Find a pub that needs you
ismypubfucked.com305 points by thinkingemote 20 hours ago
305 points by thinkingemote 20 hours ago
Kinda meta, but this is the first time in a long time where I've put only the first half of my postcode in expecting it not to work and been surprised. Most of these "find your nearest XYZ" site require the full postcode which is just unnecessary unless you're looking for a fairly precise location. A full postcode can narrow your location down to an individual street, so its nice not to give too much away if you can.
For anyone not in the know, UK postcodes are made up of two parts: a general area (the outward code) and then a more specific one (the inward code.) Generally speaking a postcode + house number will be good enough to get a letter delivered to the right place, though the sorting office might not be too happy with you...
The format [0] is roughly: AB12 3CD, though the number of letters/numbers on the left side can vary a bit. As far as I know the second set of numbers is always 1 digit though, so that's how you can easily split the two sides of it to format it nicely. There's a couple of special ones that break the rules though.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postcodes_in_the_United_Kingdo...
There used to be a site "postcodeine" which would overlay the prefixes onto a map as you typed, so you could enter "SW" or "KY" etc and watch it narrow down the area by keystroke.
I agree with the bit about the having to enter a full postcode on some sites, I often use one nearby or, if they make me select a specific address for no valid reason I make sure I use a random address nearby. Apologies to some of my neighbours who might be bombarded with junk mail for services I’ve once been half interested in.
A full postcode is often much less than a single street.
Picking something at random stick “SW15 6DZ” into Google maps and you’ll see it only covers 6 buildings (most are individual houses but some are split into flats). According to the Royal Mail address finder site there are only 12 unique delivery addresses that share that postcode. The Western half of that road has 12 or so full postcodes for only 100 houses.
A full postcode and one other bit of information can often be enough to uniquely identify someone.
If a US 5 digit zipcode is roughly equivalent to the “general area” part of a UK postcode (94107 <=> SW15) then the full UK postcode is like the 9 digit US Zip+4 format where the extra 4 digits narrow location down to a block, part of a block or even a specific building.
A friend of mine who lived in a tent in a park got his own postcode. True story.
Details: election time. He went to the election folks and asked for his election papers. They said "sure, where do you live?" he said "the Bender, Eastville Park, Bristol", they said "that's not a valid address", he said "that's where I live, so that's where I'd like my registration to be, please". There was some back and forth. They caved, and duly entered his address on the electoral roll as such. Then he went to the Post Office and said "this is my address, as entered on the electoral roll, can I have my postcode please?". The Post Office kinda had no option, since this was now his official address. So they gave him a postcode and the postie had to walk through the park to drop off his mail.
> the 9 digit US Zip+4 format where the extra 4 digits narrow location down to a block, part of a block or even a specific building.
A US Zip+4 usually identifies a specific delivery point. In some places this can mean it can even identify specific units within a building.
Yep, locally where I am there’s one postcode for all the houses on one side of the street (all the even numbered houses) and another for the opposite side (all the odd numbers.)
Presumably it helps a lot with validating the address is correct, kinda like a checksum, and also probably helps with how deliveries are organised by the local office before the postie is sent out with them all.
"A full postcode is often much less than a single street."
My business has its own unique postcode and so does next door! Between us we cover roughly three acres. Our place is one building with parking and a fair bit of greenery.
There is apparently a suite to rent in the Rosewood Hotel in London (near Holborn) which has it's own postcode (WC1V 7EN).
To be fair it's a 6-bedroom wing, but still a fun fact.
> A full postcode can narrow your location down to an individual street,
Often a single block of flats. Rurally perhaps even just a single residence?
I lived in SW1 many years ago and was surprised to learn, from this website, that SW goes all the way out to SW19!
Fun fact: apart from the main office SW1 they're alphabetised by area, from SW2 Brixton to SW19 Wimbledon. All of the London postcode areas are like this.
