General Banter and Random Musings

[User 23988]

My name is Den has done it again

 

[Glen_C]

Morning guys - I know I said I’m away with the kids over the weekend but I want to jump in on this point above and explain from my point of view because this question comes up a lot in shopping TV and I want to show you where I get my information from and answer the above points. You may disagree with all of it but at least you have an answer .

Rediffusion fans. We brought them into the business because people were asking for fans and bladeless ones. I happily did the demo to show people round the fan and how it works, checked on Google what the prices were and most places were selling them at £99. We can sell them at £89 so we can beat the majority of the market and still make a margin. So we are happy, you are happy and we can show the prices and time stamp comparison.
simple as that.

The brand and the heritage of the fans - here’s where I got all the information from below. I went to the company website and learnt it. I’ll add the link at the bottom.
So for me, I have a great little fan that works well, is good quality, has a good price and I have a history of the brand to talk about. I did mention in the show that I’m not a fan expert and I might get some facts wrong (like a date etc - I think one show I said 1923 and it was 1928 I meant).
That’s live tv though and I accept that if I’m doing hours and hours of it I am going to make mistakes and if it’s a big one - we get picked up by ASA or a producers will let me/us know in our ear and we correct ourselves. We aren’t perfect that I agree with you all on.

But I would say don’t look too much into thinking we are deliberately leading people up the garden path. This is where I found all my information on Rediffusion. I don’t look much further than this because at the end of the day it’s a good product, a good price, the website and company information tells me all I need to know to tell people at home and I don’t have time to question whether the information on the company website is true or not because I also believe what I’m reading.

These forums are great because you all really care. I said it before about Hammys breakdown of watches. You know your stuff. So i can read your points, do some extra research maybe and adjust my editorial on some of the products IF I agree there is a discrepancy.

But I would say don’t over complicate it. here is where I got all the information from.

About Us

Rediscover the art of home living with Rediffusion - a name synonymous with timeless British excellence. With nearly 100 years of existence, we've been crafting our solutions for the home that seamlessly blend heritage with the demands of the modern world.

rediffusion.uk

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself, Alex, for not being a fan expert. Peter Vollesbregt isn't an expert on anything, but Ideal World would have viewers believe he is, even when it comes to GX Pillows.

 

[Muttley]

Morning guys - I know I said I’m away with the kids over the weekend but I want to jump in on this point above and explain from my point of view because this question comes up a lot in shopping TV and I want to show you where I get my information from and answer the above points. You may disagree with all of it but at least you have an answer .

Rediffusion fans. We brought them into the business because people were asking for fans and bladeless ones. I happily did the demo to show people round the fan and how it works, checked on Google what the prices were and most places were selling them at £99. We can sell them at £89 so we can beat the majority of the market and still make a margin. So we are happy, you are happy and we can show the prices and time stamp comparison.
simple as that.

The brand and the heritage of the fans - here’s where I got all the information from below. I went to the company website and learnt it. I’ll add the link at the bottom.
So for me, I have a great little fan that works well, is good quality, has a good price and I have a history of the brand to talk about. I did mention in the show that I’m not a fan expert and I might get some facts wrong (like a date etc - I think one show I said 1923 and it was 1928 I meant).
That’s live tv though and I accept that if I’m doing hours and hours of it I am going to make mistakes and if it’s a big one - we get picked up by ASA or a producers will let me/us know in our ear and we correct ourselves. We aren’t perfect that I agree with you all on.

But I would say don’t look too much into thinking we are deliberately leading people up the garden path. This is where I found all my information on Rediffusion. I don’t look much further than this because at the end of the day it’s a good product, a good price, the website and company information tells me all I need to know to tell people at home and I don’t have time to question whether the information on the company website is true or not because I also believe what I’m reading.

These forums are great because you all really care. I said it before about Hammys breakdown of watches. You know your stuff. So i can read your points, do some extra research maybe and adjust my editorial on some of the products IF I agree there is a discrepancy.

