) of what should be Manc posts. :)

Besides, it looks like EB can hold his own against the 'world'.....easy..... :)

Oh no! If BAAAAAAAAAAAAH puts people off Liverpool, we're all fucked! :puke:
Yes! plus a host of other things. Right I am off out now with some mates for a drink and to enjoy the lovely eveving sunshine instead of arguing with scousers on a geeky forum. Think we will have a ride into Manc.

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/lol/spamato/spam-c07.jpg

Liverpool City of Spam 2005:wink2:

Yeah, Liverpool is so crap!

The Liverpool forum deserves the spam award. So many threads go off topic with useless skybar type chat and cheesy jokes!

where's me hanky!

That's only for Hockey, a "Full House" (boxing, etc.) is 21,000. Maple Leaf Gardens held 17,000, 18,800 for concerts and 20,000 for boxing. The CNE Coloseum and Varsity Arena held, between them, 23,000. Now not counting local arenas like the Mel Lastman, Hershey, Etobicoke, Scarborough, Brampton, North York, Vaughan, Woodbridge and Rexdale arenas, all with at least 5,000 + capacity, there is also hundreds of small minor hockey facilties holding 2,000 or less, within the GTA.
Sloyne, you don't know what you're talking about. I used the concert capacity for all the arenas in my post. The MEN is larger than any arena in Toronto, completely contrary to your original claim that all of Torontos were larger than the MEN! I didn't include any arenas below 5,000 capacity.

Maple Leaf Gardens holds the distinction and, record, of being the only sports venue to have sold every seat for every Leafs hockey game ever played there.
The MEN is the busiest arena in the world. :)

Toronto Rogers Centre (SkyDome), with a fully retractable roof, holds 50,600 for baseball and 53,000 for football and I understand that the record crowd is 62,000 for a Paul McCartney ( a Scouser I believe) concert. Toronto also has the CNE Stadium, Varsity Stadium and the Allen Lamport soccer stadium the Woodbine Thoroughbred Race Track with a harness racing track and the city also hosts a Indy event annually.
Old Trafford - 75,000
City of Manchester Stadium - 48,000
We also have the Reebok Stadium, JJB Stadium, Edgeley Park, Boundary Park, Spotland and Old Trafford cricket ground at 20,000+. Salford Reds are also building a new stadium soon and Peel Holdings are building a horse race track too near the Trafford Centre.

The Toronto Marathon attracts 10,000.
The Great Manchester Run attracts around 30,000. :)
+ participants a International film festival, international tennis
We have a film festival, an Irish festival, a Pride festival, three beer festivals, a poetry festival, a comedy festival and others, including the first Manchester festival next year. We don't have tennis though.

The city is home to 4 "Major League franchises; the Maple Leafs of the NHL, Blue Jays Baseball of the American League; Raptors of the NBA and Argonauts of the CFL.
Manchester is home to 4 Premiership teams, three other professional football teams, two rugby teams, a basketball team and an ice hockey team.

The Canadian Golf Open Championship is played at Glen Abbey, Oakville a bedroom community of Toronto. There are more than 60 public golf courses in the GTA. Our bid to host the Olympic games was a realistic one and we were shortlisted and lost in the finals.
We were also shortlisted for the Olympics but lost out to a strong bid from Sydney. We had as good a chance of winning as Toronto.

We have an extensive transit system with subway, LRT, streetcar (Red Rocket), bus and ferry, all run by the municipality and all clean and safe.
Toronto's transit is no better than Manchester's, which has 140 rail stops and, post Big Bang, around 140 metrolink stops too, as well as a huge bus network.

We have a "Stoop & Scoop" law with fines of $1000.00 that is enforced, hence the reason for no dog shit on our sidewalks.
We have that too. at 500 pounds if I remember rightly.

An extensive waterfront with public access to beaches and other facilities.
You're obviously going to win on this one, seeing as Manchester is inland, but I think our dockland area is pretty good for an inland city.

Our city is second only to New York in theatres and theatre productions.
In North America maybe. In the UK Manchester is second only to London for theatres, though I think Leeds has a more active production scene.

Roy Thomson Hall, home of the TorontoSymphony Orchestra (TSO) is acclaimed at being among the top five concert venues world wide and the ultra-modern buildings profile is a tourist attraction in it's own right.
Bridgewater Hall is also acclaimed as one of the top concert venues worldwide (for orchestral works) and has also won numerous architectural awards.

Toronto has the second tallest building in the Commonwealth with only the Petronas Towers in KL being taller. And I played 18 holes today at Conestoga Country Club and shot a 88 and the temperature was also 88F degrees (31c). And yet, although our skyline is as distictive and recognizable as that of Liverpools and more dramatic, with taller buildings, than that of Montreal
Skyline and temperature are things Manchester doesn't have a hope in hell of competing on right now, I'll grant you.

and we, like Mancunians, are always blowing our own horn, we are still aspiring to be world class but, if we have yet to attain that status and eclipse Montreal, just how long do you think it will take Manchester to attain world class status and eclipse Liverpool? :)
As far as I'm concerned Toronto eclipsed Montreal years ago. It's a no contest. As for Liverpool, my personal opinion is that the only time it was ahead of Manchester was before the ship canal was built.

Typical thats what puts people off liverpool....what a shame

In those ten words you betray your prejudice. Why do you come to Liverpool? Is it an unavoidable work activity, or some other obligation?

The Liverpool forum deserves the spam award. So many threads go off topic with useless skybar type chat and cheesy jokes!

Excuse me, this is a forum with very long and tedious and informed posts by me and others on it. I wont name the others because they are not tedious, but there are people like Martin S who are hugely well informed about urban planning issues and who have no peer on the Manc Forum.

On the other hand the Liverpool forum doesn't have so much of the absurd "we have a bigger population than Mexico City and a grander skyline than Manhattan" pretentions of the more juvenline Manc thread. That is the most self-deluding spam anywhere on skyscraperCity.

Is right Polly.

Excuse me, this is a forum with very long and tedious and informed posts by me and others on it. I wont name the others because they are not tedious, but there are people like Martin S who are hugely well informed about urban planning issues and who have no peer on the Manc Forum.

On the other hand the Liverpool forum doesn't have so much of the absurd "we have a bigger population than Mexico City and a grander skyline than Manhattan" pretentions of the more juvenline Manc thread. That is the most self-deluding spam anywhere on skyscraperCity.

:applause:

http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/lol/spamato/spam-c07.jpg

Liverpool City of Spam 2005:wink2:

Well,we did use to make the stuff,in a factory in Belle Vale. :cheers: :cheers:

my personal opinion [/B] is that the only time it was ahead of Manchester was before the ship canal was built.

That's why your opinion counts for nothing. :cheers: :cheers:

Sloyne, you don't know what you're talking about.

Sorry EarlyBird, my mistake, if your assertions are correct then manchester is, by far, the best, most advanced with the best of everything worthwhile, city on the planet. We who live in the likes of New York, Rio, HK, Cape Town, Sydney, Perth, Toronto, London, Paris, Milan, Rome, Vancouver, Auckland, Tampa, Miami are just deluding ourselves, we actually live in shit-holes. By-the-way, were can I buy some of that stuff you smoke, or inject?

Oh yes! Isn't Liverpool Football Club the most succesful soccer club in England? They can't be, can they? I mean manchester, surely, must be the best at everything, even football. I have been looking at some Premier League stats and it looks as if Manchester United have dominated since the Prem Leagues inception, and yet, they have only managed to win one European Championship. Nah! it must be some mistake, and didn't Everton win as many trophies as Man U. did, this season? :)

i think you meant to say britain sloyne

Don't bother Sloyne - he's a city fan. Yeah that's right, the club who inherited a free stadium and are still millions in debt, and think they're the most passionate fans in the country.

Don't bother Sloyne - he's a city fan. Yeah that's right, the club who inherited a free stadium and are still millions in debt, and think they're the most passionate fans in the country.
They didn't "inherit" it, it's on lease.

Sorry EarlyBird, my mistake, if your assertions are correct then manchester is, by far, the best, most advanced with the best of everything worthwhile, city on the planet. We who live in the likes of New York, Rio, HK, Cape Town, Sydney, Perth, Toronto, London, Paris, Milan, Rome, Vancouver, Auckland, Tampa, Miami are just deluding ourselves, we actually live in shit-holes. By-the-way, were can I buy some of that stuff you smoke, or inject?

Why don't you try looking at the claims I made. Every single one can easily be confirmed. Kind of shows how badly Toronto is lacking for a city of it's size.

Why don't you try looking at the claims I made. Every single one can easily be confirmed. .

Er no, actually they can't. You have just been shown on the airport thread abusing statistical analysis to try to hide the fact that the growth rate of Manchester Airport has been lower than that of LJL. You have also shown that you cannot admit a simple error and move on. Your credibility when it comes to any description or analysis of statistics is absolutely zero.

Er no, actually they can't. You have just been shown on the airport thread abusing statistical analysis to try to hide the fact that the growth rate of Manchester Airport has been lower than that of LJL. You have also shown that you cannot admit a simple error and move on. Your credibility when it comes to any description or analysis of statistics is absolutely zero.
Please prove a single one of my claims in the post sloyne was referring to wrong. By proving them wrong I mean in the same way I just proved you wrong in the JLA thread. :)

By proving them wrong I mean in the same way I just proved you wrong in the JLA thread. :)

This is absurd, you have made a complete ass of yourself on that thread, and dug yourself in to a completely untenable position. You are currently trying to wriggle out of that one by changing the subject (from how to meanginfully describe historic change in numbers to methods and techniques for forecasting future change). You are a ridiculous little fellow.

This is absurd, you have made a complete ass of yourself on that thread, and dug yourself in to a completely untenable position. You are currently trying to wriggle out of that one by changing the subject (from how to meanginfully describe historic change in numbers to methods and techniques for forecasting future change). You are a ridiculous little fellow.
On the contrary, you've had two different people laughing you off the face of the thread! Your argument is baseless. What I was comparing was the growth in a single year (i.e. whether in 2004 MAN or JLA was growing faster). It had nothing to do with past figures and it had nothing to do with future figures! The only reason I showed future projections based on the current growth rates was to show how ridiculous it is using a proportional growth figure!

In those ten words you betray your prejudice. Why do you come to Liverpool? Is it an unavoidable work activity, or some other obligation?
Correction! with the last three words I betray my prejudice ....and the reason is I actually try to like liverpudlians but sometimes find it difficult for reasons shown on here and the fact that half of Wigan are liverpudlian, and no I dont have any obligation to visit liverpool or manchester for that matter. Does this mean I have to stay away?

Don't bother Sloyne - he's a city fan. Yeah that's right, the club who inherited a free stadium and are still millions in debt, and think they're the most passionate fans in the country.

Thats right! A club that hasn't won one of the 3 major thropies in 30 years and lives in the shadow of probably the biggest club in the world and still pulls an average of 46,000 fans per home game!!

Compare that to anyone of Birminghams clubs!