And a bit further to SW20 in Raynes Park (a.k.a. “West Wimbledon” in Estate Agent vernacular).
I’ve lived somewhere in SW18/SW15/SW19 for the last 30 years. Having not grown up in London I can’t imagine living anywhere else. Apparently many other bits of London (North, East, central, etc) are good too but I’m not ready for change.
Wow a fantastic independent pub near where I used to live in London is seeing its rateable value go up 480%! This website really puts the headlines in to a nice local perspective.
It seems like the taxes only go up while the services get worse in the UK, although I’ve been away for 5 years now so maybe things improved.
> seeing its rateable value go up 480%!
Rateable value is based on what the market prices would be to rent that space. So, somebody is doing nicely apparently.
But if the landlord owns the pub (rare in the UK I know), but I believe it’s the case in this instance, then what are they getting from unrealised property price gains?
Leverages and confidence from the credit agency (be it banks or private investments), and the higher possiblity of approving the borrowing, and thus getting more shitty debts to be made, and contribute more to the total Gee-Dee-Pee which is the holy grail those economists chase after
What does anyone gain from it really, except money in the bank for a handful of individuals, outsized property prices seem to be a hurdle for functional societies in basically every way.
It doesn't benefit a town if rent is so expensive that their businesses shut down.
When young I use to work in construction. (With diplomas) The wages for 18 year olds in the Netherlands at the time were such that I got 340 euro per month for 40 hour weeks. It's a truly shit salary but you could also see it as a wonderful formula to build cheap houses. As my boss billed the customers 28 euro per hour for my work and those houses cost roughly 35000 to buy(!) and it took roughly 80 hours of work each. (Very rough estimates but that oddly doesn't matter) You could say I build 6.4% of the houses. They roughly cost 350 000 euro today which seems 10 fold but since people can't afford that they need a mortgage and pay 3 times that amount over 30 years. That would mean my labor now costs 10 000 per month. At the time I tried to calculate the savings escape velocity and discovered that if I saved 100% of my income I would be able to buy my own house in never years. If I build 6.4% of a house in 2 weeks that would be 3.2% per week or 32 weeks to build 100%.
Say 64 weeks and the process produces one whole home for someone else. I get that there should be some people between the construction worker and the citizen eventho they never did anything useful to the result but the margins are so preposterous that the original salary is a mere rounding error.
Then I look at Amish barn raising videos and the laughter becomes uncontrollable. I would definitely go there and help out - for free of course. If I had to keep doing that I would look for some vegetables and uhh my own house? Even if they would never build it for me it would still be more enjoyable than the western extortion scheme.
You conveniently leave out that you were making minimum(?) youth wage.
In 2026, at 18y minimum wage is €7.36 per hour and at 21y it rockets up to €14.71
Not that youth wage past 18y isn't a stupid concept, but your wage being guaranteed to at least double in ~36 months time is rather relevant.
The were making 8.5 per hour which above the 2026 youth wage.
They also are relating a story from their past and since they have had an account since 2015, I am assuming their youthful past was at least 1 decade ago if not nearly 20 years ago.
> In 2026, at 18y minimum wage is €7.36 per hour and at 21y it rockets up to €14.71
And the average house price just went past half a million. Even cheap housing is north of 350K. You can't save up against yearly price increases.
> ... those houses [...] took roughly 80 hours of work each.
80 hours total on-site labor to build, or 80 hour of your (presumably lower-skill) labor?
Nothing, but if market value of the land is going up, then that means the price for government services is going up (e.g. government employees need to be paid more, land acquisition or rent costs more, materials cost more, etc). Hence taxes collected have to go up.
This could all simply be due to a devaluation of the currency, rather than due to increased desirability or productivity.
> It seems like the taxes only go up while the services get worse in the UK,
Same in the Netherlands
Here’s the Lamb and Flag in Oxford
https://www.ismypubfucked.com/pub/11447801200
> the Inklings, a literary group including J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis, started meeting at The Lamb and Flag.
