BIB: None of these are financially dependent on Phil, are they? Apart from maybe Jay, I guess, as he's employed at the Arches and lives with him. Ronnie and Roxy own the gym which Phil has nothing to do with, to the best of my knowledge. Ben hasn't been financially dependent on him for several years now. So why would they need to be taken into account?

And as for comparing Sharon to Phil, it's simply not relevant. Sharon has been through a traumatic experience and is doing this because she believes Phil needs to pay, which he arguably does as he's totally robbed her of her confidence and almost killed her. She wouldn't have organised thugs to come and 'scare' him for no other reason than wanting more control over him.

I think it's pretty unlikely Sharon will entirely destroy phil; I think the ending may be very anticlimatic: wedding day; Sharon can't go through with it; phil searches for her; Sharon reveals she knows truth; they have a heart to heart and phil relinquishes his stake in the Albert.

That is how I imagine it will be.

Hopefully though it will be clearly implied and stated that she *could* have destroyed him if she wanted to.

In EE Watts trumps Mitchell.

I would imagine it would still affect his family, it's Lexi's inheritance, as someone else quite rightly said and Ben will need somewhere to live when he returns. Jay works at the Arches and i'm not if he would continue to work there if Sharon takes it (plus doesn't jay still live with Phil, it would leave him homeless too)? Jay's loyalty is with Phil. And not just financially but I can't see Ronnie and Roxy would leave Phil on the street, someone would have to put Phil and Ben up, they would have no where else to go unless they set up camp in the square - which I would love to see. Haha.

I was merely saying that if the tables were turned, it would be a whole different story. I'm not against Sharon getting revenge by the way! Just an observation. I just still don't think that this means that Sharon is entitled to all his assets. I know she wouldn't send thugs to scare him, I was saying hypothetically. I don't think she nessacarily has to go through with it to be Sharon WATTS again, it's the fact that she could go through with it, as said above.

I think it's a great storyline but I don't know how the aftermath will work? Sharon would probably benefit from doing a runner, and then returning a few months later. screwing Phil over on such a scale and then bumping into him the next day at the minute mart seems a bit futile.

That or Phil goes AWOL. Could the plot tie in with Steve's annual panto break?

I think it will something along these lines, Sharon will ultimately do the decent thing because she isn't a malicious person at heart.

I have a sneaky feeling that Phil will be one step ahead of Sharon, which would be a shame if so because I really want Sharon to strip all the layers off Phil, to have him lose everything and start from the bottom again.

Afterwards, I'd like Sharon to get her own home and bring in some new family for her.

Phil will probably get back with Shirley.

The 30th anniversary next year will see Lucy's killer revealed. Now come on, no character like Jay, Lee, Abi, Lauren, Whitney and........ Janet would possibly be Lucy's killer for one reason; they're not that important. I'm presuming Lucy's killer will be the duff duff moment and IT MUST BE A CHARACTER OF IMPORTANCE THAT WOULD CREATE A BIG IMPACT such as;
Sharon, Phil, Ian, Max, Mick, Nick, Ronnie...........WHY? These are BIG characters that matter and are IMPORTANT to the show. DTC wouldn't waste such an opportunity by announcing a character like Cindy or Abi killed Lucy, would he?

Then again, you never know, Janet deserves a big story....

I'd love to see Phil living like a little homeless crack monkey in the square. Taking shelter under Arthurs bench each night, Ian might even lend him his hobo hat if he's lucky.

I think Ian's "hobo hat" is quite chic actually.

I would like to see Phil homeless and broke but that won't happen will it. He is a Mitchell so he will always win. The Shirley fans don't want sharon to get revenge on Phil haha.

I'm a fan of Shirley's but I don't care if Sharon hangs him upside down by his feet from a lamppost and thrashes him within an inch of his life. Phil is no catch.

I'm a fan of Shirley but that doesn't mean I don't want Sharon to get revenge on Phil. I just hope that Shirley doesn't get ruined in the process. Haha.

Funnily enough besides the fact that a LOT of characters do get sacrificed for Phil, I do enjoy watching him, I'd like to see more of his softer, funnier side like back in May/early June.

