Random musings and general banter.

[harrytumkins]

The 20th edition was "basically sold out" after the first show

Been on a hell of a lot of this show they had 20 (they say) how many have actually sold?

Benedictus Vananananananananananananagas

BIG Z

Kev advertising personal appearances for BIG Z

 

[PhædrusR]

Not only fake but with the smirking entitlement of nothing to do with us it’s not our fault.
We carry on as if nothing has happened (WRONG)
No apology from any of them for leaving customers out of pocket,with goods not delivered,or easy pays still being taken but no goods supplied.
Not sure why these shysters are still on tv?

Understand your sentiment but, as you well know, this is a totally different company and the presenters were either contracted agents or employed by IW.

After their redundancy or contract termination/end, that are free to go and work elsewhere in a similar role, contract permitting.

It's no different to useless business execs, or other workers or directors who can be accused of messing up one company before they take a golden goodbye and a few months/years later reappear at another company and start to mess that up too.

We used to call them 'corporate seagulls'; they appear at a company, sh!t all over it, before moving onto another to do the same.

This happens at all levels, but especially middle management, execs or directors or professionals/consultants. Often, you can tell from their LinkedIn/CV if they never stay at one firm longer than about 2 years: first year get foot in, see the system, make changes and screw it up, 2nd year leave when they see the results or before they get found out and blamed for their incompetence and find a scapegoat to blame before they move on somewhere else.

My point is you can't really blame TV sales presenters for moving around.
They weren't running the channel or managing it. They're just the on screen salespeople, however bad or unethical you think they are. Just because you only see them as representatives of the channel doesn't mean they know everything going on and do not know what the management strategy is or all the decisions being taken. Like any employee/agent, you play the hand you're dealt. There had to be someone selling on the channel to try and make money to theoretically save it. Same as a restaurant, you don't blame the waiters/staff for taking your payment only to find the restaurant is shut the next day. Yes you got your dinner but not able to return.

The people to blame are the owners and CEO and management responsible for running the business into the ground or not making the right decisions or priorities. They are the ones that by going into administration did not keep the jobs and roles for people to work in.

 

[Professor Branestawm]

Nubeo with Jonathan Boreoff and Crawley. I swear theyve been bringing this exact same “limited edition of just 80 worldwide” Manta model to air on IW for years. Clearly no one wants the ruddy thing!

And all this talk of diving. Pretty sure Derrick, 67, watching from his bungalow in Hull, isn’t into deep sea diving. Anyone into diving isn’t watching selly telly for watches.

At least not twice,
imagine the thought process…
’Now, I’ll need an accurate timer for my dive, to be sure oxygen isn’t an issue. Where can I get a reliable, yet stylish device to trust my life to?‘
‘I know, Ideal World off the telly, or whatever it’s called now that it’s gone bust, again!’.

 

[Deleted member 21838]

I think being asked to go in front of the camera and ask people to part with £600 for garden furniture, with no mention allowed that your employer is in the most dire financial peril is a task I would have definitely declined. They didn’t. An apology for doing that would be appreciated, and not the regular ‘poor mistreated us’ routine - particularly from Ryan. “We were unemployed for eight weeks,“ he said last night? Was his pub shut during that time, too?

 

[Muttley]

New stock coming shortly after the emails

A perfectly nice email has Shaun all in a mess finally realises it is fine and seems happy

"we have been called allsorts tonight I must admit"

OK, what have you all been emailing?.

We should draft one email and all of us send it at the same time, that would be so funny!

And we could include a line asking if they will be stocking expensive rattan furniture...

 

[Deleted member 21838]

The 20th edition was "basically sold out" after the first show

Been on a hell of a lot of this show they had 20 (they say) how many have actually sold?

Benedictus Vananananananananananananagas

BIG Z

Kev advertising personal appearances for BIG Z

I thought similar. Willy Wonka's everlasting gobstopper came to mind so plentiful was the sold out stock. "Technically sold out," said Treated us Badly. "A technical limited stock." Stock semantics. The same old 'BS' Ideal World used to use - always on watch shows. The truth of it you suspect is that they had a very small number to sell in the first place, 'loaded into the system' as Kev always adds. But possibly with the option of him adding more after that if the first small number did sell. Then you have the watches left in baskets and not checked out - presumably anybody can do that and without the real intention to ever buy?

