Archers thread #178: Ambridge or Scambridge? Discuss The Archers here.

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

Thank you, @PseudoBadger, for kicking off this long, long series of Archers threads.

All views on The Archers welcome here! New blood welcomed, and of course we are always delighted to welcome back former or occasional listeners/posters. We don't all agree on all points, although we do mostly try to be civil about it. Most of us are posting tongue in cheek a lot of the time, so don't worry about revealing that you fancy Mucky Mick, or other unusual views.

Spoilers: not on this thread, please! We don't wait for the omnibus to discuss the weeknight episodes, but we do try our best to avoid cross-contamination from https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/radio_addicts/4636789-the-archers-spoilers-thread-7-cant-wait-for-702pm-join-us-here, where spoilers are positively welcomed!

For newer listeners, lurkers or those who just have no idea what we're talking about, @DadDadDad has created this useful thread: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/3557323-For-Archers-fans-a-guide-to-acronyms-on-the-long-running-discussion-threads-and-any-other-meta-thread-questions-you-may-have - BOOP point for him! (See thread for explanation.)

The scars from Scambridge week will take some healing. Most of us felt we were the ones scammed - where was The Archers we know and (very occasionally) love?

Anyway, onwards and - almost certainly not - upwards. Will it be the best Christmas ever in Ambridge? Do we still care? Over to you!

Probably people think of CEO

its not modern

I remember estates of Executive Homes going up in the late 70s and laughing about it then. Not necessarily anything wrong with the houses just the snobbery.

A CEO is carrying out the instructions of the board, so just someone under orders. (I remember my father's little rant about this one when he was made managing director of a company, back in the sixties...)

Sure - but I assume the people looking to buy these houses are thinking more about the earning potential

I guess they can’t use a term like luxury

I would like it to be known I am wearing a cashmere jumper today.

I'm wondering if we will get a Bridge Farm fallout between Helen and Tom if the latter buys Kirstys old house- Helen had her chance, dithered and won't want her brother buying it.

I do t understand what happened to all the money they received for selling the land to build the properties - presumably so my E could come Helen's way to have enabled her to buy Kirstys house ?

Helen doesn’t want it

but being Helen she won’t want Tom to have it. Or she will let Tom buy it and then find away not to leave

Helen told Tony that she did not want the Beechwood house because it was too suburban. All this "I can't afford it" guff is in order to turn herself into a martyr as usual, with the side benefit that if Tom and Natasha buy it she can be reproachful at them until the end of time.

She’s going to end up in the farmhouse with Tony and Pat which will give her plenty to moan about

she will probably insist on bathroom/kitchen upgrades so the eco house ends up delayed and then either Pat or Tony will die and it will never be built

I think when she finds out Tom and Natasha have offered on it she will lose her shit and feel like they’ve betrayed her even though she decided not to buy it. She will put in an offer, Pat and Tony will pressure Tom to withdraw because we must protect Helen at all costs - cue huge hullabaloo and possibly even Kirsty losing HER house because of the delay - maybe neither Tom nor Helen end up there? Or Helen gets it but falls out with Kirsty.

I am struggling to think whether the scriptwriters would rather put Helen or Tom in the farmhouse and I think it will be Tom because he’s got Natasha and also “the twins” who promise all sorts of potential drama (well done whoever put that gene into the family back in the 50s).

There are very few couples in the younger adult age group in the Archers aren’t there - no equivalent of Pat and Tony or David and Ruth who’ve got together young and stuck together - even though I think that’s still quite common in farming circles. Couples under 45ish - Emma and Ed, Fallon and Harrison, Tom and Natasha. Who else?

I hope either Tom or Helen get it because otherwise beechwood becomes an estate of newcomers!

I don’t think Helen will go for it - I think she is keen on the farmhouse and she can’t find anywhere else to rent so will conveniently end up back home

Being outbid is not gazumping, Natasha

Brenda’s offered on Beechwood …

For goodness sake. Helen is truly ghastly. She doesn’t want to buy Beechwood so what is her problem!

Did Brenda say that she caught up with Adam in 'the inn"
Does she mean the Bull or is she Mary?

Oh that was good. Natasha bested.

I really hope Brenda's scuppered the BFNI by over-bidding, with a view to helping Kirsty and then flogging it on privately (at a small loss, if necessary) to the other people interested <on edit: by whom I mean the outsiders, not Helen or Tom>. We need a bit of villainy.

What a very nasty, dog-in-a-manger person Helen is. She doesn't want the house herself because she doesn't really like it, but she doesn't want her brother and his wife to have it even thought they like it very much.

Helen dear, whoever buys it you are going to have to move out, and strangers are less likely to pander to you about a flexible departure date. If you'd played it a bit better you could have caused Tom and Natasha to let it to you for another couple of years while you "looked for somewhere else". (Or didn't bother to.)

I thought exactly that, @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime . Tom and Natasha should be the ideal people to buy the slaver's house (from Helen's pov) for that very reason. And they must know it. So why all the secrecy?! They should have told Helen straight away, and sold it to her as being able to stay put for longer. And even they must realise that not putting an offer in themselves wouldn't keep it secure for Helen. The fact that they weren't up front with her will come back to bite them, obviously.

Maybe Gavin will come back and set fire to the place?

Fink
The fact that they weren't up front with her will come back to bite them, obviously.

Whereas he fact taat she was not upfront with them will never be mentioned at all.

I agree that Helen was the frozen limit in her reaction.

Is the long game that she goes to live with Pat and Tony, they shove off to the PassAggHaus in short order leaving her in the ancestral home. Cue much chagrin and side-eye looks from Tom and Gnasher?

I get the impression tash isn’t keen on the farmhouse

as usual it will be Helen making the issue. She will probably go on and on at Tom at how bad she feels taking the house until he feels bad about it

With hindsight, I can't help wondering whether the plot all went horribly wrong on stabnight. Had Rob been a bit quicker, he could have taken the knife away from Helen and (genuinely accidentally) stabbed her rather more successfully than she stabbed him. It would have saved everyone a lot of bother.

Is it borchester or borsetcher?

’what are you talking about Brenda? I don’t understand?’ - I don’t understand how anyone could do anything outside my liking

shes such a vile idiot - honestly how can she be so self centred. And the way she attacks Tom because she’s too much of a coward to say anything to natasha

and Kirsty’s ‘poor Helen’ - she’s such a doormat. Is she lying that the other offer was better?

Skipped the Brad bits - finding that all a bit dull

And I don’t like how Brenda operates