Four in a Bed :: New Series (Part 2)

199100102104105213

Comments

  • anyonefortennisanyonefortennis Posts: 111,858
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Shrike wrote: »
    A quick scan through tripadvisor suggests that a generous continental is standard. They may have got even more in for the cameras, but there doesn't seem to be any complaints from the punters.

    Those Mr Kipling French Fancies were an odd choice for brekkie.
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    Shrike wrote: »
    A quick scan through tripadvisor suggests that a generous continental is standard. They may have got even more in for the cameras, but there doesn't seem to be any complaints from the punters.

    Glad they won anyway. Definitely the nicest out of a mix of oddballs.

    Wasn't Richard and his housekeeper put in a room with a double bed one night or am I just imagining that?
  • BellaRosaBellaRosa Posts: 36,483
    Forum Member
    As for that cow Sharon, I dislike her intensely, not least for making me wish like I never have before that someone's business fails! She deserves it after showing herself up for the rotten to the core bitch that she is!

    I watched this again today on 47 and she even said the road outside Richards B&B was dangerous. How low can she go :mad:
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,588
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Glad they won anyway. Definitely the nicest out of a mix of oddballs.

    Wak was a great lad, not so sure about Faisal, but he may well be a bit shy which came over as stand offish. The flying bull boys were ok, but had a little bit of a tendancy to camp it up.
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Wasn't Richard and his housekeeper put in a room with a double bed one night or am I just imagining that?

    It seemed that way at first in the flying bull, but the room was referred to has 'his' room so I'm guessing she did have a separate room.
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    BellaRosa wrote: »
    I watched this again today on 47 and she even said the road outside Richards B&B was dangerous. How low can she go :mad:

    Pretty sure she just said it was noisy - which in fairness it did look.

    But the comments about the shower screen were pathetic. Our shower screen hits the mount above the toilet if we open it.

    The only time we do open it is to clean it so unless she was going to be cleaning it just came across as very petty & vindictive.

    I don't get why people haven't cottoned on to the fact that this is great free publicity for their business and the best way to come across is nice, helpful & fair. Like the winners were.

    Generally I think it's because many people are rude, selfish morons!
  • jazzyjazzyjazzyjazzy Posts: 4,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Really? It wasn't all that and I reckon the breakfast bought especially for the filming wasn't what is usually served.

    Probably just cereal & toast.

    Richard was a self satisfied smug git who, according to tripadvisor & his many responses doesn't take too kindly to criticism.

    Also shouldn't this only have people on who actually own their B&Bs not just managers? This is Barry from Birmingham who runs a 49 room bed and breakfast. It's called a Travelodge.

    Sharon was just a huge snob with an Essex accent. Such a hypocrite complaining about there being no wi fi on the 1st night yet turning her house into something, literally out of the Victorian times.

    Shazza, love - they didn't have the internet back then and your dictatorship & ordering around of staff just to fulfill your terrible acting fantasy was just a massive embarrassment!

    A pair of thoroughly unpleasant individuals who, unsurprisingly weren't married. I wonder why.....


    See my post #2408 page 97 - I found the buffet menu on their Trip Advisor page and it is not cereal and toast.
  • anyonefortennisanyonefortennis Posts: 111,858
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Pretty sure she just said it was noisy - which in fairness it did look.

    But the comments about the shower screen were pathetic. Our shower screen hits the mount above the toilet if we open it.

    The only time we do open it is to clean it so unless she was going to be cleaning it just came across as very petty & vindictive.

    I don't get why people haven't cottoned on to the fact that this is great free publicity for their business and the best way to come across is nice, helpful & fair. Like the winners were.

    Generally I think it's because many people are rude, selfish morons!

    She said the road was dangerous as well as noisy.
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    She said the road was dangerous as well as noisy.

    That's just over sunny siding the egg! Bit like Richard's cooks did, twice.
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    Shrike wrote: »
    Wak was a great lad, not so sure about Faisal, but he may well be a bit shy which came over as stand offish. The flying bull boys were ok, but had a little bit of a tendancy to camp it up.


    It seemed that way at first in the flying bull, but the room was referred to has 'his' room so I'm guessing she did have a separate room.

    If Wak was the big lump then I agree with you. What I found weird was that the owner was described as being a bit like Del Boy but he seemed to be lacking in charisma & social skills.

    It appeared that Wak was kind of looking after him, which may be the case. Not entirely sure how you cannot know what a poached egg is when you are in your late 30's /40's.
    Bizarre.
  • MutterMutter Posts: 3,269
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Really? It wasn't all that and I reckon the breakfast bought especially for the filming wasn't what is usually served.

    Probably just cereal & toast.

    Richard was a self satisfied smug git who, according to tripadvisor & his many responses doesn't take too kindly to criticism.