 

[User 23988]

Understand your sentiment but, as you well know, this is a totally different company and the presenters were either contracted agents or employed by IW.

After their redundancy or contract termination/end, that are free to go and work elsewhere in a similar role, contract permitting.

It's no different to useless business execs, or other workers or directors who can be accused of messing up one company before they take a golden goodbye and a few months/years later reappear at another company and start to mess that up too.

We used to call them 'corporate seagulls'; they appear at a company, sh!t all over it, before moving onto another to do the same.

This happens at all levels, but especially middle management, execs or directors or professionals/consultants. Often, you can tell from their LinkedIn/CV if they never stay at one firm longer than about 2 years: first year get foot in, see the system, make changes and screw it up, 2nd year leave when they see the results or before they get found out and blamed for their incompetence and find a scapegoat to blame before they move on somewhere else.

My point is you can't really blame TV sales presenters for moving around.
They weren't running the channel or managing it. They're just the on screen salespeople, however bad or unethical you think they are. Just because you only see them as representatives of the channel doesn't mean they know everything going on and do not know what the management strategy is or all the decisions being taken. Like any employee/agent, you play the hand you're dealt. There had to be someone selling on the channel to try and make money to theoretically save it. Same as a restaurant, you don't blame the waiters/staff for taking your payment only to find the restaurant is shut the next day. Yes you got your dinner but not able to return.

The people to blame are the owners and CEO and management responsible for running the business into the ground or not making the right decisions or priorities. They are the ones that by going into administration did not keep the jobs and roles for people to work in.

It’s a totally different company fronted by people who sold in the past with another company,expensive rattan furniture which was either not delivered or no stock available but payment still taken.
The poor me routine doesn’t work anymore,remember they were all at a party hosted by bouncing bunny after IW went bust.
Please don’t make excuses for them anybody with morals would have said no I can’t do that it’s not right,otherwise you are saying they did not have prior knowledge of how bad the financial situation was with IW.
Yet we viewers/customers from a distance could see the s*** was going to hit the fan.
Shysters the lot of them and we all know it

 

[Deleted member 21838]

It’s one way or the other..It can’t be all that last few days with no mention of difficulty sales presentation techniques, but it’s nothing to do with us, Guv, and then playing the sympathy poor, innocent collateral damage ticket. Either ‘fess up and take your part in the unfortunate mess, and look for sympathy along with ALL the staff who lost their jobs. Or insist you knew nothing of any difficulties, detach yourselves from the whole thing, pick yourselves and dust yourselves down (er..that’s enough cliched, Ed..) and keep your mouths shut - just like you did when selling rattan a couple of hours from going off-air.

 

[PhædrusR]

I don't agree with the simplistic view. What would you have done?

Even if they'd all resigned and said, no, the company is in trouble, I'm not willing to sell items I worry the customer will not get, then somebody else would be hired to do it, or the last person who had appeared would be incurring your wrath.

Again, it is not the presenters' fault customer may not get their items, which at the time was an operating, functioning company trying to make money by selling to keep it afloat and keep people's jobs.
The management could or should have had a closing down sale and a fulfilment guarantee.

The only things they are responsible for is poor, bad or unethical sales tactics or ASA breaches. Not the management of the company and its fulfilment and cashflow processes.

1. They're employed/contracted to do their job. They would have been in breach 2. Somebody would have been on when the lights went out. Even if nobody took over then whoever had last been on air would be the scapegoat.

The presenters are not responsible for the failure of the company and any stock/supply issues. They are salespeople which is not a dirty word if done properly.

Yes, their "I'm alright jack", found another job, attitudes is not ideal, and galling for others from IW who may be jobless or in difficulty. But no different from workers in any company who lose their job and find another. Do you expect them to not do their job at another company. Whether you like them or their style, is irrelevant to the case in point.

Because it is TV and you viscerally see only them as the TV channel representatives and never see owners, or management on screen, they take the brunt of mismanagement. Despite doing their jobs, which they were contracted to do, even if badly and even if their poor sales caused the business losses.

You ire and anger should be more directed at the owners and management, more than any of the 'staff', front or back of house, imho.

There has to be a last day. A bit like politicians, all TV shopping channels/careers end in failure!
And you move on.

 

[Deleted member 21838]

It would be interesting to know if there were any presenters who were reluctant to be a part of the final days farce? Paul Becque?