The Lamb and Flag has faced previous financial challenges.
It in fact closed temporarily in the pandemic due to UK law preventing their then owner / operator, St John’s College, a charity, subsidising a loss making business, despite having the wherewithal to do so.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-55763746.amp
Amateurs. One close to me is at an +821% increase in its tax bill and rateable value at 613%.
The services have certainly not got better in the last 5 years. This Government is fiscally illiterate and has hit the top of the Laffer curve and is now trying to go down the other side.
This government have been in power for less than 2 years. Despite launching a lot of trial balloons on raising taxes they haven't actually raised the headline tax rates (other than allowing fiscal drag to do so).
Overall the tax burden in the UK is middling for western democracies. It's actually on the low side for low earners - which is probably a problem because the distribution is such that the majority pay very little.
The other problem being cliff edges and complexities which distinctive chasing pay rises and working more for a lot of people.
Unfortunately, if an election were to be held today, the morons at Reform would have the greatest chance of winning, thanks to Starmer's ostrich syndrome, Corbyn dividing the Labour vote and the Tories being absolutely irrelevant after 15 years of continuous rule.
I'd be interested to know your view on how you think Britain should be governed and the extent to which you think others would agree. Serious question: can you offer a link to some such description?
Curtail immigration to pre-Brexit levels (with a strong focus on repatriating criminals and net tax non-contributing immigrant households), focus on the working class and devise a route for the UK to get back into the EU. Also refocus policing to focus on actual societal issues - child grooming and the rise of fundamentalist elements (as evidenced by the UAE banning their citizens from studying in the UK) - as opposed to elderly citizens tweets. Devalue the GBP to refund the NHS and roll back austerity while investing further into energy independence and removing bureaucratic red tape for consumer scale mitigation technologies.
Any party that does all of these will be guaranteed electoral wins for decades - I've seen the data back when I was a Tory. Problem is, these points are kryptonite to the very identity of either major party.
Thank you! I took a bet with myself on what you would say (if you did) and lost! Seems to me that the EU as presently constructed is a huge problem; on some other points I'd agree.
Don’t. Just don’t.
There’s time for some party to sort themselves out before the next election is due (Aug 2029).
I thought Corbyn started his own party? Surely they have time to figure out a way to look more competent than Starmer of all people
The more Corbyn performs, the more the Labour vote will get divided. The same balkanization happened with the Tories and Reform/UKIP.
"This" ...?
You jest.
Meet the new government, same as the old government.
old government left them a £20bn funding hole to fix as they broke the rules on spending.
Agreed. I think Parliamentary Democracy has about run in course - all countries under it face basically the same problems, and the elections are meaningless.
The onus is on you to suggest an alternative. Which countries not under it 'face the same problems'?
- A strong leader and a weak bureaucracy, so that your vote means something. - A good constitution that puts hard limits on what they can do, no boiling the frog with freedom of speech restrictions like Canada, Australia, and The UK
So basically an elected dictator with a functioning kill switch. Not a parade of faceless, temporary, unimportant prime ministers and elections which don't matter.
> freedom of speech restrictions like Canada, Australia, and The UK
Unlike in the USA, where speaking out to, or disagreeing with, the president will get you removed from positions of authority?
(If you haven't already gathered, such bogus claims of free speech restrictions in other countries are distracting you from the reality of what is happening in your own country.)
Disclaimer - I don't drink at all. Still, when visiting London, I found going to Pubs (for the food mostly) a magical experience. When you enter such place, see that it's so so old, almost like a relic, like a monument, you really appreciate the place. My business trips led me to London centre so I saw the oldest ones.
One striking feature in the UK is the number of pubs that 'went on fire'.
The business is no longer viable, planning constraints (and often listed building constraints, which is protection for historical buildings, many pubs are very old) won't let them do anything else with the building so they sit empty until they spontaneously combust. Soon after they get demolished and regrow as a supermarket or apartments.