But I would say don’t over complicate it. here is where I got all the information from.

About Us

Rediscover the art of home living with Rediffusion - a name synonymous with timeless British excellence. With nearly 100 years of existence, we've been crafting our solutions for the home that seamlessly blend heritage with the demands of the modern world.

rediffusion.uk

Thanks for telling us that. Not sure how the branding issue is solved if that's on their website.

All I can say it that it really annoys us when a brand appears to be piggybacking onto a former trusted brand name when they have no actual connection with the original company. Puts me off buying even if I think it might be a good product. And it's the presenter who is saying it so we blame them.

On a lighter note, I wonder if any jeweller will resurrect the name of Ratners in 30 years time when they think we've we've all forgotten the CEO's low opinion of some of their products?

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Fair play again to Alex for responding. The point about these regurgitated brand names of the past being presented as unbroken from original inception goes beyond the fan presentation on Seen on TV, and it covers many shopping channels. I am not saying it is deliberately deceptive. I also checked the Rediffusion website and it very much states the history of the company going back decades and decades. No mention that history isn’t directly connected to the current name. I only found out by checking the address at companies house and looking at the Rediffusion name on Wikipedia. The people who resurrect these old names do so for a reason. Clearly, they don’t want to emphasise their new venture is not the original company from first formation. If they put New Rediffusion, for example, on their website, it rather defeats the narrative. Like high street retailers, shopping channels have at the very least a moral obligation to tell people the researched facts. It’s not over complicating things to do this. Put yourselves in a similar position of being sold a car, say, and being told by the sales person it was made by a British manufacturer with 100 years of history. Buying on that basis, you later find out the current maker reinstated the marque last year and the car was actually made in and imported from China. Would you still have bought it knowing the latter? That’s the key. Shopping channel buyers deserve the truth and not just the grand hyperbole..

 

[Hammy60]

Morning guys - I know I said I’m away with the kids over the weekend but I want to jump in on this point above and explain from my point of view because this question comes up a lot in shopping TV and I want to show you where I get my information from and answer the above points. You may disagree with all of it but at least you have an answer .


The brand and the heritage of the fans - here’s where I got all the information from below. I went to the company website and learnt it. I’ll add the link at the bottom.

That’s live tv though and I accept that if I’m doing hours and hours of it I am going to make mistakes and if it’s a big one - we get picked up by ASA or a producers will let me/us know in our ear and we correct ourselves. We aren’t perfect that I agree with you all on.



These forums are great because you all really care. I said it before about Hammys breakdown of watches. You know your stuff. So i can read your points, do some extra research maybe and adjust my editorial on some of the products IF I agree there is a discrepancy.

1.First point, if you're supposed to be with the kids, be with the kids. I know work is important, but family is more so, and answering a few grumpy posters here certainly ain't.

2.One thing I learned in collecting watches, is NEVER believe what is on a brand's web site or what their representative says, always double check. Okay in this instance I don't know about the current Rediffusion but would be investigating elsewhere first before accepting anything about their history and heritage from their web page.

3.From experience ASA is a waste of time.

4.Thank you for your kind words, but don't worry if a see anything amiss i'll soon post about it.
But so far you've been okayish, Vostok Europe went as expected, as said before Kevin is one of the better guests and Millie was good presenting a watch show, Duchamp show well Jonathan never said anything about the brand so avoided the negative posts that would surely have followed had he done so. When i said in point two, never believe what's on a brand's web site, then Duchamp are a prime example of why you shouldn't.

 

[Duke of Cheese]

He seems a decent bloke, Hammy, as we both and others probably sense. Family guy going above and beyond. Essentially it looks like he's been dropped in it to fend off all the criticisms and that's hard, particularly with all the pressure going on in the background. I continue to appreciate his input. I'm sure others here feel the same, too.