 

[Deleted member 21838]

For me, they are as equally to blame as anyone there involved with the broadcasting and selling strategy. They (the presenters) were asking us to buy relatively expensive furniture and conveying everything as normal. they were the people the viewers were making their purchasing choices around. Whatever way that it is defended, it doesn‘t sit right with my moral code. As for moving on… the four of them and others, are treating this new venture as a sort of Ideal World Mark Three, and continually firing off cheap shots about their former workplace. If they’d made a genuine fresh presenting start, and no reference to their last roles, perhaps those critical of their previous judgement skills would move on also. But it is the same rhetoric, the same pressure selling, and the same overall style as the one Ideal World portrayed, until they folded.

 

[User 23988]

I don't agree with the simplistic view. What would you have done?

Even if they'd all resigned and said, no, the company is in trouble, I'm not willing to sell items I worry the customer will not get, then somebody else would be hired to do it, or the last person who had appeared would be incurring your wrath.

Again, it is not the presenters' fault customer may not get their items, which at the time was an operating, functioning company trying to make money by selling to keep it afloat and keep people's jobs.
The management could or should have had a closing down sale and a fulfilment guarantee.

The only things they are responsible for is poor, bad or unethical sales tactics or ASA breaches. Not the management of the company and its fulfilment and cashflow processes.

1. They're employed/contracted to do their job. They would have been in breach 2. Somebody would have been on when the lights went out. Even if nobody took over then whoever had last been on air would be the scapegoat.

The presenters are not responsible for the failure of the company and any stock/supply issues. They are salespeople which is not a dirty word if done properly.

Yes, their "I'm alright jack", found another job, attitudes is not ideal, and galling for others from IW who may be jobless or in difficulty. But no different from workers in any company who lose their job and find another. Do you expect them to not do their job at another company. Whether you like them or their style, is irrelevant to the case in point.

Because it is TV and you viscerally see only them as the TV channel representatives and never see owners, or management on screen, they take the brunt of mismanagement. Despite doing their jobs, which they were contracted to do, even if badly and even if their poor sales caused the business losses.

You ire and anger should be more directed at the owners and management, more than any of the 'staff', front or back of house, imho.

There has to be a last day. A bit like politicians, all TV shopping channels/careers end in failure!
And you move on.

Simple reply please do not defend the indefensible.
My ire or anger as you put it is for the former IW customers nothing more nothing less.
As for the tat sellers they became caricatures of themselves and to this day are employing the same selling methods as before.
Don’t get to defensive it’s nothing personal and really it’s just observation and banter.
But reading between the lines it seems they are getting a hard time from emails being sent to the studio,so not everyone is enjoying them back on tv

 

[Herring]

It would be interesting to know if there were any presenters who were reluctant to be a part of the final days farce? Paul Becque?

Something I remember noticing during those final, dying, Rattan/AirCon-filled weeks was that Mike of the Masons began, seemingly out of nowhere, to talk up "your rights and protections as a consumer if things go wrong" (or something to that effect). He was a lot serious when talking about it then when doing the old "we give you a 30 day money back guarantee, aren't we SO generous" routine in weeks/months past.

Now, I had zero idea the channel was about to fold at the time. But I distinctly remember his tone shift and the fact he was offering useful information. Makes more sense in hindsight.

Did he ever sell Rattan? I get the impression he was one of those who got to 'pick' the shows he fronted. He seemed a lot more at ease (and less of a pushy pruck (feel free to ask Carol for another vowel if the 'u' doesn't make sense ) during the Firetrap clothes shows towards the end.

 

[Jazzydrury]

Something I remember noticing during those final, dying, Rattan/AirCon-filled weeks was how Mike of the Masons started, seemingly out of nowhere, began to talk up "your rights and consumers protections if things go wrong" (or something to that effect). He was being a lot serious when saying it then when he'd do the usual "we give you a 30 day money back guarantee, aren't we SO generous" routine in weeks/months past.

Now, I had zero idea the channel was about to fold at the time. But I distinctly remember this tone shift. It makes more sense in hindsight.

Did he ever sell Rattan? I get the impression he was one of those who got to 'pick' the shows he fronted. He seemed a lot more at ease (and less of a pushy pruck (feel free to ask Carol for another vowel if the 'u' doesn't make sense ) during the Firetrap clothes shows towards the end.