I want phil to absolutely hit rock bottom! And them bounce back up after the 30th:P

The way I see this playing out is that Sharon has a change of heart and comes clean to Phil that she can't marry him and then uses the information she has on him (which Marcus has put together) to make him sign over the Albert in her name only. She would also uses the info she has on him to keep him in check and threaten to expose him if he steps out of line, or does anything she doesn't like!

Dot might spout the bible but she isn't Christian herself. In the 80s she was a racist, she has stolen herself and killed someone (now I personally agreed with her helping Ethel but in her faith its a sin).
But Christianity does give forgiveness. Hate the sin not the sinner. Considering Dot is friends with people who have committed a variety of sins (including Dennis Rickman who did a lot worse) I cant see Sharon losing Dot over this.
As for Jay I wouldn't be so sure he will lose anything. She will need someone to run the garage after all....He might prefer not having Phil breathing down his neck and telling him to leave at a moments notice. And Sharon hasn't threatened to kill him like Phil has.

And those who "adore" Phil might think unlike idiot Shirley who doesn't seem to care her grandson was nearly killed that what Phil did was much worse. Linda doesn't have an issue with it. Lola might not want someone like Phil around her granddaughter. Denise wouldn't approve of what Phil did. Phil is a lot more unpopular and this will add to it. If anything Phil will lose out more. I know you hate Sharon but considering what Phil has done I think even Grant/Peggy would be shocked.
Material things mean very little in the grand scheme of things when it comes to physical violence. I am wondering however if that gun will be used there must be some reason Sharon has ended up with it.

I don't 'adore' Phil but on one hand - it was awful what he did, and I don't condone it but he did hire the bodyguards to scare of the thugs and with that in mind, they wouldn't have got anywhere near Sharon, the only reason it went wrong was because Sharon sent them home. So I can see both sides of the story.
I too, think the gun will come into play somewhere, Ronnie will probably return and thank Phil for getting rid of it, who will in turn tell her he thought she took it..

The only way I see this story working is if Peggy is back for it.

There is no way she wouldn't appear upon learning Sharon has conned her favourite son out of everything.

I forgot about the gun. The fact Sharon has it must play a part somewhere down the line.

Does sharon still have the gun?

This is how I would play out the episode, I'd make it an hour long, sharon would be late for the wedding but eventually turns up, she decides that she can't go through with her plan and she marries phil, later at the wedding reception at the vic, grant, peggy, and sam show up, shirley has a conversation with ronnie in the toilets about her and Phil's affair, which sharon overhars, she then public ally humiliates phil, leaving peggy furious... Sharon goes for shirley (loool) but is held back by grant, sharon makes her exit, and phil chases after her, at the bar of the Albert, phil finds sharon at the Albert (where Sharon is secretly hiding her gun) and the pair get into a fight/argument near the balcony, sharon picks up the fun and threatens phil, phil tries to snatch the fun off sharon, but a bullet is shot, and phil is seriously injured, philith then takes a few steps back in pain and shock and falls over the balcony, he is found by shirley, sharon is arrested, I'll leave the aftermath to the experts hahahahaha...

God knows what is going on with Sharon & Phil in the aftermath!! Sharon and Phil's wedding day is in late September but this is going to be very messy. Whatever happens next is going to totally destroy Sharon & Phil for good.. As far as I know, Letitia Dean isn't leaving EastEnders but they have to find a way to give Sharon storylines without Phil. But Phil will always be part of Sharon's life because of their rich history.

I totally agree.

I feel like I am out on a limb, alone, all alone in liking Phil. Haha. I hate that good characters have been sacrificed for him but other than that, I have actually grown to quite like him, especially when he turns various shades of red in full rant mode which is hilarious. I also like the softer, more humorous Phil we saw few months back, I'd like to see more of that.

I don't mind Phil the bully, Phil the family man and Phil the businessman. I just don't see him as some sort of prize partner/lover....there's just something unbelievable about that image. It seems to be an Eastenders thing, every woman must fall for Phil, Ian or Max, and usually two at a time. It's just a joke.

Bib: Definitely agree. It was like Phil/Dawn? What on earth was that about?!

Phil a rock to Ian pull the other one, he was willing to put Ian's distraught son in the frame for Lucy's murder to save runt of the litter Billy, his only being nice out of misguided guilt/sympathy but push comes to shove he be back to bullying Ian after it all dies down.

This would be good, especially if Shirley joined in!