Random musings and general banter.

[Duke of Cheese]

It is possible that the poster is a member of staff. They've just joined and we've just been mocking the channel for using our screen names of people who love the channel and buy everything.

As we know they read this forum it wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility to join the forum and be a cheerleader for the channel.

The ‘despise’ comment is very interesting. If indeed they do have some direct connection with Ideal World (and how would they know about the new studio dates for opening if they didn’t and they were being accurate with posting that information), the hostility in tone towards criticism is at odds with Rob Locke and his channel who openly welcome members feedback - good and bad.

 

[galesgal57]

Vegan approved leather???
isn’t that a contradiction in terms

Think it's called plastic.

 

[SiRich]

Think it's called plastic.

pleather!! in shopping telly world a bit of a PU reference tends to surface to throw punters off the cheap and nasty vibe - PU Leather!

 

[Latearrival]

Think it's called plastic.

Nah it can’t be plastic
she said it twice, deffo said the bag was « vegan approved leather » she wouldn’t lie to customs I’m sure

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Pens, tea towels and bath mats. Cashmere gloves previously compared to £60 ones as an example of value. John Lewis do adult ones from around £35. Why always exaggerate the value?

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Why don’t they show the exact source of a direct price comparison? Quoting £84 as an example for the same thing, with an unnamed competitor visual. They (IW) are selling one for £12.99. They could tell the viewers that it was available for £17.99 on Amazon, couldn’t they? But no, they have to use some hysterical amount of money for the pen which they’ve got from God knows where. I will write I Must Give Viewers An Informed Choice, 1000 times. The only other place you can get it she has just said is for £84. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Jazzydrury]

Why don’t they show the exact source of a direct price comparison? Quoting £84 as an example for the same thing, with an unnamed competitor visual. They (IW) are selling one for £12.99. They could tell the viewers that it was available for £17.99 on Amazon, couldn’t they? But no, they have to use some hysterical amount of money for the pen which they’ve got from God knows where. I will write I Must Give Viewers An Informed Choice, 1000 times. The only other place you can get it she has just said is for £84. Draw your own conclusions.

View attachment 27321

Also you can get that in time for Christmas unlike IW

 

[Duke of Cheese]

The internet shops selling things cheaper than them ‘may not be real’ she warns us. I was always suspicious that Amazon might be a figment of my imagination, You couldn’t make it up..

Yet another unnamed price comparison. Going by her advice earlier on cheaper shops - I don’t trust unnamed more expensive price comparisons, they might not be real…..Quality and Class..No, sorry.. Giving unnamed high price comparisons to try and get people to buy two is NOT classy. £82 from WHERE?? Why don’t they say?

 

[cheeky chappie]

I would love an Ideal World insider to explain the logic behind the ‘not a direct comparison’ strategy.

They do it on Gemporia as well. They'll be selling a ring with a Tamsolansowansozanso stone in it for £49.99. They'll then show other rings with the same type of stone from other retailers costing ten twenty thirty times more, with 'not a direct comparison' on the screen. Or they'll show a massive chunk of the material that sold for £50k.

All of this relates in no way whatsoever to the product being sold, however the strategy is to affirm in the viewers mind that they're getting a GREAT bargain ... even though most times they're not

 

[Duke of Cheese]

One day, they will show something that I will actually want to buy. When that will be, I wouldn’t like to speculate upon.

 

[cheeky chappie]

The internet shops selling things cheaper than them ‘may not be real’ she warns us. I was always suspicious that Amazon might be a figment of my imagination, You couldn’t make it up..

Yet another unnamed price comparison. Going by her advice earlier on cheaper shops - I don’t trust unnamed more expensive price comparisons, they might not be real…..Quality and Class..No, sorry.. Giving unnamed high price comparisons to try and get people to buy two is NOT classy. £82 from WHERE?? Why don’t they say?

HA HA HAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Talk about desperate, talk about trying to mislead. Of course some websites might not be real, mind you, how much more honorable was it to be flogging products right up to going under on the previous incarnation of IW?

 

[Duke of Cheese]

You could argue that those sort of comments about pretend websites prey on the fear of older people watching in being hesitant in testing the online waters to buy. Predominately, they are pushing the phone number as the first choice means of ordering. And as we all know, that is usually the way that a lot of older people are more comfortable in buying. Encouraging them to stick to that method, as rival websites may not be real is probably quite a useful way of sustaining ‘long-term’ older buyers’ not-internet business.