Don't bother! Because you can't! :)

Correction! with the last three words I betray my prejudice ....and the reason is I actually try to like liverpudlians but sometimes find it difficult for reasons shown on here.No I dont have any obligation to visit liverpool ..should I stay away then?

It is a world city, owned and enjoyed by the people of the world, not just current residents. It's got nothing to do with me where you travel, I was just intrigued as to why you would visit a place you seem not to like. I only go to places I dont like when I have to, never through choice.

It is a world city, owned and enjoyed by the people of the world, not just current residents. It's got nothing to do with me where you travel, I was just intrigued as to why you would visit a place you seem not to like. I only go to places I dont like when I have to, never through choice.
Did I say I didnt like it? I visit both Manchester and Liverpool because they are both big and dynamic cities and both are approx. equal travelling distance from here. I just find manchester more exciting due to its Skyscraper ambitions.I have actual praised parts of liverpool such as the catherdral and waterfront potential or did you not want to hear that ..and criticised the city centre in general for being a mess .. epiecially the roads... cheifly because of the prep for 2008. having a preference for one city does not mean I dont want to visit the other.Variety is the spice of life as they say and both cities have different and uniqe characters and I an conveinienty sandwiched between the two.

The Liverpool forum deserves the spam award. So many threads go off topic with useless skybar type chat and cheesy jokes!

Well thank you for your spam contribution Caw. ;)

Old Trafford - 75,000
City of Manchester Stadium - 48,000
We also have the Reebok Stadium, JJB Stadium, Edgeley Park, Boundary Park, Spotland and Old Trafford cricket ground at 20,000+. Salford Reds are also building a new stadium soon and Peel Holdings are building a horse race track too near the Trafford Centre.

Old Trafford doesn't hold 75,000 yet.

It's amazing how many of the above venues are outside of the Manchester City boundary.

If you didn't stretch things as much and without exaggeration, we might take you more seriously.

Manchester is home to 4 Premiership teams, three other professional football teams, two rugby teams, a basketball team and an ice hockey team.

Another exaggeration - 4 Premiership Teams my arse.

Man City is the only one.

Did I say I didnt like it? I visit both Manchester and Liverpool because they are both big and dynamic cities and both are approx. equal travelling distance from here. I just find manchester more exciting due to its Skyscraper ambitions.I have actual praised parts of liverpool such as the catherdral and waterfront potential or did you not want to hear that ..and criticised the city centre in general for being a mess .. epiecially the roads... cheifly because of the prep for 2008. having a preference for one city does not mean I dont want to visit the other.Variety is the spice of life as they say and both cities have different and uniqe characters and I an conveinienty sandwiched between the two.

You are entitled to your opinion Oscar and I happen to agree with most of your points in your posts.

At least you are not twisting facts to get your points across.

Old Trafford doesn't hold 75,000 yet.

It's amazing how many of the above venues are outside of the Manchester City boundary.

If you didn't stretch things as much and without exaggeration, we might take you more seriously.

I'm using Greater Manchester, Sloyne used the Greater Toronto area. Based on commuter numbers similar to those which define GTA Liverpool would fall within Manchester. All but JJB is in the urban area of Manchester.

Another exaggeration - 4 Premiership Teams my arse.

Man City is the only one.
As you've been told on other threads, a city is an urban area, not just a local authority.

city

n 1: a large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts

Based on this Manchester has four Premiership teams, or three if you don't want to include suburban teams in the metro (which Sloyne did for Toronto).

Another exaggeration - 4 Premiership Teams my arse.

Man City is the only one.

:lol:

You idiot!

Old Trafford doesn't hold 75,000 yet.

It's amazing how many of the above venues are outside of the Manchester City boundary.

If you didn't stretch things as much and without exaggeration, we might take you more seriously.

I've had an argument today in the Manc forum about something similar to this, and it was hard bloody work, regarding them saying that Manchester was not part of Lancashire, but the other nine boroughs of Greater Manchester were Manchester. Obviously, it depends on how you want to look at things, historically, geographically, politically, economically, demographically.

Obviously, Salford is no more controlled by Manchester as it is by Lancaster (sorry Preston), as it is a unitary authority. So, is it Manchester or Lancashire?

Well, just for you Gazzab, and those others that are just as thick as you, I'll try to explain it in simple terms.

A. Political boundaries mean absolutely nothing. In fact on the Westminster level, certain Gtr Manchester constituency boundaries actually cross local council boundaries.

B. Geographically, the river Irwell does mainly seperate Salford from Manchester, except for the fact that there is a sizeable chunk of Salford on Manchester's side of the river.

C. Economically, Manchester City Centre does act as the city centre for the whole of the Greater Manchester Conurbation. It attracts serious number of commuters from all over GM and beyond. GM accounts for approx 35% of the North West economy.

D. Historically, Manchester, in fact the whole of South West Lancashire was the Salford Hundred. Liverpool was in the "West Derby Hundred". Go figure!

E. Demographically, the Cities of Manchester, Salford, and the Metropolitan Borough of Trafford, which have no non urban areas between them (in fact, if I blindfolded you and stuck you in one, you would not be able to tell me when you crossed from one to the other, never mind which one you were in), would give a population of around 1 million people. Those three together are that dense!

F. Is The City of London the smallest city in England?

Think carefully about F. if you have got the bollocks to answer at all.

Go and ask the people of wigan ,bolton,rochdale if they're from manchester.In fact some people from Bolton still use a lancashire post code. The West Derby Hundred covered South west lancs,not salford. The West Derby hundred was twice the population of the salford hundred and included Wigan. You're beginning to sound like early bird.

"The Great Manchester Run attracts around 30,000. :)"

Well, the Toronto Marathon attracts less people, because it is more than 10km long.


"We have a film festival, an Irish festival, a Pride festival, three beer festivals, a poetry festival, a comedy festival and others, including the first Manchester festival next year. We don't have tennis though."

Toronto, aka 'Hollywood North', has several film festivals including the Toronto International Film Festival. We also have the Toronto Street Festival on Younge Street, we have the Caribana, the Downtown Jazz Festival, a huge gay pride parade, the fringe festival (theatre), the Dragonboat Race Festival. And yes, we do have the Toronto Festival of Beer. :cheers:

"Manchester is home to 4 Premiership teams, three other professional football teams, two rugby teams, a basketball team and an ice hockey team."

Toronto is home to the largest Hockey League in the World, the GTHL. (but an amateur one)
We have a lacrosse team, a baseball team, a football team, 2 american football team, a hockey team, and a rugby team. WE definetely have a wider range of sport teams in the city.

"In North America maybe. In the UK Manchester is second only to London for theatres, though I think Leeds has a more active production scene."

I admit that Toronto may be behind London, but we are lightyears ahead of Manchester in the theatre industry.

"The Great Manchester Run attracts around 30,000. :)"

Well, the Toronto Marathon attracts less people, because it is more than 10km long.

No, it's because the Great Manchester Run is more popular. It's simply a fact that the 10K is a much more prominent sporting event. Manchester has a more active road racing scene than Toronto. Get over it. :)

"We have a film festival, an Irish festival, a Pride festival, three beer festivals, a poetry festival, a comedy festival and others, including the first Manchester festival next year. We don't have tennis though."

Toronto, aka 'Hollywood North', has several film festivals including the Toronto International Film Festival. We also have the Toronto Street Festival on Younge Street, we have the Caribana, the Downtown Jazz Festival, a huge gay pride parade, the fringe festival (theatre), the Dragonboat Race Festival. And yes, we do have the Toronto Festival of Beer. :cheers:
Oh, I forgot our jazz festival and our arts festival... Oops! Manchester's Irish festival is the second largest in the world after NYC. Our Pride festival, though not as large as Toronto's, is the largest in the UK and hosted EuroPride in 2003, attracting 1.7 million people, the largest Pride attendance in Europe's history.

"Manchester is home to 4 Premiership teams, three other professional football teams, two rugby teams, a basketball team and an ice hockey team."

Toronto is home to the largest Hockey League in the World, the GTHL. (but an amateur one)
We have a lacrosse team, a baseball team, a football team, 2 american football team, a hockey team, and a rugby team. WE definetely have a wider range of sport teams in the city.
That's more wide ranging than football, rubgy union, rugby league, basketball and ice hockey? Which has greater worldwide appeal as a selection of sports?

BTW, have you noticed how Manchester competes relatively well with Toronto, despite the fact Toronto's urban area is 4,366,508 and Manchester's is 2,274,931?

Don't you have the biggest beatles festival as well.

Don't you have the biggest beatles festival as well.
No, though unfortunately for us we have Europe's largest scouse contingent outside Liverpool. ;)

You mean scousers who live in wigan

You mean scousers who live in wigan
No.

BTW, did you know that, based on census results, if unofficial nationalities were allowed to be included then Scouse would be the UK's seventh largest. Apparently thousands of people from Liverpool put "Merseyside" in the nationality box. :ohno:

Go and ask the people of wigan ,bolton,rochdale if they're from manchester.In fact some people from Bolton still use a lancashire post code. The West Derby Hundred covered South west lancs,not salford. The West Derby hundred was twice the population of the salford hundred and included Wigan. You're beginning to sound like early bird.
The majority of people from Bolton and Rochdale count themselves as Manchester suburbs. Wigan doesn't yet, but that'll change. You only need to look at the developments in the area between the two to know that.

See , the thing is early bird ,most scousers regard themselves as scouse first and english second.

That's more wide ranging than football, rubgy union, rugby league, basketball and ice hockey? Which has greater worldwide appeal as a selection of sports?

BTW, have you noticed how Manchester competes relatively well with Toronto, despite the fact Toronto's urban area is 4,366,508 and Manchester's is 2,274,931?

Yes, i've noticed, especially when you exaggerate everything to a pulp. http://www.redto.com/EventsDir/events2.html

If you want to learn more about Toronto's festivals.

Yes, i've noticed, especially when you exaggerate everything to a pulp. http://www.redto.com/EventsDir/events2.html

If you want to learn more about Toronto's festivals.
Name one thing I've exaggerated or keep your mouth shut.

I'll give you this Early, you're a feisty little mong.

Go and ask the people of wigan ,bolton,rochdale if they're from manchester.In fact some people from Bolton still use a lancashire post code.
ummmm... what exactly is a 'Lancashire' post code? :?

I meant lancashire instead of GM. You should know, because you're another sad little wool.

There is no such thing as a Lancashire postcode as far as I'm aware. Unless you are talking about the LA postcode which is Lancaster.
My postcode is PR1 and I dont even live in the Preston administrative area!

We here in Southport dont use Merseyside in our addresses cos we are soooooooooo not part of Liverpool :D
We are L A N C A S T R I A N :)

Postcodes and political boundaries are very different things. Bolton is a postal town and has its own post code (BL).

Greater Manchester County has some postal districts that lie in Manchester's (M), Bolton's (BL) Stockport's (SK)

The County of Merseyside contains postal districts with L, PR and CH postcodes, as Liverpool, Preston and Chester are the post towns for different parts of the county. Ormskirk is outside of Merseyside County and yet has a L postcode. Glossop is outside GM County and yet has a Stockport postcode. I could go on.

