Upheld Complaints Against Sit-Up - 24 July 2013

[Wirral70]

LOL. how appropriate that 'captain fact' would take issue with metaphor LOL. you've:call: made my day!:heart:

I'd rather be Captain Fact than Mrs Misjudgement :grin:

Stick it with Bings, the law of averages says you'll surely get there eventually although personally I wouldn't put money on it where you're concerned!

Ooh, Betty.

 

[PJ.]

Thanks for the hand PJ. but wait. while your attention is diverted.. who is stalking Mike Mason?? Nobody?? you mean.. he is un-stalked? goodness me!

I have a crack team on it of course .....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[bingowings]

I'd rather be Captain Fact than Mrs Misjudgement :grin:

Stick it with Bings, the law of averages says you'll surely get there eventually although personally I wouldn't put money on it where you're concerned!

Ooh, Betty.

The only reason your complaints get upheld is because you complain about BID. you could write the ASA and tell them you dont like the BID studio and they would uphold it. im sorry to burst your little bubble but both them and you are victimising that poor channel and its wonderful presenters. its nothing short of bullying and nobody likes a bully!

 

[bingowings]

I have a crack team on it of course .....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

ahh SkyPlus? as i thought. no stone eh PJ? No stone!

 

[Wirral70]

The only reason your complaints get upheld is because you complain about BID. you could write the ASA and tell them you dont like the BID studio and they would uphold it. im sorry to burst your little bubble but both them and you are victimising that poor channel and its wonderful presenters. its nothing short of bullying and nobody likes a bully!

Bingo, I know this is probably not in your sphere of comprehension but the only reason my complaints get Upheld is because they are factual.

Not opinion, not speculation, fact.

As for victimisation, I personally think submitting five complaints about one channel in the space of a few moments could be considered victimisation, something which the ASA no doubt took into account. I can say with total honesty that I haven't complained about Bid that many times in almost a year.

It sounds like a knee jerk, ill considered, spiteful, petty and above all utterly inappropriate way to correspond with a regulator. If I had behaved that way i'd be ashamed of myself. Complaints should only ever be made when you are absolutely sure of what you seen and what was said, not to try and prove points on a forum, for which you failed miserably.

 

[bingowings]

Bingo, I know this is probably not in your sphere of comprehension but the only reason my complaints get Upheld is because they are factual.

Not opinion, not speculation, fact.

As for victimisation, I personally think submitting FIVE complaints about ONE channel in the space of a few moments

Yet again Wirral you are sensationalising the facts to make them fit your purpose. ironic dont you think?

could be considered victimisation, something which the ASA no doubt took into account. I can say with total honesty that I haven't complained about Bid that many times in a YEAR.

Erm. you complain about BID at least 10 times a day lol. how do you find time to eat?

It sounds like a knee jerk, ill considered, spiteful, petty and above all utterly inappropriate way to correspond with a regulator. If I had behaved that way i'd be ashamed of myself.

If my life consisted of sitting studying a channel and desperately trying to find something even slightly contentious to blow out of all proportion so it would merit a 'new post' on a forum i would feel pretty ashamed. but complaining about a channel i felt mislead by? nope. not ashamed in the slightest. maybe you should get out more?

 

[Wirral70]

[/B]

If my life consisted of sitting studying a channel and desperately trying to find something even slightly contentious to blow out of all proportion so it would merit a 'new post' on a forum i would feel pretty ashamed. but complaining about a channel i felt mislead by? nope. not ashamed in the slightest. maybe you should get out more?

All I can say to that is the day I join a forum just to disrupt it and cause arguments is when I will really start worrying, until then...........

But really Bing, you have absolutely no idea what you are doing with the ASA. Your Ideal World 'complaint' made me howl with laughter, heaven knows what they must have thought.

So, so funny!

 

[bingowings]

PMSL! Bingo, that is an absolutely lamentably weak complaint to make about IW, hilarious!! Are you honestly telling me you are not aware of a new product being sold at an introductory price? I have been telling you for weeks the price Bid sold Yonanas for was not the standard price. The Argos standard price is £59.99 but they are selling it for £49.67 with free delivery.

If you are so desperate to make a complaint stick might I suggest you keep watching Bid? I promise you, you won't have to watch for long before something worthwhile crops up.




Better luck next time Bings, you'll get there in the end kidder.

BIS regulations which the ASA are supposed to enforce.

regarding 'introductory offers'

1.3.2 You should not allow an offer to run on so long that it becomes misleading to
describe it as an ‘introductory’ or other ‘special offer’. What is a reasonable period
will depend on the circumstances (but, depending on the shelf-life of the product, it is
likely to be a matter of weeks, not months). In general, you should state the date
the offer will end

1.3.4 If you decide to quote a future price, you should explain what you mean in full.
The use of acronyms should be avoided as they do not clearly convey information
that consumers need to know. The description should be clearly and prominently
displayed with the price indication.

