Random musings and general banter.

[Jazzydrury]

He said he’s been wearing Eur de Parfum, coming up soon What’s your Gender with Peter Simon, and his Menapause

 

[Paul B]

I'm attending a wedding at the weekend. I'm pretty excited as it will be the first opportunity to wear my selly telly special 'collectors' watch. My Cannon & Ball diver's watch (rated to 18 inches) has a sliver of seabed rock embedded in a special viewing port at the back. It's a fabulous hand assembled timepiece. I was worried that all attention will be taken off the bride when the wedding guests (and perhaps even the vicar) see it on my wrist, but that's a chance I'm willing to take.

Given the fact that it's an appreciating asset and, for collectors, condition is everything, I was in two minds whether or not to wear it but have taken it from the safety deposit box I have in the vault at the bank ready for the weekend (it's now in my home safe).

Don't worry though, it's fully insured.

 

[cheeky chappie]

Okay now i see why they keep saying sold out for certain products yet they appear later in the day, next day in other shows.
They are only allocating so much stock per show, so when they say sold out it's only that shows stock that has gone, there is still more in the warehouse for later shows.

Yeah, in other words nothing but more deception and bullsh1t, of course they did the same on the previous incarnation of IW.

'This is the last Ford Kuga we have in stock sir, once it sells we'll be sold out and we fully expect it to be sold today.'

'Oh that's a pity, I can't buy today but would have been in a position to buy next week.'

'Ah well, we 'do' have another 5 of this model in our stock facility 5 miles away sir. They'll be brought to the showroom next week.'

Smoke. Mirrors. Deception.

Not family, friendship, fun

 

[Deleted member 21838]

was he confused, I was convinced it was both front/rear from his update/pitch, well done IW, flogging another shile of pite

I could be wrong, and it could have a facility for recording from the rear? From what I saw of the presentation, I can’t see where on the unit that would be from. I’m sure there wasn’t a separate rear camera to fit and no rear lens on the main front part of the unit.

Even with Nextbase cameras, if you choose not to have a dedicated rear camera fitted at the back, the rear lens camera you can fit as an addition to the front one doesn’t give you the best visual quality a fixed one on the rear windscreen would do.

I cannot see how a £20 camera being able to provide the standard of and access to key footage needed as an evidence contribution for an accident claim. I’m prepared to accept
I could be wrong on that, and that Ive just spent around £250 too much on getting a high quality one.

What I cannot accept is using unsupported analogies about your insurance going down if you buy their dash cam. ’Possibly’ ‘Might’ and ‘Could dos’ are not good enough to use as incentives to buy. And definitely ‘might save you 50 percent if you ask’ comments from some bloke in the Gallery. If they want to do it properly, they need to employ somebody to ring a selection of insurance companies, which can be done pre-show and ask if buying their £20 dash cam could lower a car insurance policy. Then use the results of those hard contacts as something to employ on-air. I spoke with LV after buying my Nextbase one this week and I was told it made no difference whatsoever to lowering my policy and in fact, the policy could increase (it didn’t) due to increased risk of theft of it from the vehicle. I doubt that is a one off position from an insurance company. It may be a cheap dash cam they are selling, but even the empty fitting on the screen if you remove the actual camera itself can encourage a potential theft from a thief thinking the camera could be hidden in the vehicle.

This from Confused.com is what they should be telling their viewers:-


There's no universal list of issues insurance-approved dash cams, as each insurance company has its own criteria for what's an acceptable dash cam.

Adrian Flux, which offers a car insurance discount of up to 15% with a dash cam, has published its list of approved dash cam models. These include:

• BlackVue
• Prestigio
• Thinkaware
• Roadhawk
• Nextbase

For more information see the full list of approved dash cams.

In general, insurance companies want dash cams that can provide high-quality video. The better the video quality, the more likely it is that the footage is useful when investigating a claim.

So when you're looking at buying a dash cam, narrow your search for models that offer at least 1080p resolution. You can get dash cams with up to 4K resolution, but these are more expensive.

