[Musicman103]

Originally Posted by Dan's Dad

How then are the commercial channels funded, if not by the end purchaser of the advertised goods and services?

Do I buy the same goods/services that are advertised on TV?

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

I will start to answer questions and provide 'proof' when you do the same.

Where is your proof that I have an agenda? (you sidestepped that too)

I stand by what I posted, I believe that no further evidence is required than what is posted by yourself in this thread.

And as we have obviously reached an impasse, I suggest that there is little to be gained by continuing to post "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" replies.

[Musicman103]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

I stand by what I posted, I believe that no further evidence is required than what is posted by yourself in this thread.

And as we have obviously reached an impasse, I suggest that there is little to be gained by continuing to post "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" replies.

So you say I have an agenda but cannot tell me what it is, or prove it.

You're asking all the questions, who, when, why, what, where as if you're in the authoratitive position, armed with all the facts. You aren't.

Yes, the conversation should stop here.

[kimbobill]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

I'm also quite happy for classic car drivers to use the roads, without paying anything for the VELs.

Swings and Roundabouts.

Bully for you. Your like a broken record with that one, how many times have you used it?

What has that to do with production of a commodity that is shared to the nation for less than 40p a day?


The idea of free taxation for classic cars was to keep some of heritage of the British motor industry alive and kicking rather than it being scrapped.

The tvl is to give us a free.(including people that don't pay) service that is suffering from the restraints posed upon it from governments and the free riders in society.
The restoration of the inflation linked increase, you say and I trust your figures will amount to £160 by 2015, less than 44p a day, How can anyone moan about that?

[kimbobill]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

Well just because you can't recognise property ramping, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. More fool you.

Have you seen Martin Robert's website?

HUTH has been running since 2003. Escape to the country since before that. Even Ch4 has had a break (or even wound down) their property programme scheduling.

What ramping up? there was an almighty slump 4 years ago which they showed, and prices excluding London are not a great deal of difference from 8 years ago. A lot of ramping there then

I haven't seen his website, is it a BBC one?

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

So you say I have an agenda but cannot tell me what it is, or prove it.

I have told you what it is (in post 142, a post that you yourself quoted in post 150), and I have indicated where the proof is.

You're asking all the questions, who, when, why, what, where as if you're in the authoratitive position, armed with all the facts. You aren't.

i didn't claim that I was. It seems that, again, you are mistaking opinion for facts.

Yes, the conversation should stop here.

Yep.

[Bedsit Bob]

Originally Posted by kimbobill

Your like a broken record with that one, how many times have you used it?

Just because I use it often, doesn't stop it from being true.

What has that to do with production of a commodity that is shared to the nation for less than 40p a day?

What has the fact it costs less than 40p a day (which is stated far more often than my VEL analogy) got to do with it

My VEL costs less than that, but I'd object to paying it (as I'm sure most people would), if I didn't drive.

The tvl is to give us a free.(including people that don't pay) service that is suffering from the restraints posed upon it from governments

How can it be a "free service", when the TVL costs money

How can anyone moan about that?

Easily, when you are paying for it, but not using the BBC.

[Musicman103]

Originally Posted by kimbobill

What ramping up? there was an almighty slump 4 years ago which they showed, and prices excluding London are not a great deal of difference from 8 years ago. A lot of ramping there then

I haven't seen his website, is it a BBC one?

There hasn't yet been an 'almighty slump' in property. At best we've seen stagnation in the capital. The rest of the UK is on a genle slide.

You can ramp without any success. Agreed? In the same way I can promote smoking without increased sales?

I'm surprised you haven't seen the MR website, as the URL is in the post of mine that you quoted ! #143.

No, it isn't a BBC one.

http://www.makingmoneyfromproperty.t...ies/20080121_7

[Musicman103]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

I have told you what it is (in post 142, a post that you yourself quoted in post 150), and I have indicated where the proof is.

what could I possibly stand to gain from making up some nonsense that the BBC produce property ramping programmes.

If anyone knows, let ME know.

p.s. just because I haven't conducted scientific evidence to prove this does NOT mean that it is absolutely, 100%, not true. It means that I can't prove it. An open mind would say "yeh it may be so, but I don't agree" and we could continue the debate from there rather than the authoratitive, judge-like "absolute rubbish without proof".

It's very easy to cry 'prove it' every time someone puts forward a point of view because it absolves the 'judge' of having to properly enter the debate and let's him/her assume
supremacy.

You will notice that TV and radio debates do not follow this 'format'.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

Easily, when you are paying for it, but not using the BBC.

Well, you can easily pull out of it.....

