Sad State Of Affairs

[icr24350]

Recently, we've had a spate of threads having a go at various presenters - Allison Young, Claudia etc. A thought has just occurred to me - is this because the stuff for sale is not worth commenting on ? I have to admit to rarely watching the channels now, as there is seldom anything I fancy. So should we not be having a pop at the buyers who are inflicting 'tat' on us, or am I just getting choosey in my old age ?

 

[NIKKID]

I think you may have a point there - the focus is no longer the product but the presenter/presentation as there is little or nothing to hold our attention.

 

[silversequin]

have to say I agree with you, I find so much of the stuff on QVC overpriced and pretty dull, plus for me, the p&p puts me off these days as once you add at least £2 45p to the purchase it stops seeming quite as attractive. In the past I have some fab things but am growing tired of the endless handbags and beauty stuff, maybe we are getting jaded and need something fresh to tempt us. I'd be interested to know if they saw a significant rise in sales on the 99p p&p day.

 

[Artemis]

I thinkl you may have a point, too, but I also think that QVC was and still is, the best of the shopping channels but that many of the presenters take themselves far too seriously now.
Not so long ago, "serious" newspapers would never indulge in gossip and discuss the private lives of Z-list wannabees.Now, they all do it in an attempt to lure us with the lurid. Anyone who wants to be someone knows that publicity, ANY publicity is better than being ignored.
We have a never-ending source of salacious gossip at our disposal.We have headlines that scream, for example, (this was one from last week ) Eva Mendes has managed to banish the bags under her eyes to glow on the red carpet! My reaction to this sort of tat is usually "FFS, who cares? " I'm not adopting a holier-than-thou attitude, I can be intrigued by, and read about a bit of nonsense as much as anyone.
It's no surprise that we feel it's all right to comment on the personal lives, mannerisms and appearance of those we watch when every news stand has magazines with features on VB.s poor skin, Cheryl's alleged high-handedness or Gwynnie's poor dress sense. It's the world we live in.
Anyone sticking their head above the parapet gets shot at these days and, rightly or wrongly, they are considered to be fair game.

 

[Scampdog]

I agree !!!....only one thing for it then "SACK THE BUYERS" :wink2::flower:

 

[Boris Bear]

have to say I agree with you, I find so much of the stuff on QVC overpriced and pretty dull, plus for me, the p&p puts me off these days as once you add at least £2 45p to the purchase it stops seeming quite as attractive. In the past I have some fab things but am growing tired of the endless handbags and beauty stuff, maybe we are getting jaded and need something fresh to tempt us. I'd be interested to know if they saw a significant rise in sales on the 99p p&p day.

When they had free p & p on grey Diamonique a few weeks ago I bought a ring which I wouldn't normally have bought. I wasn't sure about the size but decided it would be less than a quid to send it back, if it was going to be £2.50 in lost p & p plus the quid I would probably have given it a miss. That makes me sound really tight but the free p & p had the desired efffect on me.

 

[Pollybelle]

Given their bulk purchasing power, I would have thought QVC could do a lot better on their pricing - they seem very uncompetitive compared to the high street and I don't buy from them automatically without shopping around first to see if I can get a better deal.

Also I'm not a fan of the clothes ranges they sell but would understand people buying from them if they were as cheap as chips. However considering a lot of the items seem to be made out of polyester it's unbelievable to me that anyone would shell out £30/£40 for a top when you could get a good quality cotton one in a chain store for a fraction of the price.

 

[talisker25]

Recently, we've had a spate of threads having a go at various presenters - Allison Young, Claudia etc. A thought has just occurred to me - is this because the stuff for sale is not worth commenting on ? I have to admit to rarely watching the channels now, as there is seldom anything I fancy. So should we not be having a pop at the buyers who are inflicting 'tat' on us, or am I just getting choosey in my old age ?

You are quite right of course, however, how many times do we hear the presenters say 'we must have a word with the buyers to get that back' so the presenters must take must take some flak for some of the carp that is sold.

 

[talisker25]

Given their bulk purchasing power, I would have thought QVC could do a lot better on their pricing - they seem very uncompetitive compared to the high street and I don't buy from them automatically without shopping around first to see if I can get a better deal.

Also I'm not a fan of the clothes ranges they sell but would understand people buying from them if they were as cheap as chips. However considering a lot of the items seem to be made out of polyester it's unbelievable to me that anyone would shell out £30/£40 for a top when you could get a good quality cotton one in a chain store for a fraction of the price.