 

[Jazzydrury]

1.First point, if you're supposed to be with the kids, be with the kids. I know work is important, but family is more so, and answering a few grumpy posters here certainly ain't.

2.One thing I learned in collecting watches, is NEVER believe what is on a brand's web site or what their representative says, always double check. Okay in this instance I don't know about the current Rediffusion but would be investigating elsewhere first before accepting anything about their history and heritage from their web page.

3.From experience ASA is a waste of time.

4.Thank you for your kind words, but don't worry if a see anything amiss i'll soon post about it.
But so far you've been okayish, Vostok Europe went as expected, as said before Kevin is one of the better guests and Millie was good presenting a watch show, Duchamp show well Jonathan never said anything about the brand so avoided the negative posts that would surely have followed had he done so. When i said in point two, never believe what's on a brand's web site, then Duchamp are a prime example of why you shouldn't.

I bought up your first point to Alex yesterday on here.

He said the kids were under the sprinkler

 

[PhaedrusR]

EPE International, Belfry House, Roydsdale Way, Bradford, BD4 6SU. This is the company operating out of the customer service address for Rediffusion and Hamilton Beach in the UK. Now, nothing really changes, does it? The current Rediffusion brand has absolutely nothing to do with the company responsible for the London ITV franchise in the 1960s. The clear selling line was the heritage and tradition of the brand name when the fans were on air on the channel. This is yet another case of dead brand/company names being acquired by new businesses with no direct connection to the name they choose to resurrect. Swan & Edgar…Mann Egerton..Gamages…RCA…Blaupunkt…Hell & Bowel…Rediffusion…The list goes on. Not just on Seen on TV, but on QVC, Ideal World and others - they all do it. Making a direct association with goods under these names with the companies they USED to be, and NOT who they are now. The ASA finds against them for doing this and ‘Tells Them Off’ but nothing changes. Why do these channels do this? Genuine ignorance? Fooling people?

When the presenters were making the heritage and long-term nature of Rediffusion to the fans they were selling, I thought this doesn’t sound right. I thought Rediffusion was a long-dead electronics and broadcasting name from decades ago. But a clear connection was pursued to suggest continuity to the extent that the company is the same one then as it is now. It isn’t. Like Swan & Edgar the Department Store is not Swan & Edgar the Chinese made watches brand badged watch company. Genuinely…Why do it? Just tell people it’s a traditional name, but make it clear its nothing to do with the original company.

Is Hamilton Beach a similar heritage brand or for real and they are the UK importers? From previous discussion HB are the most popular USA domestic appliance brand, similar to Tefal, etc.? Even though I'd never heard of them until IW3.
HB in Wikipedia as a valid current brand, so I suspect this EPE outfit are US and Chinese importers.

 

[PhaedrusR]

No, I'm not a Rediffusion fan. Geddit?

 

[PhaedrusR]

Morning guys - I know I said I’m away with the kids over the weekend but I want to jump in on this point above and explain from my point of view because this question comes up a lot in shopping TV and I want to show you where I get my information from and answer the above points. You may disagree with all of it but at least you have an answer .

Rediffusion fans. We brought them into the business because people were asking for fans and bladeless ones. I happily did the demo to show people round the fan and how it works, checked on Google what the prices were and most places were selling them at £99. We can sell them at £89 so we can beat the majority of the market and still make a margin. So we are happy, you are happy and we can show the prices and time stamp comparison.
simple as that.

The brand and the heritage of the fans - here’s where I got all the information from below. I went to the company website and learnt it. I’ll add the link at the bottom.
So for me, I have a great little fan that works well, is good quality, has a good price and I have a history of the brand to talk about. I did mention in the show that I’m not a fan expert and I might get some facts wrong (like a date etc - I think one show I said 1923 and it was 1928 I meant).
That’s live tv though and I accept that if I’m doing hours and hours of it I am going to make mistakes and if it’s a big one - we get picked up by ASA or a producers will let me/us know in our ear and we correct ourselves. We aren’t perfect that I agree with you all on.

