I was saddened by Brighton and Hove City Council's comments in the article about The Lanes (The Argus, April 4).

It is difficult for small entrepreneurs to compete with infiltration into Brighton's bohemian areas by multiples.

The council forgets Brighton is completely unlike any other seaside resort and it is this which attracts visitors, students and residents, themselves unique, choosy, intelligent, ethical and amazing.

I realise the council has to sell leases on our properties indiscriminately, but although selling to the highest bidder might be economically sound in the short term, what about the long-term consequences for Brighton's identity and the knock-on effect for the local economy?

Brighton's identity is our future.

It is an asset which does not appear on the balance sheet but most definitely counts as a USP.

Before I get accused of being a sky pilot, let me say that multiples buy everything centrally.

This is all agreed in the board room. Deliveries arrive in trucks, not little vans (I think trucks block up the little roads in the lanes, but call me picky).

Multiples don't buy locally: The money goes out of the city.

You'll never meet the owner and the manager will have a script to answer your questions.

Small traders build up long-term relationships with their customers and small local suppliers, which is surely preferable.

Everything stays bohemian and the money stays in the town, oops sorry, city.

Small traders don't have time to become councillors because we are too busy swimming against the tide trying to pay the rent, so we elect people to run the place, and keep our fingers crossed.

Of course, other businesses are keen to establish themselves in The Lanes, but this is not justification for allowing the blandification of our streets.

Does anyone in the council ever think about this?

-Zena Thompson, Brighton