The post office could tomorrow decide to reorder postal distribution with a new common North West post code distributed out of a large sorting office in Warrington (something already exists in terms of Sort Codes, rather than post codes) and it would have no bearing whatsoever on political boundaries, councils, "city regions", "metro regions", etc.

Don't forget WA for St Helens.

Post codes mean nothing in the real world. Same as the telephone prefix's.

We here in Southport dont use Merseyside in our addresses cos we are soooooooooo not part of Liverpool :D
We are L A N C A S T R I A N :)

Bog off Accura. Actually most people in Southport do correctly use Merseyside in their address as the post office asks them to.

Incidentally, if Southport is in Lancashire, so is Liverpool, which rather makes a mockery Accura's statement above.

It's curious that the post office, although adopting Merseyside in approved address styles never accepted Greater Manchester, which is why the correct addresses are Salford, Lancashire, Stockport, Cheshire, Sale, Cheshire and Bolton, Lancs, although none of those towns have been part of Lancashire or Cheshire for administrative or even ceremonial reasons since 1974.

Don't forget WA for St Helens.

Post codes mean nothing in the real world. Same as the telephone prefix's.
Same as council boundaries too

Go and ask the people of wigan ,bolton,rochdale if they're from manchester.In fact some people from Bolton still use a lancashire post code. The West Derby Hundred covered South west lancs,not salford. The West Derby hundred was twice the population of the salford hundred and included Wigan. You're beginning to sound like early bird.

Did you actually make a point there, or just the normal waffle?

It's you that talks shite ,SALFORD hundred,what was all theat crap about.

[QUOTE=WeasteDevil

E. Demographically, the Cities of Manchester, Salford, and the Metropolitan Borough of Trafford, which have no non urban areas between them (in fact, if I blindfolded you and stuck you in one, you would not be able to tell me when you crossed from one to the other, never mind which one you were in), would give a population of around 1 million people. Those three together are that dense!

If you were blindfolded that goes for just about everywhere.Fact is there are signs telling you you have left Manchester and are now entering Salford, Trafford etc...

Pedantry is brilliant.

Well put 8.

That's more wide ranging than football, rubgy union, rugby league, basketball and ice hockey? Which has greater worldwide appeal as a selection of sports?

BTW, have you noticed how Manchester competes relatively well with Toronto, despite the fact Toronto's urban area is 4,366,508 and Manchester's is 2,274,931?

And you still can't build an underground system?
Or, have you got a much bigger one than Liverpools and will now produce the statistics to prove it? :cheers:

And you still can't build an underground system?
Or, have you got a much bigger one than Liverpools and will now produce the statistics to prove it? :cheers:
Liverpool hasnt got a fucking underground. Its just a metropolitan rail system which has a tunnel section in the city centre.
And when Preston gets its trams, it will have exactly the same thing!

Liverpool hasnt got a fucking underground. Its just a metropolitan rail system which has a tunnel section in the city centre.
And when Preston gets its trams, it will have exactly the same thing!

Lime Street, Central, Moorfields, James Street, Hamilton Square, Conway Park, Green Lane are all underground.

The Northern Line is underground all the way to Sandhills and Brunswick, and on the City Line is underground all the way to Edge Hill.

And a lot of GMPTE's rail network is in tunnels too...

Bog off Accura. Actually most people in Southport do correctly use Merseyside in their address as the post office asks them to.

Incidentally, if Southport is in Lancashire, so is Liverpool, which rather makes a mockery Accura's statement above.

It's curious that the post office, although adopting Merseyside in approved address styles never accepted Greater Manchester, which is why the correct addresses are Salford, Lancashire, Stockport, Cheshire, Sale, Cheshire and Bolton, Lancs, although none of those towns have been part of Lancashire or Cheshire for administrative or even ceremonial reasons since 1974.
Yet more incorrect information from Awayo. The Post Office have abolished the use of counties in the postcode address file. They haven't included them for the past 6 or so years. Before that the Royal Mail included Greater Manchester for all places it considered to be in the Manchester urban area at the time, which included Salford, Tameside and Trafford. Now it would also include Stockport, Oldham and parts of Bury, Bolton and Rochdale. Right now, if you have an Ashton-Under-Lyne address the correct Royal Mail address would be:

1 The Street
Ashton-Under-Lyne
OL6 1AA

A metropolitan rail system that takes in Chester, Ormskirk and Southport.

And you still can't build an underground system?
Or, have you got a much bigger one than Liverpools and will now produce the statistics to prove it? :cheers:
We've got the UK's most successful light rail system. It's the largest outside London and is due to be tripled in size shortly. The simple fact is that no city outside London has the population density to make it economically viable to build an underground any more.

A metropolitan rail system that takes in Chester, Ormskirk and Southport.
Well how else would you describe it?

Liverpool does have an underground.

Yes, it is small and compact and restricted mainly to the City Centre. People use the underground network to get from one side of the city to another, and indeed one side of the water to another.

So you're agreeing with a metropolitan structure to the greater Liverpool area.

Liverpool does have an underground.

Yes, it is small and compact and restricted mainly to the City Centre. People use the underground network to get from one side of the city to another, and indeed one side of the water to another.
Thats exactly what Manchester has with GMPTE except its above ground. And Manchester has a tram system also, which is something Liverpool cannot yet boast. If you had left the Overhead Railway in place, you might be on top :P



Actually on second thoughts, Liverpool does have a tram system! The Birkenhead Tram Museum Line!!! But that would mean Manchester has two tram lines with the Heaton Park Tram Museum line!

So you're agreeing with a metropolitan structure to the greater Liverpool area.
Yes, with the exception of Chester. You said yourself that Chester is a city in its own right, BUT people who live there often commute to Liverpool.

I dont know why your quizzing me on this now. I've always accepted that Merseyside IS Greater Liverpool + Runcorn and Skem.

Since when could you go across town in Manchester using the rail network?

Since when could you go across town in Manchester using the rail network?
You've ALWAYS been able to. We have over 140 railway stations!

Since when could you go across town in Manchester using the rail network?
I've travelled from places in Manchester to other places in Manchester using the rail network frequently. I recently travelled from Oxford Road to Horwich Parkway with some friends going to the cinema :D

Chester can be a city and form part of a greater metropolitan area.

Can you go from Victoria to Piccadilly?

We've got the UK's most successful light rail system. It's the largest outside London and is due to be tripled in size shortly. The simple fact is that no city outside London has the population density to make it economically viable to build an underground any more.


Yeah right, so why are they planning to extend the Glasgow subway. What do you mean by light rail, I take it you don't mean trains, because it is Glasgow which has the largest rail network outside London.

Can you go from Victoria to Piccadilly?
Yes

By train, are you sure Accy?

Liverpool does have an underground.

Yes, it is small and compact and restricted mainly to the City Centre. People use the underground network to get from one side of the city to another, and indeed one side of the water to another.

The Wirral & Northern lines are metro's by definition. That being that they are electrified and separate to any other traffic. Whether it's above ground, underground or in a cutting is purely superficial.

Yet more incorrect information from Awayo. The Post Office have abolished the use of counties in the postcode address file. They haven't included them for the past 6 or so years. Before that the Royal Mail included Greater Manchester for all places it considered to be in the Manchester urban area at the time, which included Salford, Tameside and Trafford. Now it would also include Stockport, Oldham and parts of Bury, Bolton and Rochdale. Right now, if you have an Ashton-Under-Lyne address the correct Royal Mail address would be:

1 The Street
Ashton-Under-Lyne
OL6 1AA

Yes EarlyBird a county is not needed in an address.

No, Greater Manchester was not incorporated into GEM addresses ever, when Merseyside. Curious, as I said; significant? No. It is not an insult to Manchester or a diminuation of its metropolitan county.

As I was trying to make out in my post, the Post Office's addresses have no bearing on even something as clear cut as an area's county. Oldham was in Greater Manchester and yet did have a Lancashire address post local government reorganisation. So what?

No address ever had Greater Manchester in its address, ever. Sale people (despite their M postcode) used Cheshire (and not through snobbery, they were never told to do anything else), Bolton, "Lancs", Oldham "Lancs", etc.

The post office are not, and never have been, concerned with esoteric determinations of the size of a city's "Urban Area". You are, of course.

The PO just wanted an letter to be directed to its correct sorting office. That's all. For fuck's sake.

Before that the Royal Mail included Greater Manchester for all places it considered to be in the Manchester urban area at the time, which included Salford, Tameside and Trafford. Now it would also include Stockport, Oldham and parts of Bury, Bolton and Rochdale

Hilarious.

The only thing that goes against them is frequency, although the Wirral line in the city centre must be about every 6 minutes.

We've got the UK's most successful light rail system. It's the largest outside London and is due to be tripled in size shortly. The simple fact is that no city outside London has the population density to make it economically viable to build an underground any more.

With the exception of Liverpool which has a lot of disused railway tunnels which could be incorporated into the present system at a cost far below other cities which would have to rely on new tunnelling.
Our system of course is not light rail, it is 'proper trains'. :cheers:

With the exception of Liverpool which has a lot of disused railway tunnels which could be incorporated into the present system at a cost far below other cities which would have to rely on new tunnelling.
Our system of course is not light rail, it is 'proper trains'. :cheers:

Our heavy rail network alone has over 140 stations. Who cares about disused lines? Manchester also has dozens. I'm talking lines you can actually get a train down right now. Manchester's network is much larger than Liverpool's. We also have the larger light rail network. Do the maths.

No need to do the maths.
You aint got an underground system. :cheers:

No address ever had Greater Manchester in its address, ever. Sale people (despite their M postcode) used Cheshire (and not through snobbery, they were never told to do anything else), Bolton, "Lancs", Oldham "Lancs", etc.

Complete and utter bollocks. Salford, Manchester. Droylsden, Manchester. Denton, Manchester. All were official Post Office addresses.

No need to do the maths.
You aint got an underground system. :cheers:
Who cares? We have the better public transport system. Makes no difference to me. I'd rather get a tram to where I want to go than go down into a piss-soaked crime-infested tunnel, only to find it doesn't go where I want anyway because they couldn't afford the line! :cheers:

Early, he meant disused tunnels, some with engineering already in place for street access, platforms etc. so an expansion of the underground is possible without the cost of tunnelling.

In other words an enhanced underground system is possible in Liverpool.

No need to do the maths.
You aint got an underground system. :cheers:
You aint got a tram system :P

Early, he meant disused tunnels, some with engineering already in place for street access, platforms etc. so an expansion of the underground is possible without the cost of tunnelling.

In other words an enhanced underground system is possible in Liverpool.
Why are they bothering to build Merseytram if they could build a quality underground system for roughly the same cost? Is it cos trams are hip at the moment?

Early, he meant disused tunnels, some with engineering already in place for street access, platforms etc. so an expansion of the underground is possible without the cost of tunnelling.

In other words an enhanced underground system is possible in Liverpool.