But I would say don’t look too much into thinking we are deliberately leading people up the garden path. This is where I found all my information on Rediffusion. I don’t look much further than this because at the end of the day it’s a good product, a good price, the website and company information tells me all I need to know to tell people at home and I don’t have time to question whether the information on the company website is true or not because I also believe what I’m reading.

These forums are great because you all really care. I said it before about Hammys breakdown of watches. You know your stuff. So i can read your points, do some extra research maybe and adjust my editorial on some of the products IF I agree there is a discrepancy.

But I would say don’t over complicate it. here is where I got all the information from.

About Us

Rediscover the art of home living with Rediffusion - a name synonymous with timeless British excellence. With nearly 100 years of existence, we've been crafting our solutions for the home that seamlessly blend heritage with the demands of the modern world.

rediffusion.uk

Do you believe everything you read then? No research. No double checking. No 1 minute Wikipedia Google search to check the Rediffusion brand heritage story?

Talk about wilful ignorance.

 

[PhaedrusR]

Thanks for telling us that. Not sure how the branding issue is solved if that's on their website.

All I can say it that it really annoys us when a brand appears to be piggybacking onto a former trusted brand name when they have no actual connection with the original company. Puts me off buying even if I think it might be a good product. And it's the presenter who is saying it so we blame them.

On a lighter note, I wonder if any jeweller will resurrect the name of Ratners in 30 years time when they think we've we've all forgotten the CEO's low opinion of some of their products?

Or they'll call it 'Signet'.

 

[PhaedrusR]

I bought up your first point to Alex yesterday on here.

He said the kids were under the sprinkler

'Honey, I shrunk the kids'.

 

[PhaedrusR]

Morning guys - I know I said I’m away with the kids over the weekend but I want to jump in on this point above and explain from my point of view because this question comes up a lot in shopping TV and I want to show you where I get my information from and answer the above points. You may disagree with all of it but at least you have an answer .

Rediffusion fans. We brought them into the business because people were asking for fans and bladeless ones. I happily did the demo to show people round the fan and how it works, checked on Google what the prices were and most places were selling them at £99. We can sell them at £89 so we can beat the majority of the market and still make a margin. So we are happy, you are happy and we can show the prices and time stamp comparison.
simple as that.

The brand and the heritage of the fans - here’s where I got all the information from below. I went to the company website and learnt it. I’ll add the link at the bottom.
So for me, I have a great little fan that works well, is good quality, has a good price and I have a history of the brand to talk about. I did mention in the show that I’m not a fan expert and I might get some facts wrong (like a date etc - I think one show I said 1923 and it was 1928 I meant).
That’s live tv though and I accept that if I’m doing hours and hours of it I am going to make mistakes and if it’s a big one - we get picked up by ASA or a producers will let me/us know in our ear and we correct ourselves. We aren’t perfect that I agree with you all on.

But I would say don’t look too much into thinking we are deliberately leading people up the garden path. This is where I found all my information on Rediffusion. I don’t look much further than this because at the end of the day it’s a good product, a good price, the website and company information tells me all I need to know to tell people at home and I don’t have time to question whether the information on the company website is true or not because I also believe what I’m reading.

These forums are great because you all really care. I said it before about Hammys breakdown of watches. You know your stuff. So i can read your points, do some extra research maybe and adjust my editorial on some of the products IF I agree there is a discrepancy.

But I would say don’t over complicate it. here is where I got all the information from.

About Us

Rediscover the art of home living with Rediffusion - a name synonymous with timeless British excellence. With nearly 100 years of existence, we've been crafting our solutions for the home that seamlessly blend heritage with the demands of the modern world.

rediffusion.uk

Pedant here. Fyi, @Alex Knowles

'their' - for belonging to someone. Not 'there'.