And...everyone I know likes to try things on before they buy, not to worry, try it, if you just don't like it, send it back. Oh! and by the way, send too much back and we will kick you of QVC, but, they don't tell you the last bit!!

 

[rainbowdottie]

Although I'm farting - and back at work so not watching half as much - there is really nothing that is appealing to me at the moment - or particularly looking forward to!

 

[barbedwire]

Recently, we've had a spate of threads having a go at various presenters - Allison Young, Claudia etc. A thought has just occurred to me - is this because the stuff for sale is not worth commenting on ? I have to admit to rarely watching the channels now, as there is seldom anything I fancy. So should we not be having a pop at the buyers who are inflicting 'tat' on us, or am I just getting choosey in my old age ?

Yeah, that's a really good point actually. I really really do try and not slag off the presenters if I can help it, but sometimes I have done - and have felt hugely guilty afterwards as I know that if it were me I'd hate it and feel very upset...

But...I do reckon that 'cos there isn't much new stuff appearing, the same ranges all the time, boring TSVs that aren't really that good value anymore - or just plain old tat being sold that it seems the only thing worth commenting on is the presenters. I think though, that in all honesty many of us have been watching shopping tv for so many years that we're immune and hardened to it anyway - so nothing really has much of an effect on us apart from the people that do the selling:tongue2: so it could just be boredom and fatigue on our part that causes it

 

[iamasmall]

is a bit like the supermarket, we only have one choice where i live and whilst everthing is in stock and good offers all fine and dandy, but the same store poorly stocked and more expensive i notice how rude/untrained/could not careless attitude of the checkout staff if you see what i mean

 

[Love A'kin]

Funnily enough I was just thinking at loud with Hubby the other day that I think perhaps our resentment with QVC's methods and policies may spill over into bitchiness about the presenters who are their public face.

For example: I watched about seven seconds of Kim & Co today and threw a cushion at Kim (well, the TV screen that her face was on!) when she said "If we don't have your size order a size up or a size down..."

Now, am I angry with Kim for being so cavalier about the returns this advice will inevitably engender - or am I cross with QVC's policies regarding sale techniques and returns?

I'm still cross with Alison Young about the Ped Pro - which is ridiculous because its her job to sell to us whatever she's is told to.

She didn't make the useless thing, pass it through quality control, authorise a TSV, buy twenty thousand of them, fill them with five minute life batteries, or approve that shonky guest who would prompt me to check if he said the sky was blue. She didn't charge me £7 in postage to have it delivered and then returned. She won't hold that return against me if I am dumb enogh to believe the sales pitch on other similarly useless gadgets and end up with a higher proportion of returned items than QVC is happy with.

But she is a person, she has a face, and she is who I remember telling me how fab it was and to buy more than one for the different members of the household for hygiene reasons.

Her words are the reason I bought and I hold it against her.

It's much harder to be angry with a big faceless corporation.

I just wonder how much of the hate and bitchiness is really resentment against QVC ?

 

[Rozzy]

The other night late, I was surfing the channels and for once instead of dipping into QVC for a few minutes (or Sky+ ing it) I went onto the Shopping Channels section and went down through all of them, when usually I only ever watch QVC or occasionally dip into IW for a laugh...........anyway, the point I'm coming to in a long drawn out way was that by doing that it really struck me that QVC are just another shopping channel and not a cosy,family chat show type of thing, they're just selling us stuff in the same way that Jack Lallane (loving the lycra baby!!:rock.....if you see what I mean:cheeky:

 

[boffy]

the better looking presenters tend to get more derogatory comments it seems.
julia,claudia,daniel green,alison young,catherine even, as she has improved a lot since joining qvc. i remember someone saying how sallow her skin looked and how unhealthy she was.insinuating that she was sick.how would a forumer know so much about a presenter: purley from conjecture and malice.

 

[Whatsinaname]

Well put, Love A'kin & boffy. There's nothing wrong with a little criticism, as long as it doesn't become hurtful and cruel. Perhaps the presenters have become so familiar to us, we feel entitled to comment on them. And lots of the products are so familiar, we've heard the sales patter many times before so we get distracted by the way the presenter speaks or what he/she's wearing etc. There's still no excuse for out and out nastiness, though. I'm surprised at the strength of some comments, I prefer some presenters to others but I couldn't say I really dislike any of them.

 

[BurlyBeaR]

I'm still cross with Alison Young about the Ped Pro - which is ridiculous because its her job to sell to us whatever she's is told to.