Thank you Toadboy,it might just get through to him.
Mind you sounds like he's losing it now.:cheers:

Accy, the places to be served by the trams would be prohibitively expensive to build a raileway, over or underground. It's the cheap option, the trams will integrae with Merseyrail and inter city service where possible though.

Other future routes or additional stops on existing routes can be added relatively cheaply to Merseyrail.

Thank you Toadboy,it might just get through to him.
Mind you sounds like he's losing it now.:cheers:
No its not. Your just all ganging up on him and your all totally deluded and living in la-la-land thinking that Liverpool is better than Manchester.

Okay... obviously biased scousers and biased mancs could never decide which is best cos they both think they are better.
So it has to be done by a neutral opinion... me :D



And I choose...












Pikachu!




J/K





Live..



nah....





Manchester!

Accy, the places to be served by the trams would be prohibitively expensive to build a raileway, over or underground. It's the cheap option, the trams will integrae with Merseyrail and inter city service where possible though.

Other future routes or additional stops on existing routes can be added relatively cheaply to Merseyrail.
You wouldnt think its the cheap option, the way they constantly bang on about how expensive the whole scheme is. What a total waste :(

You'r not neutral,you're a sheep. :cheers:

It's cheap compared with rail!!

How long before Merseyrail Electrics reaches Preston? within your lifetime I'll bet.

You'r not neutral,you're a sheep. :cheers:
WTF... you constantly moan about how scousers are wrongly judged as criminals and thugs, yet you go and say something like that.

How long before Merseyrail Electrics reaches Preston?
Look at the Preston projects list in my sig. That event might be a lot sooner than you think ;) And it would go right past my doorstep.

WTF... you constantly moan about how scousers are wrongly judged as criminals and thugs, yet you go and say something like that.


Look at the Preston projects list in my sig. That event might be a lot sooner than you think ;) And it would go right past my doorstep.


Why am I a criminal and a thug just because i called you a sheep. :cheers:

I've not peeked at your Preston thread for a bit, I'll head there now.

Why am I a criminal and a thug just because i called you a sheep. :cheers:
You called me a sheep because I live in Lancashire (or cos I'm from Ireland, dunno which). Should I call you a criminal cos you live in Liverpool?

I dont believe in stereotypes like that.

Complete and utter bollocks. Salford, Manchester. Droylsden, Manchester. Denton, Manchester. All were official Post Office addresses.

If I'm speaking bollocks them please disagree with me. You haven't.

My point, again. After 1974 when Greater Manchester and Merseyside counties came into existence, for some reason, the post office incorporated Merseyside into the addresses of outlying parts of the new county, including areas that did not have Liverpool as their postal town and therefore an "L" postcode.

As in Liverpool's case, the districts in the new Greater Manchester county included areas that were served by different post towns: Manchester, Bolton, Stockport.

This sort of thing happens. Postal districts and local authority districts are different things. Those districts that had Manchester post codes (including Salford) could be correctly labelled Salford, Manchester from a postal point of view, following the principle that the best way to label a letter is to include is post town in the address. However, all of the other postal districts in Greater Manchester that were served by other post towns and had non-Manchester post codes retained their historical county in their addresses - so Bolton, Lancs, Oldham, Lancs and Stockport, Cheshire.

Even in those areas that had a Manchester post code and people placed the county into their address rather than the post town of Manchester (e.g. Salford), Lancashire was used but never Greater Manchester - at least not correctly as far as the post office was concerned.

In Merseyside (and it was inconsistant and without any good reason for it to be the case), the new county was incorporated into the addresses of areas outside of the "L" postcode area such as Southport and St Helens.

It means nothing. It's not an insult to you and Manchester that this curious bureaucratic inconsistancy occurred, so there's no reason for you to get annoyed by it.

Good thread stuff there Accy.

We'll have to get EB in on this because he will have statistics to prove that there are more and bigger criminals in MCR than Liverpool.
Because he's like that.

p.s. It's because you're from Preston/Lancs.

p.p.s. You're a friendly sheep though. :cheers:

p.s. It's because you're from Preston/Lancs.

p.p.s. You're a friendly sheep though. :cheers:
Why thank you :) I'm not a sheep though, honest! (admittedly I could use a haircut)

Q. what is a woolyback A. anyone who isn't a scouser!

Just to briefly bring up my point about Preston Docks. For a while did some pretty major stuff:

-In 1968, the Albert Edward Dock accounted for 16% of total sea cargo passing through ports
-It was (and remains to this day) the largest single dock basin in the country
-Preston was the first dock to introduce Roll-on Roll-off traffic (Ro-Ro) in 1948
-By the 1960's the port held the record for the handling the largest amount of container and ferry traffic
-Cotton and wood pulp were the most important cargoes landed here

Taken from www.prestondocks.co.uk

http://www.prestondocks.co.uk/old_preston_dock.jpg

Not exactly what I would call a spare part on Liverpool's account.

what boats that looks like a little tug boat.

Why thank you :) I'm not a sheep though, honest! (admittedly I could use a haircut)

Only joking anyway Accy. :cheers: :cheers:

It was (and remains to this day) the largest single dock basin in the country.

Not so Accura, that honour goes to the Royal Seaforth Dock on the Mersey, in fact the Royal Seaforth is the largest artificialy enclose expanse of seawater in the world. Also, the Langton Lock is the largest tidal lock in the world. Prestons Albert Edward Dock only held the title for a short time, being eclipsed by the Canada Dock on the Mersey.

Q. what is a woolyback A. anyone who isn't a scouser!

Nope, it's anyone from the Granadaland nation which includes your hometown of Wigan, Preston, Manchester amongst others.

Anybody with a lancaster accent

and also like the company of sheep ;)

Not so Accura, that honour goes to the Royal Seaforth Dock on the Mersey, in fact the Royal Seaforth is the largest artificialy enclose expanse of seawater in the world. Also, the Langton Lock is the largest tidal lock in the world. Prestons Albert Edward Dock only held the title for a short time, being eclipsed by the Canada Dock on the Mersey.

Go Sloyne!

If I'm speaking bollocks them please disagree with me. You haven't.

My point, again. After 1974 when Greater Manchester and Merseyside counties came into existence, for some reason, the post office incorporated Merseyside into the addresses of outlying parts of the new county, including areas that did not have Liverpool as their postal town and therefore an "L" postcode.

As in Liverpool's case, the districts in the new Greater Manchester county included areas that were served by different post towns: Manchester, Bolton, Stockport.

This sort of thing happens. Postal districts and local authority districts are different things. Those districts that had Manchester post codes (including Salford) could be correctly labelled Salford, Manchester from a postal point of view, following the principle that the best way to label a letter is to include is post town in the address. However, all of the other postal districts in Greater Manchester that were served by other post towns and had non-Manchester post codes retained their historical county in their addresses - so Bolton, Lancs, Oldham, Lancs and Stockport, Cheshire.

Even in those areas that had a Manchester post code and people placed the county into their address rather than the post town of Manchester (e.g. Salford), Lancashire was used but never Greater Manchester - at least not correctly as far as the post office was concerned.

In Merseyside (and it was inconsistant and without any good reason for it to be the case), the new county was incorporated into the addresses of areas outside of the "L" postcode area such as Southport and St Helens.

It means nothing. It's not an insult to you and Manchester that this curious bureaucratic inconsistancy occurred, so there's no reason for you to get annoyed by it.
Again, you don't seem to understand this basic concept. Royal Mail used "Manchester" in all addresses (including Salford and parts of both Trafford and Tameside) that were within Manchester's urban area. It's just like London. They never include Greater London, they just put London in all addresses within Greater London's urban area. Manchester is exactly the same in that they shortened "Greater Manchester Urban Area" to "Manchester". Liverpool, Leeds and Birmingham are different.

You're one bad beaut, you Early.

Not so Accura, that honour goes to the Royal Seaforth Dock on the Mersey, in fact the Royal Seaforth is the largest artificialy enclose expanse of seawater in the world. Also, the Langton Lock is the largest tidal lock in the world. Prestons Albert Edward Dock only held the title for a short time, being eclipsed by the Canada Dock on the Mersey.
Pictures?

Anybody with a lancaster accent
Oh well... that kinda blows Gareth's theory out of the water...

http://www.btinternet.com/~philipbparker/Aerial_pic_Gladstone-Seaforth.jpg

Part of the Royal Seaforth Dock, taken by Philip Parker.

Take a look here :)
http://www.btinternet.com/~philipbparker/royal_seaforth_dock.htm

But there is more than one basin. In fact there are several.

The large one on the left is Royal Seaforth. The dock is in fact about twice the size of what is in that picture.

Only one basin Accy.

Again, you don't seem to understand this basic concept. Royal Mail used "Manchester" in all addresses (including Salford and parts of both Trafford and Tameside) that were within Manchester's urban area. It's just like London. They never include Greater London, they just put London in all addresses within Greater London's urban area. Manchester is exactly the same in that they shortened "Greater Manchester Urban Area" to "Manchester". Liverpool, Leeds and Birmingham are different.

But a lot of London has always had a "Middlesex" postal code, not a London one. And other parts of areas that have been part of metroplitan London for ages (such as Twickenham) have had their own postal addresses since....well maybe you can find out, as part of your next project, but it's a long time. There has never been a London pre-fix for the metropolis, it's always been divvied up between a number of postal regions.

Areas of the Wirral had L prefixes for generations (until this recent CH silliness, which needs to be reversed). Do you understand the geography of the Wirral, EB? It has been conneced by an underground line to central Liverpool for a long time, and later by roads - it is part of a contiguous urban area, as roads and a commuter rail line run through (actually under) it, and a lot of the Wirral settlements (Wallasey being a good example) are as much a suburb and part of Liverpool as Woolton or Bootle or Childwall. You seem to think the River has more separating effect than it actually does.

The dock to the right is Gladstone.

Fair enough. But NONE of your docks have a steam railway!

That's the stuff that comes out of a kettle isn't it. :cheers:

The Mersey is a physical barrier in Liverpool but as Liverpolitan states the rail system as tunnels have largely cancelled it out.

Is Newcastle/Gateshead 2 seperate places or Glasgow or London itself? All the best cities have a river at their heart, the great cities have mighty rivers. See Liverpool and New York for clarity.

But a lot of London has always had a "Middlesex" postal code, not a London one. And other parts of areas that have been part of metroplitan London for ages (such as Twickenham) have had their own postal addresses since....well maybe you can find out, as part of your next project, but it's a long time. There has never been a London pre-fix for the metropolis, it's always been divvied up between a number of postal regions.
Again you prove you really have no comprehension of anything Liverpolitan. We were talking about the use of the term "Greater Manchester" in postal addresses. I pointed out that it wasn't used by Royal Mail in the postcode address file because they went down the Greater London route and called it Manchester instead of "Greater Manchester Urban Area". Post codes have bugger all to do with it.

London and Manchester both had the city name included in the address for any areas inside the urban area, rather than the traditional county for everything. This was different to every other city in the country. They stopped doing this, though, because the urban areas began growing too much and the use of the city name stopped being of any use in distinguishing where a place was.