'naive' - not 'nieve'. For someone unaware and innocent. Are you @saintslad too?!?!? Same identical spelling error. You've been found out mate.

Ironic, to be naive of their fake Rediffusion resurrection.

 

[saintslad]

Flattered by your attention.

 

[The Insider]

The Insiders aren’t Employees at Seen on TV, so I’m guessing other shopping channels, so would probably thrive in seeing a channel go bust

Not at all, especially when I assume like me, the second Insider knows people who worked there or perhaps even worked at Seen on TV themselves. I knew the news for a number of hours before I posted about it on Wednesday and I only did so because someone asked why they were broadcasting repeats. If I thrived on seeing them in trouble, I'd have posted the news immediately and in a more gleeful manner. Most people who work in shopping TV know and have friends who work at other channels so it would be highly unusual for anyone in this business to be happy about another channel going bust, or in this case, being in trouble so early on.

I am striving to be fair and balanced, but Alex and both insiders' statements are creating confusion about what is actually happening. All three of them have inside information, yet we have two different accounts of what is going on. Alex's posts convey to me...

I'm uncertain if I'm right, but I believe Everyone TV is in charge of the daily operations of the Freeview platforms. My assumption is that Simon/Seen on TV will lease the Freeview channel from them. When Simon signed his contract to lease channel 79 (I know some people are on channel 94). Simon's solicitor missed a clause in the contract about the lease cost for the channel been increased and this has caused a bigger financial loss than planned for and this is the reason it has stopped live broadcasts.

Both insiders posts convey to me that more is going on behind the scenes and the reason the boradcasts have stopped is because they are making no sales and the repeats are been played to save money on live broadcasting in the hope of making some sales and going back live if the sales pick up. It appears that these individuals have a personal connection to people who work there, or they have a connection to someone who knows someone. The information that was shared could only be given by someone who is employed there.

Alex's latest explanation is accurate - Arqiva who provide their Freeview capacity (not Everyone TV) have demanded a larger sum of money than they had realised would be owed at this stage. As Alex has stated, it appears to have been an oversight by Simon and his legal counsel - a pretty costly oversight to the tune of a few hundred thousand pounds. It's worrying that this sum (and more some) wasn't waiting in reserves to cover the running costs of the channel until it reached break even point which would have easily taken many months, possibly even years.

As the second Insider has said, it seems Simon was totally blindsided into thinking they would make big sales from day 1 and goodness knows why when he witnessed the failure of Shop Extra and the declining sales at Ideal World. Why he thought his channel would be different and buck the trend is anyones guess and if he seriously thought there was a gap in the market, I'd love to know what gap. Air fryers, waterless wash and wax, overpriced watches, fans, mattresses, Piranha and toilet roll - it was all so original and fresh, not

Unfortunately I can't see them attracting investment this late into the game. The running costs are too high for the low sales they had in their first week. It's not just the cost of presenters and crew (which the second Insider conservatively estimated would be at least £2000 a day) but there will be at least £4000 to £5000 in broadcast costs EVERY DAY to cover Sky, Freesat and Freeview carriage. Add on top of that rent, rates and bills for their studio and warehouse premises plus website, administration costs etc.

You feel Simon has wanted his own shopping channel for a while

Spot on and I believe this was the driving force for him going all out by stretching himself financially with national Freeview coverage and launching live 12 hours a day despite not having enough product, too few backend staff, an unsuitable marketing plan and as now come to light, too small a cash reserves. He will have wanted to have been seen as a big player in the shopping TV industry and sadly, he's only done the opposite.

Well, well, well…two Insiders and a Hopping seem VERY keen to pour scorn on this new venture. I’m not an avid shopping telly viewer but ‘pop in’ now and then out of curiosity. I haven’t seen much of this new channel but wish them well regardless.