If you're thinking of buying a dash cam specifically to get a discount on your car insurance, contact your insurer first. They'll be able to tell you if they require a specific model or have any specific requirements.

 

[Jazzydrury]

There’s some freaky device on there now

 

[cheeky chappie]

I could be wrong, and it could have a facility for recording from the rear? From what I saw of the presentation, I can’t see where on the unit that would be from. I’m sure there wasn’t a separate rear camera to fit and no rear lens on the main front part of the unit.

Even with Nextbase cameras, if you choose not to have a dedicated rear camera fitted at the back, the rear lens camera you can fit as an addition to the front one doesn’t give you the best visual quality a fixed one on the rear windscreen would do.

I cannot see how a £20 camera being able to provide the standard of and access to key footage needed as an evidence contribution for an accident claim. I’m prepared to accept
I could be wrong on that, and that Ive just spent around £250 too much on getting a high quality one.

What I cannot accept is using unsupported analogies about your insurance going down if you buy their dash cam. ’Possibly’ ‘Might’ and ‘Could dos’ are not good enough to use as incentives to buy. And definitely ‘might save you 50 percent if you ask’ comments from some bloke in the Gallery. If they want to do it properly, they need to employ somebody to ring a selection of insurance companies, which can be done pre-show and ask if buying their £20 dash cam could lower a car insurance policy. Then use the results of those hard contacts as something to employ on-air. I spoke with LV after buying my Nextbase one this week and I was told it made no difference whatsoever to lowering my policy and in fact, the policy could increase (it didn’t) due to increased risk of theft of it from the vehicle. I doubt that is a one off position from an insurance company. It may be a cheap dash cam they are selling, but even the empty fitting on the screen if you remove the actual camera itself can encourage a potential theft from a thief thinking the camera could be hidden in the vehicle.

This from Confused.com is what they should be telling their viewers:-


There's no universal list of issues insurance-approved dash cams, as each insurance company has its own criteria for what's an acceptable dash cam.

Adrian Flux, which offers a car insurance discount of up to 15% with a dash cam, has published its list of approved dash cam models. These include:

• BlackVue
• Prestigio
• Thinkaware
• Roadhawk
• Nextbase

For more information see the full list of approved dash cams.

In general, insurance companies want dash cams that can provide high-quality video. The better the video quality, the more likely it is that the footage is useful when investigating a claim.

So when you're looking at buying a dash cam, narrow your search for models that offer at least 1080p resolution. You can get dash cams with up to 4K resolution, but these are more expensive.

If you're thinking of buying a dash cam specifically to get a discount on your car insurance, contact your insurer first. They'll be able to tell you if they require a specific model or have any specific requirements.

Great post. Unfortunately basing their sales on reality is something IW rarely does. As you say, sales pitches FILLED with words like could, might, should.

You do really have to wonder what's going on with this reincarnated IW and some of the products. Maybe TJC taking the opportunity to shift stuff from their stock that didn't previously sell.

 

[Jazzydrury]

They rushed the launch

 

[Jazzydrury]

They have a new Dash Cam on but it looks the same

 

[User 23988]

Did you expect anything more,with Pedro Simone,Mike of the Masons,Caravan Jaxx,
the Irish woman with the unpronounceable name,South Africa,it’s worse than the previous version of Ideal World,and that’s quite an achievement.
All we need now is Reg Varney,my name is Den,and the Creepy twins with Bouncy Bunny to complete the set

They rushed the launch

 

[Jazzydrury]

Another Shyster has turned up Jess Woods

 

[Deleted member 21838]

I think people can and should accept the reasons why they had to rush the launch to air, the inadequate demonstrations (cookers with no food etc.) and that products and choice would improve (hopefully) along the way. And particularly with the opening of the new studio at some point. I think what people find difficult to accept is the same questionable selling techniques, and lack of correct information being employed in their presentations time and time again. That has nothing to do with launching a channel quickly. That has to do with lack of transparency and giving viewers an informed choice to buy or not. And as I mentioned in my posts about the dash cam: giving people cock and bull theories about whether their insurance is going to drop by 50 percent for buying a cheap dash cam is completely unacceptable without firm research to back up such grand claims. Again, that sales technique has nothing to do with the rapid launch and also the woefully disappointing price points for so many of the goods. Even to the extent where there are examples of them selling items more expensively on the new channel, that can be bought more cheaply by going back to the original channel’s website. Are they taking people for complete fools? Or is it just woeful and slapdashcam research by the behind the scenes staff?