She didn't make the useless thing, pass it through quality control, authorise a TSV, buy twenty thousand of them, fill them with five minute life batteries, or approve that shonky guest who would prompt me to check if he said the sky was blue. She didn't charge me £7 in postage to have it delivered and then returned. She won't hold that return against me if I am dumb enogh to believe the sales pitch on other similarly useless gadgets and end up with a higher proportion of returned items than QVC is happy with.

But she is a person, she has a face, and she is who I remember telling me how fab it was and to buy more than one for the different members of the household for hygiene reasons.

Her words are the reason I bought and I hold it against her.

exactly. and she gets paid for her face and her words, no one forces any of them to be on tv. for that reason alone theyre all fair game to be criticised.

 

[Re Cycle]

I thinkl you may have a point, too, but I also think that QVC was and still is, the best of the shopping channels but that many of the presenters take themselves far too seriously now.
Not so long ago, "serious" newspapers would never indulge in gossip and discuss the private lives of Z-list wannabees.Now, they all do it in an attempt to lure us with the lurid. Anyone who wants to be someone knows that publicity, ANY publicity is better than being ignored.
We have a never-ending source of salacious gossip at our disposal.We have headlines that scream, for example, (this was one from last week ) Eva Mendes has managed to banish the bags under her eyes to glow on the red carpet! My reaction to this sort of tat is usually "FFS, who cares? " I'm not adopting a holier-than-thou attitude, I can be intrigued by, and read about a bit of nonsense as much as anyone.
It's no surprise that we feel it's all right to comment on the personal lives, mannerisms and appearance of those we watch when every news stand has magazines with features on VB.s poor skin, Cheryl's alleged high-handedness or Gwynnie's poor dress sense. It's the world we live in.
Anyone sticking their head above the parapet gets shot at these days and, rightly or wrongly, they are considered to be fair game.

Yes, I mostly agree. Great post.

Take the Daily (Hate) Mail, for instance.

We think (and know) that being anonymous invites all kind of spite. Noone knows who you are and you can say what the hell you like, with little or no comeback. The Mail (for example) constantly comments on women's bodies - the "comments" section does that as well under each story - and that attitude crosses media...to here, for example. The posters who have commented on Jill and Claudia know who you are. You probably don't even think that what you do is somehow, well, sort of NOT OK.

Regarding the products on QVC - honestly, I don't know. I've watched and bought stuff for 7 years and yes, the price of gold (and silver) has gone ballistic, (not down to QVC) the prices aren't perhaps as brill as I'd like but I still get the chance to try skin care on Easy Pay (and in small sizes), the fashion has improved ENORMOUSLY. I get to buy funky unusual semi-precious gemstones, that marvellous Lori Grenier (sp?) jewellery cabinet and some good quality cookware.

So...negative comments on here, IMHO are due to a minority of posters knowing that another minority of posters will back them up. Strength in unpleasant numbers under the guise of freedom of expression, I suppose. Directed at QVC presenters and sadly, other posters on here.

 

[carrots]

I think rightly or wrongly we buy based on what the presenter says and if we then have to pay to return said items because they are not what we hoped for, we blame the presenter.
Quite rightly in my opinion because it was their sales patter that convinced us, they said they'd tried it, they said how good it was............... etc. So if we're taken in we don't blame ourselves for our moment of madness.
I've tried things that proved to be rubbish and haven't lived up to the claims made by AY and I won't waste money on Ojon again it didn't work, pure and simple, but she tells me it's wonderful - so I blame her she said it.
I've stopped watching now, so that's their loss not mine.

 

[Re Cycle]

I think rightly or wrongly we buy based on what the presenter says and if we then have to pay to return said items because they are not what we hoped for, we blame the presenter.
Quite rightly in my opinion because it was their sales patter that convinced us, they said they'd tried it, they said how good it was............... etc. So if we're taken in we don't blame ourselves for our moment of madness.
I've tried things that proved to be rubbish and haven't lived up to the claims made by AY and I won't waste money on Ojon again it didn't work, pure and simple, but she tells me it's wonderful - so I blame her she said it.
I've stopped watching now, so that's their loss not mine.

Hi there

Sales is sales, I guess...to a certain degree.

I tried Ojon and it didn't suit me. Others loved it and feel their hair has improved no end. I love the Philip Kingsley products. Others have hated it and their hair hasn't improved no end. AY was lying on neither occasion. I have fine hair, others have coarse hair, others have afro caribbean hair, others have thick hair. What would you do? Not all products will suit everyone. When I sent back my Ojon stuff I held it against nobody. I just didn't buy it again.