Worth noting the circle of "pubs that light on fire" and "flat roofed 1970s slum pub" almost entirely overlap. Nobodies setting fire to their thatched-roof pub from 1650 because of pub rates. They just change hands through the breweries every 3-4 years now.
https://news.sky.com/story/police-now-treating-fire-at-histo...
More profitable to convert the pub into a house and sell it that to actually run a pub.
Great idea!
https://www.mirror.co.uk/money/personal-finance/finance-expe... shows how little pubs make per pint, very sad.
If anyone's curious about cask beer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ud_eTwY4nc&list=PLyDTS7ZG3z... is a very interesting youtube video series by The Craft Beer Channel.
My grandparents were publicans 70+ years ago. Even they they made very little on beer. All the profit was spirits and software drinks. Probably food as well now.
> All the profit was spirits and software drinks.
What are the margins on a Codeacola?
It's interesting, I was hoping it would be based on more than just the rates change though. Maybe combined with Google "how busy is this place" data, for example.
Agreed. Currently it reckons that the most-fucked pub in my area is the largest pub within walking distance from a major premier league football stadium.
But it's always busy even out of season, and absolutely heaving on match days. I'd be surprised if a single match day's profits weren't sufficient to cover the additional tax for the year.
Personally, I'll continue to offer my enthusiastic support to my much smaller, friendlier local even though it's facing only a tiny tax increase by comparison.
Whilst you make a good point, the true purpose of this site it to draw attention to the new outrageous tax bills faced by pubs; many of which are going under and are a real loss to the communities they serve.
Interest in context on "government pub rates". New tax scheme?
Existing tax. Proposed new calculation for the "value" of business property, disproportionately affecting pubs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8e57dexly1o
> In her November Budget, Chancellor Rachel Reeves scaled back business rate discounts that have been in force since the pandemic from 75% to 40% - and announced that there would be no discount at all from April. That, combined with big upward adjustments to rateable values of pub premises, left landlords with the prospect of much higher rates bills.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_rates_in_England
> Properties are assessed in a rating list with a rateable value, a valuation of their annual rental value on a fixed valuation date using assumptions fixed by statute. Rating lists are created and maintained by the Valuation Office Agency, a UK government executive agency.
Ah, interesting. So it sounds like the tax roughly scales with property value (or size). And pubs are probably a "poor use of land" because the revenue per square foot is not particularly high?
Yes. It scales with a government agency's estimate of the property's annual rent (even if you own it), based on market rates in the area over the past two years, which they then scale up/down based on floorspace and how dilapidated the building is.
You pay a percentage of the hypothetical rent as tax. There is a lower rate if you're a small business, and there are also tax reliefs for various reasons (charity, partial building occupation, etc.)
But pubs have been in trouble for quite some time: https://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Article/2025/05/27/numbe...
Pubs have high costs, small margins and customers are extremely price-sensitive. What pubs are generally asking for is more types of relief, because what we tend to see is pubs close, people in the area become more isolated, and the building remains empty for years thereafter. [] Pubs appreciated the post-COVID relief, but tax rates are about to shoot up.
[] fun fact: if the building is vacant, its landlord must pay rates as if it's 100% occupied. Hence this brazen scheme where a man puts a snail farm in every room so you can pay the rates of an agricultural enterprise: https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/dec/04/...
... was that a real guardian article, or just an elaborate prank built around the phrase "shell company"?
Pubs are dying. Have been for years.
Many deaths were postponed because their taxes were reduced due to Covid. Those taxes are now returning to normal levels. This will result in a glut of deaths, as pubs that were just hanging on go under.
The policy question is, basically, do we want to subsidize pubs because they're part of our national culture, even though we don't use them nearly as much as we used to?
"Does Britain really need?" has been responsible for the gutting of so much of what used to make Britain a nice place to live over the last 20 years. You can say she same about public libraries, local bus routes, civic architecture, arts funding, youth services, maintenance budgets. The damage has been incalculable.