NONE of this was done by IW. NONE.they DIDNT mention that it was even a 'promotional price. not once. if BID did this they would be slammed for it and it would be you doing the slamming. but because its another channel you reach for the old rose tinted and become all philosophical about it.

 

[bingowings]

[/B]

If my life consisted of sitting studying a channel and desperately trying to find something even slightly contentious to blow out of all proportion so it would merit a 'new post' on a forum i would feel pretty ashamed. but complaining about a channel i felt mislead by? nope. not ashamed in the slightest. maybe you should get out more?

All I can say to that is the day I join a forum just to disrupt it and cause arguments is when I will really start worrying, until then...........

But really Bing, you have absolutely no idea what you are doing with the ASA. Your Ideal World 'complaint' made me howl with laughter, heaven knows what they must have thought.

So, so funny!

Al those poor people mislead by IW and you think it is funny? thats a pretty sick sense of humour you have there wirral!

 

[Wirral70]

BIS regulations which the ASA are supposed to enforce.

regarding 'introductory offers'

1.3.2 You should not allow an offer to run on so long that it becomes misleading to
describe it as an ‘introductory’ or other ‘special offer’. What is a reasonable period
will depend on the circumstances (but, depending on the shelf-life of the product, it is
likely to be a matter of weeks, not months). In general, you should state the date
the offer will end

1.3.4 If you decide to quote a future price, you should explain what you mean in full.
The use of acronyms should be avoided as they do not clearly convey information
that consumers need to know. The description should be clearly and prominently
displayed with the price indication.

NONE of this was done by IW. NONE.they DIDNT mention that it was even a 'promotional price. not once. if BID did this they would be slammed for it and it would be you doing the slamming. but because its another channel you reach for the old rose tinted and become all philosophical about it.

Well if you are absolutely sure of your facts don't waste your time on here pontificating me ducks, do something about it!!

That's what I do, facts are your friend in these matters.

 

[Wirral70]

Al those poor people mislead by IW and you think it is funny? thats a pretty sick sense of humour you have there wirral!

Yes, those poor people who got a product for £10 less than usual.

If that qualifies me to be sick then I happily concede, I am sick.

 

[bingowings]

Well if you are absolutely sure of your facts don't waste your time on here me duck, do something about it.

That's what I do, facts are your friend in these matters.

If it was BID TV is was complaining about that would be the case. but it is clear the ASA will uphold ANYTHING against BID while they will be much more lenient for other advertiser. dont get me wrong. they have put themselves in this position. but they are clearly trying to work out their problems yet are being punished beyond that of others. i think it should be one rule for all. not one rule for most.

 

[bingowings]

Yes, those poor people who got a product for £10 less than usual.

If that qualifies me to be sick then I happily concede, I am sick.

pleeeeeeeese explain how paying £49.99 + £4.99 p and p is saving a tenner?

 

[Wirral70]

pleeeeeeeese explain how paying £49.99 + £4.99 p and p is saving a tenner?

Simple Bing. Because the standard price is £59.99

Exactly the same as Argos.

 

[Wirral70]

If it was BID TV is was complaining about that would be the case. but it is clear the ASA will uphold ANYTHING against BID while they will be much more lenient for other advertiser. dont get me wrong. they have put themselves in this position. but they are clearly trying to work out their problems yet are being punished beyond that of others. i think it should be one rule for all. not one rule for most.

Again that is factually incorrect. Bid have had complaints Not Upheld.

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/4/sit_up-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_217115.aspx

 

[bingowings]

Simple Bing. Because the standard price is £59.99

Exactly the same as Argos.

http://www.argos.co.uk/static/Search/searchTerms/YONANAS.htm

£49.67

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fact?s=t

You clearly need this.

 

[bingowings]

Again that is factually incorrect. Bid have had complaints Not Upheld.

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/4/sit_up-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_217115.aspx

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/metaphorically

Here you go. read and absorb.

 

[Wirral70]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/metaphorically

Here you go. read and absorb.

I rather suspect that when you correspond with the ASA you also use metaphoric terminology.

That would explain the responses you have received :grin:

 

[Paul_s]

I rather suspect that when you correspond with the ASA you also use metaphoric terminology.

That would explain the responses you have received :grin:

I actually believe that Bingo is employed by Bid.tv.

Must work for the same department who come up with all the lame excuses that we see in the ASA complaints.

 

[Bennyxp]

If it was BID TV is was complaining about that would be the case. but it is clear the ASA will uphold ANYTHING against BID while they will be much more lenient for other advertiser. dont get me wrong. they have put themselves in this position. but they are clearly trying to work out their problems yet are being punished beyond that of others. i think it should be one rule for all. not one rule for most.

I still hear presenters on bid saying about the tv dongle "...this used to go for £60 not long ago..." It now goes for under £10. "Not long ago", well, three years ago it did. I believe this is in the same category as your complaint, and bid never give a date of when it last went for £60 as they aren't going to say " in October 2009....." however this would not be something I would complain about. The ASA could ask them to not say "not long ago" but they would still be able to say "this used to go for £60" so it would not be upheld as such.