What baffles me is how the aforementioned trio seem at pains to defend I.W….and what a shoddy, duplicitous bunch of tat-schleppers we know THEY are. The products are market stall tacky, the presenters are cringe-inducing liars and the ludicrously inflated RRPs are criminal.

Defending I.W is as pitiful as expecting people to believe Muriel is real.

Your head really is in the clouds if you are accusing me of defending Ideal World. I simply stated that for all the cheap digs that Seen on TV presenters were making about their former employer, Ideal World would be around longer than Simon's channel would ever be. That's not defending, that's just facts because they are backed by a cash rich parent company who for example, paid £7m in the blink of an eye for TJC to swap Freeview channel numbers with Ideal World back in 2022.

 

[Duke of Cheese]

I hope Alex will be back. After some of the stuff today I wouldn’t blame him in not posting further.

 

[Jazzydrury]

I hope Alex will be back. After some of the stuff today I wouldn’t blame him in not posting further.

Totally agree some of these posts have been brutal,and it’s not me saying it as a channel fan

 

[Holy Jesus]

Hi all , Simon Isles, or Slimy Lies as he’s better known is a very bad business man, he had NO chance of it ever working. The bigger picture for me is that there are 17 staff that some of whom left other jobs to join seen on, they ran with isles and slated other channels , they are now out of work because of the pure ignorance and arrogance of Isles thinking he could do it.

He should be ashamed of himself and disappear with his piranha rubbish, which is Chinese knock off crap. He has said in the past that if they are not buying you’re not lying enough.

His demos are fake and he does not care about you or me when we purchase.

Alex is brave for coming on here and being honest. Imagine this ! Liz Truss lasted longer as PM than the channel did .

Arrogance is not a recipe for success.

 

[Glen_C]

Hi all , Simon Isles, or Slimy Lies as he’s better known is a very bad business man, he had NO chance of it ever working. The bigger picture for me is that there are 17 staff that some of whom left other jobs to join seen on, they ran with isles and slated other channels , they are now out of work because of the pure ignorance and arrogance of Isles thinking he could do it.

He should be ashamed of himself and disappear with his piranha rubbish, which is Chinese knock off crap. He has said in the past that if they are not buying you’re not lying enough.

His demos are fake and he does not care about you or me when we purchase.

Alex is brave for coming on here and being honest. Imagine this ! Liz Truss lasted longer as PM than the channel did .

Arrogance is not a recipe for success.

Some Ideal World presenters must have a similar mindset.

 

[Herring]

Totally agree some of these posts have been brutal,and it’s not me saying it as a channel fan

They really haven't, though — unless some things have been deleted or edited since I've logged on and caught up?

If anything, people seem to have been very polite and encouraging, especially to Alex, and with hoping Seen On TV can catch breath, get back on its feet, and help bring good value products to people, sold accurately without lies or mistruths, and give us Selly Telly swots some entertaining shows!

If you're referring to the fact it was brought up that the bladeless fan company's "history" ought to be mentioned in the past-tense given it's long-divorced from the products the company who bought the brand name now sell... That's no different to the criticisms many of us level against Swan & Edgar, Gamages, et al — we've never been called "brutal" for highlighting that!

If you're referring to the fact it was inferred Alex saying "…well the website says it's their history, so I just parroted it, so it's fine" is a bit of a low-effort excuse... Again, hardly "brutal" - it is low effort. I accept I may I have higher standards in taking companies at face-value since I'm a (technology) journalist for a living, but given people are being asked to part with their cash on the basis of that information… I don't think it's unfair to point out it's a bit meh.

If you're referring to Insider laying out the truth on the current situation as "brutal" then you are over-reacting. The facts aren't made-up, they're not emotive, they're not half-truths or misrepresentations. Insider hasn't, as they themselves say, been gleeful in sharing it - a little snarky, perhaps, but if you were someone with experience in shopping TV, and you saw Simon's hubris in thinking he could muscle in and rival established players quickly, you'd arguably feel a bit of "…I could've told you so" too.