Areas of the Wirral had L prefixes for generations (until this recent CH silliness, which needs to be reversed). Do you understand the geography of the Wirral, EB? It has been conneced by an underground line to central Liverpool for a long time, and later by roads - it is part of a contiguous urban area, as roads and a commuter rail line run through (actually under) it, and a lot of the Wirral settlements (Wallasey being a good example) are as much a suburb and part of Liverpool as Woolton or Bootle or Childwall. You seem to think the River has more separating effect than it actually does.
I don't think it has any separating effect at all liverpolitan. Where you've got that crap from I don't know. I added the Birkenhead urban area to the Liverpool area to give you a Liverpool urban area population statistic. It's simply that from a purely statistical angle the two are separate due to the base population density used by ONS. If they'd chosen a high enough value for the two to become one urban area then Liverpool would also be a part of Manchester, which is why they used the value they did. The Wirral is no more a part of Liverpool than Bolton, Bury, Rochdale, Oldham, Tameside and Stockport are of Manchester though.

That's rubbish Early, Wirral is suburban, Bolton, Bury, Rochdale, Oldham and Stockport are definately towns in their own right. That's not to say they're not of Manchester but you can't compare them with Wirral and Liverpool.

The only towns in Merseyside that compare are St Helens and Southport.

Again, you don't seem to understand this basic concept. Royal Mail used "Manchester" in all addresses (including Salford and parts of both Trafford and Tameside) that were within Manchester's urban area. It's just like London. They never include Greater London, they just put London in all addresses within Greater London's urban area. Manchester is exactly the same in that they shortened "Greater Manchester Urban Area" to "Manchester". Liverpool, Leeds and Birmingham are different.

Oh christ...

I do understand this is boring folks...

This is simply birdie.

The whole country is split up by the Royal Mail into postal districts centred on a postal town. These districts have no obvious connection with local authority districts and a tenuous one with any city's urban area or anything else.

Each district is simply those neighourhoods that the post office has found it convenient to be served by one sorting office.

Manchester is a postal district with a main sorting office in Manchester covering all those areas that have been assigned Manchester post codes (M1, M2, ...).

Liverpool is one too, as is Preston, Warrington, Oldham, Bolton, Chester, Stockport, etc.

These predated all the existance of Greater Manchester or Merseyside counties and always were not contiguous with any local authority area. The area that the Post Office decided would be best served by the Manchester sorting office and given Manchester (M) post code does not correspond to anything other than those areas decided to be logistically more efficient to be served by the Manchester sorting office rather than the Wigan one, the Stockport one or whatver. Salford, for example did not have a sorting office, was therefore not a post town and was served the the Mcr SO and hence has always had M post codes. This is why bits of what was later to become the borough of Trafford have M postcodes and bits have SK ones.

The areas with M in their post code are simply those that are served by the Manchester SO and therefore can be correctly addressed with Manchester in their address as Manchester is the correct post town. That is all.

Similarly Liverpool postal district extended out from inner Liverpool to Formby and Ormkirk, eastwards to Rufford and southwards all the way down to Ellesmere Port, as these areas were served by the sorting office on Victoria Street, Liverpool (later Mount Pleasant).

London is the same, the London postcodes (WC, EC, NW, SW, SE, E, N) are all the districts for which London was the post town and were served by a collection of London sorting offices. This system dates from the C19th, was the first in the country and the extent of this postal region never was contiguous with London County Council, or the GLC or the actual extent of the London urban area at that point. For example, Kingston upon Thames is its own post town and letters delivered to it have always been handled by the Kingston sorting office. Before 1965 Kingston was outside of London from a local government point of view, true, however part of the town that had never been in London had a SW postcode, part of it was served by the KT SO. This was simply because it was more convient for letters from the streets in that area to be delivered from and collected to a London SO than the Kingston one.

Postal codes and cities (as local authorities or as urban areas or whatever) do to match up. They never have and they are not meant to.

Incidentally, if you wish to draw analogies between London and another city based on its historical postal district organisation, it should be Liverpool as Liverpool was the first town to be divided into postal districts (Liverpool 1, Liverpool 2, etc.) outside of London, following London's model, one of the city's facets that led to its appelation at the "second metropolis"

At the time, you would have sent a letter to, for exampel, simply 4 Deangate, Manchester, but to 25 Canning Street, Liverpool 8 and 3 Endell Street, London WC.

They stopped doing this, though, because the urban areas began growing too much and the use of the city name stopped being of any use in distinguishing where a place was.



When? Areas designated as "Middlesex" in postal terms go well into the metropolis. It's not just a post-code, it's actually part of the full postal address. Very many areas of "Greater London" have always had a "Middlesex" address, not a "London" one. In what year did they "stop" attempting to use "London" as a postal designator for all areas within whatever was accepted as the metropolis at that time?

Are you aware that Middlesex/Surrey are similar to Cheshire/Lancs in that sense, that is the old counties went up to the natural boundary regardless of the city, and have continued (curiously in the case of Middlesex even after that ceased to be a County, but not in case of Surrey that still is) to this day? Wirral towns usd to have a Cheshire address but Liverpool post-code.

The areas with M in their post code are simply those that are served by the Manchester SO and therefore can be correctly addressed with Manchester in their address as Manchester is the correct post town. That is all.
And all I'm saying is that they didn't include "Greater Manchester" in the addresses like they included "Merseyside" because they chose to just use "Manchester" instead! Jesus, are you really that fucking stupid?

Nobody or any organisation has ever shortened Greater Manchester into Manchester. You never see:
Stockport,
Manchester
SK1 1NT

on any address.

You are trying to compare to London all the time which is ridiculous because even down there they keep the individuality eg:

Croydon
Surrey
CR1 1NT

or

Twickenham
Middx
TW1 1TT

Ironically St Helens seemed to use Merseyside, the rest used Liverpool.

And one for Accura

Preston
Lancs
PR1 1CK

When? Areas designated as "Middlesex" in postal terms go well into the metropolis. It's not just a post-code, it's actually part of the full postal address. Very many areas of "Greater London" have always had a "Middlesex" address, not a "London" one. In what year did they "stop" attempting to use "London" as a postal designator for all areas within whatever was accepted as the metropolis at that time?
Middlesex hasn't been used by Royal Mail since the 1960s you buffoon! They changed it to use "London" in the addresses instead at the same time they included "Manchester" on ours. They then decided to change the system to simplify addresses. Across Greater London they now just use "London" and not the individual towns. Across Greater Manchester (and indeed all other UK cities) they simply use the towns too. They removed an entire level from their PAF in 1999.

Are you aware that Middlesex/Surrey are similar to Cheshire/Lancs in that sense, that is the old counties went up to the natural boundary regardless of the city, and have continued (curiously in the case of Middlesex even after that ceased to be a County, but not in case of Surrey that still is) to this day? Wirral towns usd to have a Cheshire address but Liverpool post-code.
You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Try actually looking at the Royal Mail Postcode Address File. There isn't a SINGLE address in there with Middlesex or Surrey in it. You are a complete and utter tosser for even trying to argue about this.

EB, can you post a link to the ONS page (their website is, as you know gigantic) that provides any technical notes for the "urban area" defining methodology you are so fond of? They are notoriously anal and obtuse, but even ONS surely cannot be attempting to define contiguous urban areas without factoring in rivers such as the Thames, Mersey, Tyne etc. Do they split London into two metropoli, "Official ONS North Londinium" and "Official ONS South Londinium", because of the unpopulated river separating them?

Middlesex hasn't been used by Royal Mail since the 1960s you buffoon! They changed it to use "London" in the addresses instead at the same time they included "Manchester" on ours. They then decided to change the system to simplify addresses. Across Greater London they now just use "London" and not the individual towns. Across Greater Manchester (and indeed all other UK cities) they simply use the towns too. They removed an entire level from their PAF in 1999.


You don't have a clue what you're talking about. Try actually looking at the Royal Mail Postcode Address File. There isn't a SINGLE address in there with Middlesex or Surrey in it. You are a complete and utter tosser for even trying to argue about this.

Well actually Middlesex is STILL used in many addresses, including businesses, and letters still get delivered to them. And it was part of official Royal Mail addresses until the 1990s. You are entirely incorrect about this.

You seem to live in a bubble, EB, of what you believe the world to be. Reality must be very confusing for you! Are you able to discuss without going into abuse mode every time you disagree, by the way? I can see you are not, it is probably a part of the syndrome you are afflicted with so I should be forgiving, but it's undignified for someone who claims to be an adult.

Middlesex and Surrey are widely used!

Just as Cheshire and Lancashire are for a large number of Greater Manchester addresses and businesses

Nobody or any organisation has ever shortened Greater Manchester into Manchester. You never see:
Stockport,
Manchester
SK1 1NT

Because they brought the system in during the 1960s and based it on urban areas! Stockport wasn't a part of Manchester's urban area until the mid 1990s! Jesus!

on any address.

You are trying to compare to London all the time which is ridiculous because even down there they keep the individuality eg:

Croydon
Surrey
CR1 1NT

or

Twickenham
Middx
TW1 1TT
They were based on urban areas! All places in London's urban area now just come under "London" in the PAF. You no longer get ANY place names. From the 60s to 1999 you had addresses like:

64 Victoria Street
Westminster
London
SW1E 6QP

but from 1999 onwards they revised it to:

64 Victoria Street
London
SW1E 6QP

For Manchester you had like:
1 High Street
Droylsden
Manchester
M* ***

But in Manchester they removed the top level (i.e. the Manchester) rather than the bottom level (i.e. the Westminster), so we're now left with:
1 High Street
Droylsden
M* ***

in the Postcode Address File.

You can't argue with a fool.

Quite so, Liverpolitan. All of the areas of London that were served by non-London sorting offices (the TW postal district, KT, BR, EN, etc.) kept the name of their county in their post code. The actual extent of London and its various different local authority definitions had nothing little to do with this.

The parts of the recent Greater Manchester county's area that were not served by the Manchester SO kept their old county names in their addresses after 1974 and rightly so as local government reorganisation had nothing to do with postal organisation.
The same thing happened in most other cities.

This is all caused by my observation that unusually, after Merseyside came into being, the post offices recommended adding the new county name to all of the areas served by non-Liverpool SOs (hence, Southport, Merseyside and St Helens, Merseyside) and neglected to do so in Manchester leaving places such as Sale with Cheshire as its county and Bolton with Lancs. A little bit untidy in its inconsitency perhaps.

This obervation has prompted Birdie to start jumping though logical hoops to try to prove that the reason why half of Greater Manchester retained Lancashire or Cheshire addresses and that no one every used G Manchester as an address is because that Manchester is "Just like London" the only mega big uber city to be, err, seemingly downsized in its county wrt postal addresses. Total tosh of course, but if it makes him happy...

Well actually Middlesex is STILL used in many addresses, including businesses, and letters still get delivered to them. And it was part of official Royal Mail addresses until the 1990s. You are entirely incorrect about this.

