Personally, I don't see the point of this complaint or why the ASA upheld it! It would seem obvious that, in a repeated broadcast, some items will be sold out - bad luck. If it was a premium rate line and they were making money out of it, that would be misleading, but I don't see how Gems can be accused of misleading customers just by NOT selling them anything. This will make life very diffiult for channels, since if they run repeated broadcasts they will now be forced to edit them first, which doesn't seem very realistic.
When you think of all the weird and wonderful practices which go on in the world of shopping telly, to uphold a complaint like this seems just bizarre. Oh, well!