Yes Give Mike his due I think he even dropped the hard sell, and several times mentioned customers rights, Also there was a list of where the presenters have moved to.

Dean Wilson and Joe Remblance are working for create and craft

 

[PhædrusR]

It would be interesting to know, perhaps from @snakesnakesnake, what information the presenters were given, and how soon they knew.

Were they given any customer stock delivery assurances by management?

Clearly MM knew the closure was happening the next day and hinted at such and effectively said goodbye and thanks for all the fish before midnight sign-off. Should he not have been selling at all. Who would they have used instead.

But where do you draw the line. Presumably most people knew the firm was in trouble for months. When would you have said no more. People received their shoes/items/orders just days before the closure, and week prior were ordering and receiving goods and afaik, they have since tried to fulfill remaining stock orders. The nightmare rattan order discussed on forum is slowly being sorted, payments stopped and refund claims happening?

So if it's just about their insensitive tones/attitude after IW closure, yes, but to say they should not be doing their jobs until closure, is stretching it. Someone had to run the business until closure. And you have to make sales to try and forestall closure. And you'd sell Sports Direct big ticket items, rattan, to maximise cashflow and profit margin. And SD were pushing for their stuff to be sold, we're told. Announcing a closing down sale would have stopped all but the most determined buyer, unless some sort of big discount and guaranteed delivery/insurance was offered, thereby exacerbating the cash/profit situation.

 

[Deleted member 21838]

If they’d been honest with the buyers (the business is in trouble but will do its utmost to honour the orders) they wouldn’t have made any sales. How much did the presenters know? Weren’t some of them creditors of the former version also in trouble? If not that - the website ’down’ the fancy promos gone, brands jumping ship to QVC…Were those things big clues?

 

[Jazzydrury]

on The final afternoon, would Shaun Crawley, have known that Was the final hour, or would management have entered at the end of that hour, and been like that’s it

 

[harrytumkins]

"The technical difficulties" saga which EVERYONE on this thread KNEW the end was nigh begs the question if we all knew (and it wasn't hard) then don't try and tell presenters who had been there for years or even decades didn't

What should they have done?

Not sold £500+ Rattan sets on a constant loop

Point has been made before but in the dying embers of Bid Tv when it wasn't as obvious things were shortly falling apart they sold £8 all-in egg cookers on a constant loop, still not ideal but it isn't putting anybody into potential financial difficulty

 

[Deleted member 21838]

Harry makes the point well. Yes, sell to the end without warning if that's the plan. But sell cheap items at knockdown prices that don't hurt the punters in the pocket too deeply if they don't turn up after meltdown. Those relentless £600 rattan sofa sets hour after hour after wretched hour were a desperate and cynical manoeuvre to pull in as much as possible with no warning whatsoever given to potential buyers of how dire the position was. A lot of their target market perhaps isn't as Net savvy as we are, and didn't have the benefit of knowing how unsteady the position of the company possibly was. I thought the whole thing was simply appalling.

 

[PhædrusR]

Simple reply please do not defend the indefensible.
My ire or anger as you put it is for the former IW customers nothing more nothing less.
As for the tat sellers they became caricatures of themselves and to this day are employing the same selling methods as before.
Don’t get to defensive it’s nothing personal and really it’s just observation and banter.
But reading between the lines it seems they are getting a hard time from emails being sent to the studio,so not everyone is enjoying them back on tv

Look, I agree with your overall point about them as individuals and their personal sales styles. I just think you need to split their roles, professionalism, the fact they were/are 'employed' to be salespeople on TV by the companies, irrespective of the state the business is in behind the scenes, from their admittedly shoddy, low-rent and barely ethical sales tactics.

Don't worry, not taking anything personal or defensive! Just looked at many of the comments and thought about it some more and the position they find/found themselves in. A bit like the commenter who argued an opposing view and was told if they didn't like it/agree, then they maybe could go elsewhere, didn't have to read and maybe this forum was not for them. Whereas in reality a bit of a discussion with different views is what we need! At times, the forum reads a bit like 'groupthink' and no other views/opinions expressed, so I'm putting my honest opinion! Like I said, agree with the overall sentiment and their behaviour, bit trying to also point out the business situation and how sometimes we have to do legal, but unpalatable jobs for the sake of the business or the company or what contractually we're obliged to do.