You seem to live in a bubble, EB, of what you believe the world to be. Reality must be very confusing for you! Are you able to discuss without going into abuse mode every time you disagree, by the way? I can see you are not, it is probably a part of the syndrome you are afflicted with so I should be forgiving, but it's undignified for someone who claims to be an adult.

They aren't official addresses! Just because people CHOOSE to write that does not make it the correct address. The information stored in the Royal Mail's postcode address file is the correct format for addresses. These no longer include Lancashire, Cheshire, Middlesex or any other county names.

Fuck me, do you have the days of the week sewn in to your skids Early?

Quite so, Liverpolitan. All of the areas of London that were served by non-London sorting offices (the TW postal district, KT, BR, EN, etc.) kept the name of their county in their post code. The actual extent of London and its various different local authority definitions had nothing little to do with this.
The current post code system was put in place during the 1960s and was based on the urban areas of the cities at that time. The postal districts you named above were not a part of London's urban area at that time, hence why they didn't have SW, N, E, etc. post codes and also why they didn't include "London" in the official address! It's simple!

Oh it takes centuries for those changes to come into effect. As a clerk in pre-computer days, I used to resent having to hand-write or hand-type out address envelopes that contained about three times more information than was actually required to deliver the letter. It's a chronic problem. Building Names and Street Numbers, for example, are usually not necessary. Town is often superflous, let alone District, if the post-code is used properly. But once introduced, people will not change them.

EB, the Post Office used to always take the stupidest people on the "milk round", when the big employers recruited graduates. No-one else would work there. That is why it became such a basket-case of an organisation, because it had successive intakes of the worst possible managers. It's sill afflicted with a large number of them. So please don't look to them for common sense or consistency.

Of course you only need the number and postcode info now eg:

1 Ashton St
TW4 4TT

to get it posted, but my argument was about your silly dream of everybody in GM coming together to be re-branded Manchester. It just won't happen.

EB, the Post Office used to always take the stupidest people on the "milk round", when the big employers recruited graduates. No-one else would work there. That is why it became such a basket-case of an organisation, because it had successive intakes of the worst possible managers. It's sill afflicted with a large number of them. So please don't look to them for common sense or consistency.

I don't look to them for consistency. When they reorganised the way addresses were written, though, they tried to make it consistent across all the cities (except London like usual), which is why they removed the Manchester from many of our addresses.

You can't argue with a fool.

Before I came across this Early Bird character I never understood that saying. Now I do. But, in his defence, and it's not a snidey thing, it's fairly obvious that there are some mental health issues going on as well. He's not stupid, he's twisted.

Fuck me, do you have the days of the week sewn in to your skids Early?
:rofl: very funny

Of course you only need the number and postcode info now eg:

1 Ashton St
TW4 4TT

to get it posted, but my argument was about your silly dream of everybody in GM coming together to be re-branded Manchester. It just won't happen.
No, the official addresses per the postcode address file are ALL:

{Number/Name} Street
{Town/City}
Postcode

That is the way they are all written now. Just because it will get delivered doesn't mean that what you wrote was correct.

He's not stupid, he's twisted.

Perhaps but, we are responding to his baiting and giving him a forum. Ignore him and he may go away.

If I move to Salford one day, which is possible, my address will be a Salford, Lancs one. That sounds classy. Salford, Greater Manchester, or Salford, SELNEC (south east lancs north east cheshire) on the other hand, sounds crappy, and Salford, Manchester would be self-defeating. I will move to Salford because it's a place in its own right. If I wanted a Mancheser address I'd move to Mancheser, but Salford has its own identity and character and history and geography - as part of the selnec conurbation and wider urban system - so I would respect that.

Cue "anybody under the age of 40 uses Greater Manchester and not the old style Lancashire" from the tiresome one

Because they brought the system in during the 1960s and based it on urban areas! Stockport wasn't a part of Manchester's urban area until the mid 1990s! Jesus

You don't seem to be getting this post town concept birdie. Stockport does not and never has had Manchester in its address because Stockport is a post town with a sorting office. All mail posted to an address with a SK postcode goes through the Stockport sorting office. This is why ever address in Stockport has Stockport in the address and not Manchester. Put Manchester in the address and you are risking it passing through the wrong sorting office.

It's got bugger all to do with Manchester's urban area. If, as you say, postcodes are based on urban areas (rather than the UK postal system!!!) and Stockport became part of that urban area in the 90s, why has Stockport still got a SK postcode and no address in Stockport has Manchester in its address even today?
[QUOTE=EarlyBird]

And know that we cannot argue with a fool, but this is just weird. Constant bizarre convuluted explanations to try to argue one's way out of a cul de sac? It's eerie. It's also a fucking boring subject, so who cares, but Birdie does whilst being completely confused.

It's all down to having to come up with an explanation every time for any matter that seems to belittle Manchester (and this county/post code thing didn't at all really) and twist it into a way of thinking that makes Manchester bigger and better than anywhere else. I wonder, does he actually believe any of this?

I'll tell you one thing, Birdie, all of the hours you've spent on this forum, usually arguing with some of the most cogent and well informed forumers (as well as the likes of me) with the most outlandish and non-comprehensible arguements have been entirely wasted. I'd imagine that not one person has been convinced by the drivel you've come out with and the overall effect must have been for most people to have thought less of Manchester and its people than if you had never posted. This is unfair on Manchester and its folk but it's your fault.

This says it all... From Google:

"London is shit" - 199 hits
"Manchester is shit" - 13 hits
"Birmingham is shit" - 28 hits
"Glasgow is shit" - 17 hits
"Leeds is shit" - 40 hits
"Liverpool is shit" - 43 hits

You don't seem to be getting this post town concept birdie. Stockport does not and never has had Manchester in its address because Stockport is a post town with a sorting office. All mail posted to an address with a SK postcode goes through the Stockport sorting office. This is why ever address in Stockport has Stockport in the address and not Manchester. Put Manchester in the address and you are risking it passing through the wrong sorting office.
And you don't seem to be getting this either. Stalybridge has an SK postcode, but it's never been Stalybridge, Stockport. Why? Because it's not in Stockport's urban area. Ashton has an OL postcode, but it's never been Ashton-Under-Lyne, Oldham. Why not? Because it's not in Oldham's urban area. Why, then, did Salford get classed as Salford, Manchester? Because it's all to do with urban areas!

It's got bugger all to do with Manchester's urban area. If, as you say, postcodes are based on urban areas (rather than the UK postal system!!!) and Stockport became part of that urban area in the 90s, why has Stockport still got a SK postcode and no address in Stockport has Manchester in its address even today?

The reason it's not included is because they didn't revise the postcode boundaries from the original ones (except for a minor change for Manchester Airport) until 1999, 4 years after Stockport became part of the urban area. The 1999 revision of the system removed county names (which is essentially what the "Manchester" part was) from all official addresses. Even Salford addresses no longer have the "Manchester" in.

It's ALL to do with urban areas. It always has been and it always will be. What you don't seem to be able to get your head around is that those boundaries are still the ones from the 1960s in general, except where major political boundary changes have necessitated change like in the case of Manchester Airport.

This says it all... From Google:

"London is shit" - 199 hits
"Manchester is shit" - 13 hits
"Birmingham is shit" - 28 hits
"Glasgow is shit" - 17 hits
"Leeds is shit" - 40 hits
"Liverpool is shit" - 43 hits

Is this some kind of cry for help? I know it's funny, but there is something a bit wrong with anyone who would type "xxxxxxxxx is shit" into Google like that, let alone then quote the statistic he has himself created. I feel a bit sullied having read this. EB, this is simply insane. There is nothing wrong with Lancashire. You can be happy there. Embrace Lancashire. Give up statistics. Life will be fun. Honestly.

The current post code system was put in place during the 1960s and was based on the urban areas of the cities at that time. The postal districts you named above were not a part of London's urban area at that time, hence why they didn't have SW, N, E, etc. post codes and also why they didn't include "London" in the official address! It's simple!

No it wasn't Kingston has been part of a contuous urban area with London for the best part of a century. I've walked over the KT2, SW boundary, it lies between two streets of Victorian villas off Coombe Hill.

Any address in London that goes to a London sorting office has a London address, any that does not (whether that area is part of the London area now or ever has been or not)

I've found the explanation for the original mystery by the way for why most met county names were incorporated into addresses but Greater Manchester was not:

"The 1974 administrative changes were also followed with regard to metropolitan areas, so Sunderland was referred to as 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' not 'Sunderland, Co. Durham'. However in deference to local sentiment the Greater Manchester area continued (and continues) to be split, in postal terms, between Lancashire and Cheshire."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_counties_of_Great_Britain

Ouch Birdie, it appears that Greater Manchester is the one met county that was not used in postal addresses as the good folk of Bolton, Lancs, and Stockport, Cheshire did not want to be associated with it. And you have just wasted an evening.

No it wasn't Kingston has been part of a contuous urban area with London for the best part of a century. I've walked over the KT2, SW boundary, it lies between two streets of Victorian villas off Coombe Hill.


Any address in London that goes to a London sorting office has a London address, any that does not (whether that area has been cone

I've found the explanation for the original mystery by the way for why most met county names were incorporated into addresses but Greater Manchester was not:

"The 1974 administrative changes were also followed with regard to metropolitan areas, so Sunderland was referred to as 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' not 'Sunderland, Co. Durham'. However in deference to local sentiment the Greater Manchester area continued (and continues) to be split, in postal terms, between Lancashire and Cheshire."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_counties_of_Great_Britain*

Ouch Birdie, it appears that Greater Manchester is the one met county that was not used in postal addresses as the good folk of Bolton, Lancs, and Stockport, Cheshire did not want to be associated with it. And you have just wasted an evening.

From the same page:
This page was last modified 22:23, 9 Jun 2005.

Ouch. Nice try.

I think EB will now be busy doing "Awayo is shit" searches on Google for an hour or two. But seriously, this is why the term SELNEC is better, as it is nuetral and respects the towns and cities as well as historic county affiliations of those living in that urban region. I think even EB would accept it if the post office designated it as the "official" address. "South East Lancashire, North East Cheshire" is the most accurate possible description of the conurbation, and when I move to Salford I'd potentially accept that if I was forced, by law, to stop using my "Salford, Lancs" address.

From the same page:


Ouch. Nice try.

I just feel offended that you've accused me of lying. Is that the best you can do.

If you look at the page in question, the modification that someone made today at 22.23 was correct the punctuation of "e.g." in two places. No text was changed.

Trusty old Wikipedia stores all previous versions however. The version from 26 Jun 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Postal_counties_of_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=4486497) has similarly:

"The 1974 administrative changes were also followed with regard to metropolitan areas, so Sunderland was referred to as 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' not 'Sunderland, Co. Durham'. However in deference to local sentiment the Greater Manchester area continued (and continues) to be split, in postal terms, between Lancashire and Cheshire."

You've lost this one. And don't accuse me of lying again son.