    Also shouldn't this only have people on who actually own their B&Bs not just managers? This is Barry from Birmingham who runs a 49 room bed and breakfast. It's called a Travelodge.

    Sharon was just a huge snob with an Essex accent. Such a hypocrite complaining about there being no wi fi on the 1st night yet turning her house into something, literally out of the Victorian times.

    Shazza, love - they didn't have the internet back then and your dictatorship & ordering around of staff just to fulfill your terrible acting fantasy was just a massive embarrassment!

    A pair of thoroughly unpleasant individuals who, unsurprisingly weren't married. I wonder why.....

    I see your point re ownership and the programme has its flaws.
    When is a B&B an hotel? Having discussed it before on here, I think it came down to Tax and regulations.

    A B&B would be a room in someone's house, not a room in a 25 bed property. Tax purposes though, call it a B&B!

    I would prefer all comments on the show were held back until the final day. Show us, but not them. I would love to see them all being oh so polite, not knowing what had been said until the final day and then, Fireworks!

    Imagine Sharon believing that they all loved her and her abode right up until the reveal?
  • anyonefortennisanyonefortennis Posts: 111,858
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Mutter wrote: »
    I see your point re ownership and the programme has its flaws.
    When is a B&B an hotel? Having discussed it before on here, I think it came down to Tax and regulations.

    A B&B would be a room in someone's house, not a room in a 25 bed property. Tax purposes though, call it a B&B!

    I would prefer all comments on the show were held back until the final day. Show us, but not them. I would love to see them all being oh so polite, not knowing what had been said until the final day and then, Fireworks!

    Imagine Sharon believing that they all loved her and her abode right up until the reveal?

    Yes I agree. I think reading out the comments at the end of the week would have a greater impact and create fireworks like you said.
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    Mutter wrote: »
    I see your point re ownership and the programme has its flaws.
    When is a B&B an hotel? Having discussed it before on here, I think it came down to Tax and regulations.

    A B&B would be a room in someone's house, not a room in a 25 bed property. Tax purposes though, call it a B&B!

    I would prefer all comments on the show were held back until the final day. Show us, but not them. I would love to see them all being oh so polite, not knowing what had been said until the final day and then, Fireworks!

    Imagine Sharon believing that they all loved her and her abode right up until the reveal?

    Yes, would be much better. I think when it started they used to get all the money in front of each other which made it a lot more "real".

    But hey, it's TV land and when they have a successful format they just have to tweak it.

    The problem is the B&B charges a set price. That's what you are paying when you book. This show lets them say, "I don't like your price or I'm too tight to pay your rate so I will pay what I want".

    It's not about what it is actually "worth" it is all down to what individuals would pay.

    Prime example is Richard. He was obviously a very tight guy. He underpaid by a very large percentage. This, and his comments caused the tension.

    Much better to have a big reveal on the final night otherwise it turns into tit for tat, point scoring and vindictiveness.
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,588
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think cutting the comments would make for an excellent Friday programme, but would leave the rest of the week a little dull.
    Mind you I do think some of the competitors have wised up to the idea that they are competing to win custom to their businesses, not trying to win a silly plaque. Both the male teams this week did seem to be biting their tongues and paid very fairly. Of course they may all be decent, easy going chaps but then again maybe they've actually watched the programme before.;)
  • MRSgotobedMRSgotobed Posts: 3,851
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Yes, would be much better. I think when it started they used to get all the money in front of each other which made it a lot more "real".

    But hey, it's TV land and when they have a successful format they just have to tweak it.

    The problem is the B&B charges a set price. That's what you are paying when you book. This show lets them say, "I don't like your price or I'm too tight to pay your rate so I will pay what I want".

    It's not about what it is actually "worth" it is all down to what individuals would pay.

    Prime example is Richard. He was obviously a very tight guy. He underpaid by a very large percentage. This, and his comments caused the tension.

    Much better to have a big reveal on the final night otherwise it turns into tit for tat, point scoring and vindictiveness.]

    I think that's such a brilliant idea, the tit for tat clouds the issue and point of the show really. Could be pretty amusing to watch too.
  • japarajapara Posts: 995
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jsmith99 wrote: »
    It's falling into the same trap as Coach Trip did ... viewers would far rather see the local scenery than a manufactured activity. In my opinion, anyway.

    I agree
  • Flabby_GutFlabby_Gut Posts: 230
    Forum Member
    japara wrote: »
    jsmith99 wrote: »
    It's falling into the same trap as Coach Trip did ... viewers would far rather see the local scenery than a manufactured activity. In my opinion, anyway.

    I agree

    It is the forced gaiety that really grates. If you stayed at a B&B unless the owners provided a meal option you wouldn't go down the local Indian with your guests.

    Like CDWM - people simply going for a meal and the host being judged on their cooking & hosting skills they now have to provide some 5th rate "entertainment".