You won't find any argument from me on all those other things.
But pubs are a weird place to draw the line.
Every one of them individually seems like a weird place to draw the line. Social fabric and the ties that bond matter.
The government has decided that they know what’s good for you better for you than you do. So they tax alcohol at incredibly high rates.
Without this more pubs could exist. So I don’t think it’s a case of subsidising as much as removing the disincentive.
While agreeing totally with your sentiment it's a fact that alcohol (the raison d'etre for pubs existing at present unless their business model changes) is classed as a Group 1 carcinogen. 'Consuming alcohol increases the risk of developing at least 7 types of cancer;, https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports-and-publications/... etc., We've all got to die but some ways are nastier than others.
I’m not familiar with the UK, but is the tax on alcohol at pubs higher than at a store? My general understanding was that people have just shopped visiting pubs for other reasons - like diluted drinks, crappy food, loud music, etc.
People stop visiting crappy pubs if they have diluted drinks (quite rare, UK is very strict about being served exact alcohol measures, there is very little free pouring in the UK and many people would spot other drinks being diluted), crappy food (sadly all too common), loud music (age related), etc.
But not many pubs are crappy in these respects.
The main reasons why fewer people are visiting average or good pubs are: * cost of living is going up so many people have less disposable income * the younger generations are much less interested in alcohol than previous generations
The latter point is an interesting one. There are two wildly different drivers for this that I’ve witnessed.
Many of the under 25s now either don’t drink alcohol at all, or only drink a fraction of what their elders did. Many prefer to just go to the gym instead (which is the millenials third space).
On the flip side, some of the children of my friends and family say that alcohol in pubs is just too expensive, so they get their kicks from recreational drugs like weed or ket.
The number of people who have the disposable income to go to the pub regularly is falling in the UK, and the mainstay of the pub was often the working class and they are being priced out by everything getting more expensive.
There aren’t enough people with enough disposable income to weather the storms and keep going to the pub regardless, and therefore pubs (in general) are in deep trouble.
> is the tax on alcohol at pubs higher than at a store?
No, but the tax on food - which is where a lot of money lies, for most pubs in this day and age - is. Also, business rates end up being significantly higher per unit of alcohol sold. This means stores can keep alcohol prices very low (even under cost, as a promotional item).
Add to that that alcohol consumption rates are decreasing overall, sugar tax affecting non-alcoholic drinks, energy prices skyrocketing, etc.
Bars and pubs aren't really competing against the store or restaurants, they're competing against you drinking alone or with only close friends. If stepping in to have a beer and shoot the shit would cost a significant chunk of a day's wages, you just won't do it, but if I can buy more beer with an hours wages than I can drink in an hour, it's not a bad time.
Weatherspoons charge under £3 for a pint in town. That's 15 minutes at minimum wage.
Beer was far more expensive 25 years ago - £1.60 in 2000 in the student pub when I first started buying my own beer, that was about half an hour at minimum wage.
On the cost side: Wages are higher, energy costs more, rent is higher (because if the pub can't operate the owner can get planning permission to convert it to a private dwelling and sell it for £600k rather than making £12k a year in rent)
On the demand side: People are healthier and drink less. It's nowhere near as acceptable to go out for a few pints at lunch time. People can't drive to a rural pub.
> Weatherspoons charge under £3 for a pint in town. That's 15 minutes at minimum wage.
Yeah but then you've to drink at spoons.
The thing is, they've purchased so many historic pubs, that if you refuse to drink at one that's a choice. I'm not saying that's a terrible choice, but it's a choice that bars you from an awful lot of pubs.
isn't weatherspoons like getting drunk at applebees basically? comparing that to a "pub" is kinda laughable
I have been to a nice ones, like the one in Exeter (but the owner is from there so that figures); I forgot the other two that were nice. Not many nice ones but they do exist.