Birmingham-City of a Thousand Trades and a Thousand Thousand Citizens

And the United Kingdoms second city, by whatever measure you wish to use. :) :) :)

I just feel offended that you've accused me of lying. Is that the best you can do.

If you look at the page in question, the modification that someone made today at 22.23 was correct the punctuation of "e.g." in two places. No text was changed.

Trusty old Wikipedia stores all previous versions however. The version from 26 Jun 2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Postal_counties_of_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=4486497) has similarly:

"The 1974 administrative changes were also followed with regard to metropolitan areas, so Sunderland was referred to as 'Sunderland, Tyne and Wear' not 'Sunderland, Co. Durham'. However in deference to local sentiment the Greater Manchester area continued (and continues) to be split, in postal terms, between Lancashire and Cheshire."

You've lost this one. And don't accuse me of lying again son.
I've not lost anything. On the contrary, you just proved the very point I was making. My point was that pages are edited all the time and by anyone. The information you quoted could have been written by any misguided person. It doesn't quote any actual information. If I wanted I could just change it to my version. Does the fact that someone who believes what you believe wrote it first make it correct? No, it just means they got there first. Maybe if you tried quoting a half-way reliable source then it might have some credibility. I mean only the other day I saw an article on wikipedia claiming that Nigel Mansell was a famous Liverpudlian sports personality!!!

Do you know the easiest way to tell that it's a load of bollocks? Well there's the fact that no opinion poll or the like. "in deference to local sentiment" my arse. It's funny how the areas ALL correlate to the 1961 census urban areas isn't it!

When I was a nipper, I lived in Hale near the airport.

Geographically it was in Lancashire, administratively it was in Cheshire and postally it was in Liverpool.

The truth is none of that mattered because the dynamic that effected it's belonging was the economic and cultural draw of Liverpool. That's what signifies a city, as far as I'm aware the Royal Mail or Post Office haven't been accredited with creating metropolis's yet.

Mansell lives on the Isle of Man, that's our island...

And the United Kingdoms second city, by whatever measure you wish to use. :) :) :)
...except urban area population, metro area population, public consensus or political consensus.

You bore me sloyne. Get a clue.

Mansell lives on the Isle of Man, that's our island...
He's a Brummie. Full stop.

I've not lost anything. On the contrary, you just proved the very point I was making. My point was that pages are edited all the time and by anyone. The information you quoted could have been written by any misguided person. It doesn't quote any actual information. If I wanted I could just change it to my version. Does the fact that someone who believes what you believe wrote it first make it correct? No, it just means they got there first. Maybe if you tried quoting a half-way reliable source then it might have some credibility. I mean only the other day I saw an article on wikipedia claiming that Nigel Mansell was a famous Liverpudlian sports personality!!!

Do you know the easiest way to tell that it's a load of bollocks? Well there's the fact that no opinion poll or the like. "in deference to local sentiment" my arse. It's funny how the areas ALL correlate to the 1961 census urban areas isn't it!

It is a little unfair I'll admit. Whilst I don't doubt that "local sentiment" in Bolton and Stockport was for keeping their ancient county names in their addresses and against the adoption of a new, alien-sounding Greater Manchester, people in Sunderland would have wanted to have keep Co. Durham and Senteleners, Lancashire but the post office did not hear them.

Wikipedia is open source, you're correct, but this article (in common with most of those on anally uninteresting topics - and I'm still on at this one at 12.15 am) is does seem to be one of the more well-researched ones and contains nothing unbelievable.

It's funny how the areas ALL correlate to the 1961 census urban areas isn't it!

What, all postal addresses correspond to conuous urban areas circa, 1961? They don't.

Three places, chosen simply as I've lived there:

Formby, Liverpool L37 (there's open farmland, a wood, another town, a river and several miles further farmland between Formby and the start of the Liverpool built up area).

Kidlington, Oxford OX11, (open countryside and three miles between the town and the city).

Kingston KT2 (no london post code or address but a continuous built up area between the centre of Kingston right through to the centre of London dating back to the C19th).

Formby has Liverpool in its address as Liverpool is its post town - it is not part of the Liverpool urban area

Kindlington has Oxford in its address as Oxford is its post town - it is not part of the Oxford urban area.

Kingston is part of the London urban area but does not have London in its address as its post town is Kingston and not London.

There's no obvious correlation at all beteen urban areas and postal addresses. Do you really believe what you're writing - it's deeply weird?

That's what signifies a city, as far as I'm aware the Royal Mail or Post Office haven't been accredited with creating metropolis's yet.


That is what occured to me at the start of all this as well.
Since when has the Royal Mail been the last word on these things anyway??

What, all postal addresses correspond to conuous urban areas circa, 1961? They don't.

Three places, chosen simply as I've lived there:

Formby, Liverpool L37 (there's open farmland, a wood, another town, a river and several miles further farmland between Formby and the start of the Liverpool built up area).

Kidlington, Oxford OX11, (open countryside and three miles between the town and the city).

Kingston KT2 (no london post code or address but a continuous built up area between the centre of Kingston right through to the centre of London dating back to the C19th).

Formby has Liverpool in its address as Liverpool is its post town - it is not part of the Liverpool urban area

Kindlington has Oxford in its address as Oxford is its post town - it is not part of the Oxford urban area.

Kingston is part of the London urban area but does not have London in its address as its post town is Kingston and not London.

There's no obvious correlation at all beteen urban areas and postal addresses. Do you really believe what you're writing - it's deeply weird?

I didn't say that the POSTCODES correspond to the urban areas from 1961, I said that the NAME OF THE AREA does. i.e. "Manchester" was all places in the Manchester urban area in 1961 (hence it includes Salford), "Oldham" was all the places in the Oldham urban area in 1961 (hence it doesn't include Ashton). The only areas listed with an urban area name in their addresses in the postcode address file were those parts in the urban areas. No parts of GM outside the 1961 urban area said "Manchester" in the PAF, no parts of Merseyside outside the Liverpool and Birkenhead 1961 urban areas said "Merseyside" in their addresses and no parts outside of Greater London's 1961 urban area said "London" in the PAF.

This is where those names came from. It's quite simple. My original post had nothing to do with postcodes. This is something you brought into the discussion. I already pointed out that though most of these areas tally with the postcodes they do not do so in their entirety.

Since 1999, however, the Royal Mail has changed the definition of a postal address from:
{Name/Number} Street
{Town/City}
{County/Conurbation}
Postcode

to:
{Name/Number} Street
{Town/City}
Postcode

I didn't say that the POSTCODES correspond to the urban areas from 1961, I said that the NAME OF THE AREA does. i.e. "Manchester" was all places in the Manchester urban area in 1961 (hence it includes Salford), "Oldham" was all the places in the Oldham urban area in 1961 (hence it doesn't include Ashton). The only areas listed with an urban area name in their addresses in the postcode address file were those parts in the urban areas. No parts of GM outside the 1961 urban area said "Manchester" in the PAF, no parts of Merseyside outside the Liverpool and Birkenhead 1961 urban areas said "Merseyside" in their addresses and no parts outside of Greater London's 1961 urban area said "London" in the PAF.

This is where those names came from. It's quite simple. My original post had nothing to do with postcodes. This is something you brought into the discussion. I already pointed out that though most of these areas tally with the postcodes they do not do so in their entirety.

Since 1999, however, the Royal Mail has changed the definition of a postal address from:
{Name/Number} Street
{Town/City}
{County/Conurbation}
Postcode

to:
{Name/Number} Street
{Town/City}
Postcode

My post mentioned the name of areas. Kingston is part of the London urban area, London is not in its address. Pinner is part of the London urban area (and has been since well before 1961), London is not part of its address, Middlesex is.

Formby is not part of Liverpool's urban area but has always had Liverpool is its post town, hence its address.

Btw, nowhere had Merseyside in its address prior to the seventies as Merseyside county was created in 1974 and was not used in addresses before then.

In 1974, the post office began to recommnend that Merseyside be used in ALL Merseyside addresses, included those areas outside of Liverpool or Birkenhead's Urban areas (Southport, Heswall, etc.) and not areas of Birkenhead's urban area outside of the new county (Ellesmere Port).

Nothing similar occurred in Manchester. Those areas served by non-Manchester sorting offices kept not only their seperate (Stockport, Bolton) addresses but also their old county names, be they part of Manchester's UA or not. The wikipedia article that you will not accept gives a plausible explanation for this.

Your UA theory is highly eccentric and, as far as I can see, completeky groundless, yet you're arguing it with passionate determination. You appear to have created the whole creaking, illogical structure of it on the fly in the desperate hope of explaining the Merseyside/Greater Manchester naming inconsistancy - the explanation for which we now have - in a way that reflects positively on Manchester .

Why bother for pity's sake, it's not important? Admit you're wrong for once.

Why bother for pity's sake, it's not important? Admit you're wrong for once.

This could set an unfortunate precedent, as if he admits he is wrong over this, he might feel obliged to admit he is repeatedly wrong on a number of issues. In fact, having now looked at a few of his arguments I think it could become an endless activity. He could, I suppose, just put "I am, of course, wrong" as his signature, as a sort of catch-all. But his modus operandi is to be wrong, then obfuscate, then change the subject, then claim he was right all along, without any reference to his original error.

For all we know, something serious might happen if EB ever did realise he was wrong (to be fair to him, I think he is incapable of realising his error, which is why he doesn't admit to it), and hell might freeze over or the sky might turn black at noon or something. So maybe it is for the best that this most wrong of wrongheaded people just continues on his self-deluded little way with his twaddle, twisted logic, errors and general nonsense. The rest of the world knows he is wrong.

And, one final thought - since he cannot appreciate or apply orthodox forms of evidence or argument, let alone logic, what worth would an admission of being wrong be from EB? If he admits he is wrong, that might indicate that in fact he is right.

My post mentioned the name of areas. Kingston is part of the London urban area, London is not in its address. Pinner is part of the London urban area (and has been since well before 1961), London is not part of its address, Middlesex is.
No, per the old PAF Kingston is in London, i.e. it's Kingston-upon-Thames, London. I can't find any trace of Pinner at all. Where the hell are you getting your information from? It's completely incorrect!

Formby is not part of Liverpool's urban area but has always had Liverpool is its post town, hence its address.
Again, per the old PAF from Royal Mail, Formby's correct address does not contain "Liverpool". Never has, never will. Just because some people choose to write it doesn't mean it's the correct address. Formby is completely irrelevant though. As I said, this system was a TRIAL that was used in MANCHESTER AND LONDON ONLY. The "Manchester" and "London" addresses tally completely with the 1961 urban areas. It wasn't taken further because they decided it was too resource intensive to keep updating the PAF in accordance with urban area changes. It's all since been abandoned anyway as this part of the address has been dropped.

Btw, nowhere had Merseyside in its address prior to the seventies as Merseyside county was created in 1974 and was not used in addresses before then.