    Why?!! Stop wrecking the format!!!!
  • sutiesutie Posts: 32,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MRSgotobed wrote: »
    I would have called a GP in for Sharon seeing as she has 'allergies' can't breath, so where is her inhaler? Forget it did she cough...cough...splutter? I wonder what her friend was thinking, she couldn't get a word in.

    I liked today's place, looked good to me, but no wonder Kerry wasn't feeling well enough to join them at breakfast, she was probably ready to explode near Sharon.

    Perhaps Sharon should research a little on Victorian hospitality, socialising and manners and surely it would have been more Victorian to have an attack of the vapours than allergies, that way she might have been hidden behind a large fan for most of the week.


    Best place for her. She is without doubt one of the most vindictive, dishonest contestants ever to appear on the programme, and good on Richard for showing her 'allergy to animals' up for what it really is .... so much bull-poo!.

    Hideous woman. :(
  • japarajapara Posts: 995
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Just watched all of this weeks on catch up..loved the boys that won absolutely detested Sharon,
    I know we don't see everything but it is quite telling when even people on the programme who liked her on the first day had grown tired of her by the end. She totally overreacted and came across as a thoroughly nasty person
  • kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,243
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Yes, would be much better. I think when it started they used to get all the money in front of each other which made it a lot more "real".

    But hey, it's TV land and when they have a successful format they just have to tweak it.

    The problem is the B&B charges a set price. That's what you are paying when you book. This show lets them say, "I don't like your price or I'm too tight to pay your rate so I will pay what I want".

    It's not about what it is actually "worth" it is all down to what individuals would pay.

    Prime example is Richard. He was obviously a very tight guy. He underpaid by a very large percentage. This, and his comments caused the tension.

    Much better to have a big reveal on the final night otherwise it turns into tit for tat, point scoring and vindictiveness.
    Yes, indeed. There was bound to be a reaction. I never understand why some people give the person who started it the benefit and completely slate the person who reacted to it.

    And it's always odd when someone can make bitchy comments like Richard and act astonished when he gets it back. (Although it is probably best to try and rise above it than indulge in tit for tat).
  • anne_666anne_666 Posts: 72,891
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm organising a group trip to Sharon's place, any takers :D:D:D
    No! Oh Dear ;)
    Why oh why do some just have to behave like that.:confused:
  • kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,243
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    anne_666 wrote: »
    I'm organising a group trip to Sharon's place, any takers :D:D:D
    No! Oh Dear ;)
    Why oh why do some just have to behave like that.:confused:
    She took it too far but Richard was the instigator. :D:D:D:D

    The least that could be expected is for it to be seen that they were both as bad as each other - him with his initial rudeness, meanness and obvious game plan and she for over-reacting. Making her more at fault is slightly suspect, IMO..
  • BellaRosaBellaRosa Posts: 36,483
    Forum Member
    Flabby_Gut wrote: »
    Pretty sure she just said it was noisy - which in fairness it did look.

    But the comments about the shower screen were pathetic. Our shower screen hits the mount above the toilet if we open it.

    The only time we do open it is to clean it so unless she was going to be cleaning it just came across as very petty & vindictive.

    I don't get why people haven't cottoned on to the fact that this is great free publicity for their business and the best way to come across is nice, helpful & fair. Like the winners were.

    Generally I think it's because many people are rude, selfish morons!


    She did say it was dangerous as well as noisy. Richard came back with "all roads are dangerous" :D

    The shower door comment was so OTT :mad::mad:
  • kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,243
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    BellaRosa wrote: »
    She did say it was dangerous as well as noisy. Richard came back with "all roads are dangerous" :D

    The shower door comment was so OTT :mad::mad:
    Maybe but it wasn't fit for purpose and clearly not how it should operate. A bit shoddy (not to say she didn't exaggerate because she did, as he did with the funeral parlour etc comments which was much worse, IMO, as was his snide comment about 'they did what they had to'. There was no context for it. She reacted over-emotionally, definitely).

    How odd that people want to give him the benefit of the doubt and heap an absurd amount of the blame onto her, complete with angry faces.
  • jazzyjazzyjazzyjazzy Posts: 4,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Going back to the very first 4IAB were all the comments kept secret until the final day - I don't seem to remember all this nastiness when it began - although it all adds to it, we would not be commenting about it if it was boring. Maybe they have just altered it quite a bit along the way.
  • ShrikeShrike Posts: 16,588
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jazzyjazzy wrote: »
    Going back to the very first 4IAB were all the comments kept secret until the final day - I don't seem to remember all this nastiness when it began - although it all adds to it, we would not be commenting about it if it was boring. Maybe they have just altered it quite a bit along the way.

    I recall a bizarre few episodes where the guests had to say on the day whether they were paying full amount or under/over (though not how much!)
    Compared to that the feed back is quite benign!
This discussion has been closed.