This is an interesting thread. As an ex editor of the largest publication for the food industry (and still a monthly columnist) I see both side of the argument. I agree that anything is better than a vacant site and in that case Sainsbury's could well be a good thing. On the bigger picture though, the argument that the big 4 retailers satisfy all consumer needs is a little simplistic. In many cases this is because decades of expansion and buying power has meant they have effectively told us what those needs are - we buy non seasonal food flown many thousands of miles, packaged the way they want it to ensure the supply chain is the most cost effective for them - not us. We buy what they sell as there is little choice in reality. For those who bemoan the expense of the smaller store, their prices tend to be based on real running costs. As Tesco's latest results show, there is little growth in the UK now and it is a 'stealing' game - the big 4 all need every possible site to keep shareholders happy that they will continue to grow. We are all complicit in this as we will all happily shop in these local stores when they open. As someone has said, this unfortunately is the world of big business and shareholder satisfaction.