In 1974, the post office began to recommnend that Merseyside be used in ALL Merseyside addresses, included those areas outside of Liverpool or Birkenhead's Urban areas (Southport, Heswall, etc.) and not areas of Birkenhead's urban area outside of the new county (Ellesmere Port).
Yes, they brought it in around the time of the creation of the metropolitan counties. The process for the creation of these counties was begun in 1968. Because of this there was no 1971 census data available and so they had to use 1961 census data. It's quite simple.

Nothing similar occurred in Manchester. Those areas served by non-Manchester sorting offices kept not only their seperate (Stockport, Bolton) addresses but also their old county names, be they part of Manchester's UA or not. The wikipedia article that you will not accept gives a plausible explanation for this.
No, the wikipedia article didn't give any plausible explanation. It gave no explanation as to why Salford was in Manchester but Stalybridge wasn't in Stockport. The reason for this is urban areas.

Your UA theory is highly eccentric and, as far as I can see, completeky groundless, yet you're arguing it with passionate determination. You appear to have created the whole creaking, illogical structure of it on the fly in the desperate hope of explaining the Merseyside/Greater Manchester naming inconsistancy - the explanation for which we now have - in a way that reflects positively on Manchester .
Personally I think it's your baseless theory about sorting offices that's groundless. After all, why, if the naming is based on sorting offices, can I give you dozens of examples in Greater Manchester that aren't based on sorting offices? Why also do they all fit in with the urban areas of Manchester and London so perfectly in pre-1999 PAFs?

Why bother for pity's sake, it's not important? Admit you're wrong for once.
I'm not "admitting" I'm wrong when I know for certain that you don't have the foggiest what you're on about!

Truly bizarre. Creative in its way, although completely fantastical. You're a one off Birdie.

One thing you surely will have to concede: although you may have found no trace of Pinner. Others have. We need no modern-day Schliemann to rediscover for us this apparently fabulous Metroland suburb.

One thing you surely will have to concede: although you may have found no trace of Pinner. Others have. We need no modern-day Schliemann to rediscover for us this apparently fabulous Metroland suburb.
I've Googled to find a real address in Pinner so I could compare in the PAFs.

1994:
Peter Reglar Estate Agent
8 Red Lion Parade
Bridge Street
PINNER
Middlesex
HA5 3JD

2004:
Peter Reglar Estate Agent
8 Red Lion Parade
Bridge Street
PINNER
HA5 3JD

Check it out in Google. Pinner is only just inside the London urban area now! It's less than half a mile from the edge of it! In 1961 it was outside it. :)

HAHAHAHAHAHA

I've Googled to find a real address in Pinner so I could compare in the PAFs.

1994:
Peter Reglar Estate Agent
8 Red Lion Parade
Bridge Street
PINNER
Middlesex
HA5 3JD

2004:
Peter Reglar Estate Agent
8 Red Lion Parade
Bridge Street
PINNER
HA5 3JD

Check it out in Google. Pinner is only just inside the London urban area now! It's less than half a mile from the edge of it! In 1961 it was outside it. :)

Here's todays map, showing just how encompassed by the Greater London conurbation Pinner is. If Pinner was a seperate urban area in 1961, I'm a Uzbek.

http://www.multimap.com/map/browse.cgi?lat=51.5971&lon=-0.3411&scale=50000&icon=x[/[/IMG]

Pinner is served by the Harrow sorting office, however, and hence its HA postcode and Mddx, rather than London address.

No address in Kingston with a KT post code has a London address and none ever has. Yet more strange stuff, Birdie.

Today, this PAF you are so fond of as available on royal mail.com shows every Kingston (KT) address as xx street, KINGSTON UPON THAMES, KTx xxx and every London address (SW, SE, E, N, NW, W, WC, EC) as xxx street, LONDON, xxx xxx.


Oh and here is the PAF record of an address in formby, one that is well outside the Liverpool urban area, believe you me.

Tesco Stores Ltd
Altcar Road
Formby
LIVERPOOL
L37 8DP

Here's todays map, showing just how encompassed by the Greater London conurbation Pinner is. If Pinner was a seperate urban area in 1961, I'm a Uzbek.

http://www.multimap.com/map/browse.cgi?lat=51.5971&lon=-0.3411&scale=50000&icon=x[/[/IMG]

Pinner is served by the Harrow sorting office, however, and hence its HA postcode and Mddx, rather than London address.

Don't be an idiot!

http://maps.google.co.uk/

Try putting Pinner in there. As you'll see, it borders Ruislip Common. This is outside the London urban area per the 2001 census, never mind the 1961 one. It's not encompassed by the London urban area at all! Next you'll be trying to claim Harefield is in the urban area!

No address in Kingston with a KT post code has a London address and none ever has. Yet more strange stuff, Birdie.

Today, this PAF you are so fond of as available on royal mail.com shows every Kingston (KT) address as xx street, KINGSTON UPON THAMES, KTx xxx and every London address (SW, SE, E, N, NW, W, WC, EC) as xxx street, LONDON, xxx xxx.
As I said to you, when they altered the boundaries for what they called "London" and what they called "Manchester" they used different definitions of the areas. That is what changing the boundaries means... It doesn't take a genius! As I already said, they changed Manchester to match everywhere else, i.e. it only displays the postal town/city. London, however, is a different kettle of fish in that it's boundary now simply covers the area known as "Inner London", rather than just the City of London, which would be the true boundary.


Oh and here is the PAF record of an address in formby, one that is well outside the Liverpool urban area, believe you me.

Tesco Stores Ltd
Altcar Road
Formby
LIVERPOOL
L37 8DP
As I've said to you multiple times now ONLY LONDON AND MANCHESTER USED THE URBAN AREA DEFINITION TO DEFINE THE POSTAL AREA. IT WAS A TRIAL THAT PROVED UNSUCCESSFUL AND WAS ABOLISHED IN THE 1999 CHANGES. Jesus, how many times do I have to say it before you stop posting irrelevant information?

Fashion chain opens in city Jun 10 2005




By Neil Hodgson, Liverpool Echo


A NEW fashion label and chain of high street stores is being launched in Liverpool.

Fashion Lab has opened the first of more than 40 stores planned by the end of this year in Dawson Way in the city's St John's shopping centre.

Two more are planned for Birken-head and Bootle, as well as sites around the UK.

The company is an Anglo-Chinese joint venture, with an export operation in Hong Kong. It is currently based in Ashton-in-Makerfield, where it has its main warehousing operation, but managing director Steve Richmond said the business plans to relocate to Liverpool next week.

He said: "We looked at Manchester and Liverpool, but we preferred Liverpool."

About 20 staff will be based in the Liverpool head office. Each franchised store will create up to 10 new jobs.

The Fashion Lab clothes range comprises two of its own labels: Sparkle, aimed at 18 to 30-year-olds and Opalstone, for 25 to 60-year-olds.

They are designed in the UK and Malaysia, made in China and exported through Hong Kong, costing about 60% less than main high street stores.

Mr Richmond said: "The clothes are created by the same designers who work on many well-known high street labels."

So far 22 franchisees have been signed up. Fashion Lab hopes to open 43 stores between now and Christmas.

This says it all... From Google:

"London is shit" - 199 hits
"Manchester is shit" - 13 hits
"Birmingham is shit" - 28 hits
"Glasgow is shit" - 17 hits
"Leeds is shit" - 40 hits
"Liverpool is shit" - 43 hits


Oh dear. :weird:

To confuse things further I live in Hindley Wigan which is WN2 but two miles down the road is Atherton M46 but still in the Wigan metro borough.The Athertonians always use Atherton Manchester M46 in their addresses but here everyone uses Wigan Lancs WN2

They also eat a lot of pies in Wigan so I've been told. :cheers:

They also eat a lot of pies in Wigan so I've been told. :cheers:

:weird:

Weaste,it's a well known fact. :cheers:

Just goes to prove its the urban area and not bounderies which dictate postcodes....Kung fuzi the pie standards have slipped in Wigan recently...there are better to be found in Bolton,I'am a butty man myself :)

Post codes have never been about boundaries, as someone mentioned earlier it is about where best an area can be served from a particular sorting office.
If the Post Office decides it would be better to change an area to another S.O. then the post code would change,as happened in the Wirral.

Thanks for the info on the pies. :cheers:

He said: "We looked at Manchester and Liverpool, but we preferred Liverpool."

More like "couldn't afford Manchester." ;)

:whisper: He's nuts.

He said: "We looked at Manchester and Liverpool, but we preferred Liverpool."


Oh god this clinches it for Liverpool, I concede, you have the better city! :lol: :crazy:

Oh god this clinches it for Liverpool, I concede, you have the better city! :lol: :crazy:

Thought everyone knew this already. :cheers:

Well apart from E.B.

Thought everyone knew this already. :cheers:

Well apart from E.B.

You know you live in the better city when a scouser dedicates an entire thread to you despite the fact you're a wool. :)

Well at least this is progress,you'r admitting to your 'woolyness'. :cheers:

Oh god this clinches it for Liverpool, I concede, you have the better city!

I couldn't agree more :laugh:

What philistines like Earlyturd don't seem to realise is that their perceived moment of glory will be yesterday's news by 2010. After all, Manchester, until its regeneration, was bleak and even now there are many scars of decay in the urban fabric. Liverpool however has massive amounts of development proposed (probably billions worth with Baltic area and Central Docks waiting for development) in addition to the infrastructure and many projects that are currently taking place. Liverpool is experiencing 15 years worth of development in 3-5 years. The development is coming later than in Leeds and Manchester, but will surpass those places. People from outside the northwest will be prioritising Liverpool in the future in their travels.

Kings Dock, PSDA, Lime St, Skelhorne St, Old Hall St, Baltic Triangle, Central Docks- adding great stuff to the amazing things that are already in Liverpool e.g. 2500 listed buildings :cheers: and much, much more.

Did someone mention pies?

I'm starving now! :)

What philistines like Earlyturd don't seem to realise is that their perceived moment of glory will be yesterday's news by 2010. After all, Manchester, until its regeneration, was bleak and even now there are many scars of decay in the urban fabric. Liverpool however has massive amounts of development proposed (probably billions worth with Baltic area and Central Docks waiting for development) in addition to the infrastructure and many projects that are currently taking place. Liverpool is experiencing 15 years worth of development in 3-5 years. The development is coming later than in Leeds and Manchester, but will surpass those places. People from outside the northwest will be prioritising Liverpool in the future in their travels.

Kings Dock, PSDA, Lime St, Skelhorne St, Old Hall St, Baltic Triangle, Central Docks- adding great stuff to the amazing things that are already in Liverpool e.g. 2500 listed buildings :cheers: and much, much more.

there is 12 billion pounds worth of development going on in manchester right now, its regeneration is on-going and it will continue.

Prove it :laugh:

i'll let earlybird do it, he's the one i heard it off..cue earlybird..

The blind leading the blind :hammer:

blind?? i think it's quite obvious that there's a hell of a lot of development going on in manchester right now, billions upon billions, just take a look at the development thread. anyway, i dont want to get into an argument, i just thought i'd intervine when you were implying that more development was going on in liverpool. I'll let earlybird carry on (seen as it's his thread).

Yeah. Blind.