 

[Dr Quincy MkII]

The poster who seems to know what is going on with the channel seems to take a very positive view of it. Everything in the garden appears to be lovely, and there are no issues whatsoever. They say the reason that you see the same items presented over and over again is because they are selling well over and over again. This may well be true, but it seems very odd why you would want to fill a whole hour with a product like a cane, and at the end of that hour say it is unlikely to be seen again. Then, a day or two later, it reappears again. Those tactics seem questionable at the very least, so forgive people for being cynical, and believing that these products are not actually selling out like the poster suggests they are.

If you want to be continually positive about the channel, say that there is nothing wrong, and everything is going brilliantly, then that’s fine. Also, if you think it gives viewers an informed choice, by comparing, say, a £30 quid handbag with one costing thousands, because it looks vaguely similar from a distance, and use that as a price comparison, then in your world that must be fine, too. But to use the ‘not a direct comparison’ rider to keep the ASA away, apparently, doesn’t seem a particularly constructive or open stance on selling. You wonder whether that policy has even been tested because I doubt anybody watching as a potential buyer would want to contact the ASA about it. Presumably, the channel has checked with them and got the green light to use that way of selling?

People aren’t always negative on the forum about Ideal World. You can see from posts that there ARE newer presenters that they do use who get much positive praise here. Equally, people have got a right to post their concerns about some of the selling tactics used, and also about the pricing of goods which can be easily checked as cheaper elsewhere by online price comparisons – the ones that the channel itself rarely if ever uses. If you think in 2023, having a television throwback making seedy double entendres and ludicrous claims about the products they are selling means everything is great, then I think we are never going to find any middle ground on the issue.

Remember Del Boy's 'Tax in Post' sticker on his three wheeler and Arthur Daley's 'Doctor on Call' on his Daimler? That's what I think of when I see *Not a direct comparison

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Or ‘These aren’t my details’ on a piece of paper stuck under your windscreen wiper after being hit in a supermarket car park when inside shopping.

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Other than yesterday when was that Swiss Roll Diet kit ever sold on Ideal World? Are they getting confused with their sister channel about selling it long-term. Where it was about £5 cheaper yesterday than the one they’re selling in their super value Ideal World winter sale today?

 

[Jazzydrury]

Seems as though IW might be live on Christmas Day, as Annie said she isn’t really a christmas person, It reminds her of sad times, and thinks of those strugglimg

So she said I’ll be working, and giving my wages for that day to charity

 

[Dr Quincy MkII]

I just wanted to add something (since the recent poster has brought it up) speaking only for myself, I don't despise shopping TV or Ideal World. I am certainly not wanting it to fail. I have worked in TV in various roles behind the scenes and know that a team of people put together the content, it isn't just the presenters. I consider myself to be giving constructive criticism (as well as poking fun and also being real about what claims are being made). But I can't stand manipulative behaviour and conning people who don't know any better. At the end of the day shopping TV are retailers. And that side of things needs to be kept in check. You aren't just watching a TV show, viewers are spending their own money and put a certain amount of trust in what is being presented. If you run a business and can't take criticism, you should move on to something else.

 

[Duke of Cheese]

Well said.

 

[User 23988]

Don’t forget all of these tat sellers got employment after IW 2 failed.
Their cvs must make interesting reading.
To keep up their lifestyle(particularly one who likes to flaunt everything on social media)they are either super confident or don’t care about anything,and they certainly don’t care about customers!
Shysters

 

[Muttley]

I just wanted to add something (since the recent poster has brought it up) speaking only for myself, I don't despise shopping TV or Ideal World. I am certainly not wanting it to fail. I have worked in TV in various roles behind the scenes and know that a team of people put together the content, it isn't just the presenters. I consider myself to be giving constructive criticism (as well as poking fun and also being real about what claims are being made). But I can't stand manipulative behaviour and conning people who don't know any better. At the end of the day shopping TV are retailers. And that side of things needs to be kept in check. You aren't just watching a TV show, viewers are spending their own money and put a certain amount of trust in what is being presented. If you run a business and can't take criticism, you should move on to something else.

I do question the motivation of newbies who immediately challenge the views of the majority of contributors. Of course, they're absolutely entitled to do that if they wish to.

But an accusation made of us is "why do you watch if you hate it". We could say the same to them - why do you contribute to a forum that has the total opposite views to you. We're not likely to change our opinions to please you.

So back to motivation. They could either be a member of staff or a presenter, or they're a character in Nordic folklore...

Best way of dealing with them is to not respond to them. You can't have an argument with someone if they don't respond.