[Marti S]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

I see products advertised and don't buy them, so advertising doesn't work.

So you dont buy any branded products or shop at at major supermarket then? Because they all advertise at some time or other on TV and what you pay at the till goes towards those adverts.

We would all be hard pressed not to buy something or from somewhere that dosent advertise

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

p.s. just because I haven't conducted scientific evidence to prove this does NOT mean that it is absolutely, 100%, not true. It means that I can't prove it. An open mind would say "yeh it may be so, but I don't agree" and we could continue the debate from there rather than the authoratitive, judge-like "absolute rubbish without proof".

So what was this, when I said in post 91 (and quoted by you in post 96, but seemingly ignored), and a further clarification from myself in post 100 (also ignored by yourself):

Originally Posted by mossy2103

It might have has limited effect along with all of the other property makeover programmes on countless other channels (not that these programmes have ever had a wide appeal, or have ever been broadcast at any other time than during the day), but i would wager that it has not been the main contributor, just satisfying (or confirming) viewers' aspirations that are or were already in place.

I think that, not for the first time in this thread (and the Salford thread), you are posted something without properly reading or understanding the replies that have been given and that you are quoting. You really do need to correct this aberration before continuing along your accusatory path, especially as it leads to confusion and annoyance for others.


Oh, in radio & TV debates, points made and clarifications offered don't seem to get ignored. with the same (already answered) points simply regurgitated, they are accepted as part of the debate

[mikw]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

what could I possibly stand to gain from making up some nonsense that the BBC produce property ramping programmes..

JUST the BBC??!!

There are no property programmes on other channels, ever??!!

Oh, come on!!!

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

I'm still waiting for SOMEONE to tell me why these programmes are allowed to be made. The sole purpose of them is to show how with a lick of paint and a few alterations, you can buy a dump and sell it for profit or rent it out.

And what's wrong with that, it's better than leaving empty and run down properties in every street.

Also you can do that with a car as well, is there 'vehicle porn' because of it?

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

How can it be a "free service", when the TVL costs money
.

More confusion eh Bob.


Anyway, using your logic how can the use of the local park be a free service when council tax costs money

[Bedsit Bob]

Originally Posted by mikw

Well, you can easily pull out of it.....

How can you easily pull out of it, when watching the commercial channels

[marblehead]

I am sorry but in the current economic climate how can we afford to alter one of our few success stories.

Independent research showed that for every £1 it costs it is generating £2 for our economy and yet you want to change a winning formula.

The BBC provides an excellent service at a very reasonable price so I think for Camerons sake we should leave it exactly as it is.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

How can you easily pull out of it, when watching the commercial channels

Confused again, Bob??!!

You already know the answer to this.

Watch whatever you want online, and don't pay for a TV license.

It's something you WELL know the answer too, so why ask the question???!!

This MOCK confusion routine is really quite disruptive.

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

How can you easily pull out of it, when watching the commercial channels

The point was not paying a licence fee and yes you can easily pull out of it by either not watching tv at all or using iplayers to watch non live tv.

You just love twisting yourself in knots.

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by mikw

This MOCK confusion routine is really quite disruptive.

You're telling me it is and it happens in nearly every reply.

[Bedsit Bob]

Originally Posted by mikw

This MOCK confusion routine is really quite disruptive.

How is this ( ) "quite disruptive" ?

[exlordlucan]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

How is this ( ) "quite disruptive" ?

Because you use it unnecessarily and all it does is drag the argument onto another tangent which disrupts the flow, not only that you usually know what is meant but instead you take things literally and whack that smilie on the end.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by Bedsit Bob

How is this ( ) "quite disruptive" ?

Because you're asking questions that you ALREADY KNOW the answer too, just to take the thread off onto a tangent.

[PiazzaCharlie]

Originally Posted by Musicman103

Do I buy the same goods/services that are advertised on TV?

Its an odd one. Everyone likes to think they are immune to advertising, and yet advertising continues to be a multi billion pound industry. Odd that companies continue to spend all that money on advertising, if everyone is immune to advertising. Either they are morons, or people are not as immune to advertising as they like to think.

You didn't reply to post 130 by the way. Or 108.

[OB racks]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

Did he get an easy ride?

re Cameron on the Marr show. Very much so IMO.

Not so much an interview as Cameron spewing out prepared statements, like a party political broadcast, and almost without question or challenge.

Particularly liked the way Cameron 'furrowed' his eyebrows at certain points, to show his 'sincerity'. Yeah right, Dave!

Marr is no Paxman, or Frost, by a long chalk IMHO.