 

[cheeky chappie]

They rushed the launch

Yeah probably the case. That aside, I guarantee their antics will not improve once they're in the new studio which you could consider a sort of reset. Some of the products and brands might improve, but they (the presenters) won't.

Once a snake-oil salesperson, always a snake-oil salesperson.

 

[cheeky chappie]

I think people can and should accept the reasons why they had to rush the launch to air, the inadequate demonstrations (cookers with no food etc.) and that products and choice would improve (hopefully) along the way. And particularly with the opening of the new studio at some point. I think what people find difficult to accept is the same questionable selling techniques, and lack of correct information being employed in their presentations time and time again. That has nothing to do with launching a channel quickly. That has to do with lack of transparency and giving viewers an informed choice to buy or not. And as I mentioned in my posts about the dash cam: giving people cock and bull theories about whether their insurance is going to drop by 50 percent for buying a cheap dash cam is completely unacceptable without firm research to back up such grand claims. Again, that sales technique has nothing to do with the rapid launch and also the woefully disappointing price points for so many of the goods. Even to the extent where there are examples of them selling items more expensively on the new channel, that can be bought more cheaply by going back to the original channel’s website. Are they taking people for complete fools?

I'm not sure I do understand why they had to rush to air. If they bought the IW brand name, why not take a few weeks/months to properly organise and then launch in a more professional manner? I'm not saying that to be funny against you, I genuinely don't know why it wouldn't have made more sense.

As for your last sentence, yes, selly telly almost constantly takes viewers for fools

 

[Deleted member 21838]

I think I read somebody posting here, who said that if they didn’t launch they‘d lose the Freeview number. Thats why I made that particular point. But equally, I’m not sure if that is completely correct or not?

 

[Latearrival]

I’m still trying to work out who their target market Is fashion wise todays leopard pattern shawl looks even worse on the presenter than it does on the hanger

 

[Deleted member 21838]

They have a view perhaps of an audience without the internet, housebound, grossly overweight, elderly, clueless, and wearing carpet squares anoraks with furry white collars and sleeves. Still that’s enough about their Platinum ones.

 

[Jazzydrury]

Supermarkets sell better clothes than IW

Jess who is like 30, looks about 70 with this dodgy fashion

 

[Ostrichkeeper]

I must admit to messaging Pedro when he was saying that the cubes were graphite.I put granite in bold type and he did finally say what it was.

 

[rubia]

Great post. Unfortunately basing their sales on reality is something IW rarely does. As you say, sales pitches FILLED with words like could, might, should.

You do really have to wonder what's going on with this reincarnated IW and some of the products. Maybe TJC taking the opportunity to shift stuff from their stock that didn't previously sell.

Even if that is the case with TJC it's wrong on every level.

 

[rubia]

I think people can and should accept the reasons why they had to rush the launch to air, the inadequate demonstrations (cookers with no food etc.) and that products and choice would improve (hopefully) along the way. And particularly with the opening of the new studio at some point. I think what people find difficult to accept is the same questionable selling techniques, and lack of correct information being employed in their presentations time and time again. That has nothing to do with launching a channel quickly. That has to do with lack of transparency and giving viewers an informed choice to buy or not. And as I mentioned in my posts about the dash cam: giving people cock and bull theories about whether their insurance is going to drop by 50 percent for buying a cheap dash cam is completely unacceptable without firm research to back up such grand claims. Again, that sales technique has nothing to do with the rapid launch and also the woefully disappointing price points for so many of the goods. Even to the extent where there are examples of them selling items more expensively on the new channel, that can be bought more cheaply by going back to the original channel’s website. Are they taking people for complete fools? Or is it just woeful and slapdashcam research by the behind the scenes staff?

100% agree