I think it is disgraceful. ....//.....
The administrators have to act today and update the websites at bare minimum. Just removing the channels off the EPG's is not on!!!
There's not a lot than can be done, an administration heading for a liquidation requires severe legal consideration, especially when groups of large creditors may me in disagreement.
As we know, the sales weren't big so very few people will be caught out. Those that are are have the protection of both the distance selling regulations (funds in escrow before dispatch) and the protection of their credit cards (bid was 100% Visa and Mastercard).
Its clear that of the main creditors, a few weren't towing the line on the CVA which caused insolvency to be apparent the day before a bank holiday. If I were KPMG my major concerns would be (a) the payment of salaries due, and (b) to understand what value could be taken from the one remaining good freeview position. To re-reimburse unsecured creditors who were the last customers would involve an agreement of the big trade creditors, no doubt that would be forthcoming but there's a lot more to talk about as well!
What about the viewers who may have purchased on the Thursday when the channels fell off-air. They don't know what's happening. The websites are still down for "maintenance", the parent site sit-up.tv is still there as if nothing has happened and the TV channels are off-air due to "technical problems" and that they will be back soon and to go to the website where they can shop online!
These customers may be elderly or vunerable people who won't know what to do.
The administrators have to act today and update the websites at bare minimum. Just removing the channels off the EPG's is not on!!!
As I a stated in a previous post, I work at the distribution warehouse that handles all the orders for Bid TV and Price Drop TV plus all the web site sales.
At the time the channels went off air there were approx. 1300 items on the system which had been ordered and paid for by customers. These orders will be cancelled and the money refunded back to the customers payment cards.
These channels are a joke tbh, My sister uses them all the time, spending her hubbies money on endless tat whilst he is out at work.
She bought some shampoo products for like £4.99 each (£8 p+p) and then found the exact same product in the £1 shop a few weeks later lol
It is terrible, but I can't imagine many people bought anything in the last few weeks.
If these channels are designed to get money from the elderly and vulnerable, which I suspect they are (or many of them are) then it's another reason to get them off air and keep them off.
I can watch these channels with NO intention of buying and never be convinced, or perhaps hypnotised, into buying because of the presenter(s).
We all watch the programmes about doorstep selling and the many other tricks to get money from certain people. We generally despise it. The authorities try and clamp down on it, and we sometimes manage to put people away for it.
But it's fine to launch a TV channel to do it - which has the easiest access to their homes!
The channels were selling approx. 1500 to 2000 units a day over the last few weeks, still quite popular with many regular customers, especially with the reduction in p&p to £4.99
You "suspect" the channels were designed to get money from the vulnerable and elderly? What's your evidence for this libelous comment.
The channels were selling approx. 1500 to 2000 units a day over the last few weeks, still quite popular with many regular customers, especially with the reduction in p&p to £4.99
You "suspect" the channels were designed to get money from the vulnerable and elderly? What's your evidence for this libelous comment.
One example is they used to sell clothes which were for the older person but the very young model and presenter would make out that they would love to wear such item despite it being for someone 40 years old than them. I think that was designed to get the silver pound and was sneaky at best ....
KPMG haven't pulled their fingers out. It has now been 6 days since the plug were pulled. For example, when Auction World.tv and chase-it.tv went into administration, a full administration notice was broadcast for a few days, before the channels were removed from the EPGs.
I expect they will be removed from Sky later this morning.
I have emailed the administrators to see why they haven't put out a message
One example is they used to sell clothes which were for the older person but the very young model and presenter would make out that they would love to wear such item despite it being for someone 40 years old than them. I think that was designed to get the silver pound and was sneaky at best ....
It may be sneaky but it's standard practice - the 50plus and Damart catalogues and websites both use younger models and all the 'granny shoe' companies show their shoes on young, smartly dressed women not over-70s in Bon Marche pleated skirts and beige quilted jackets.
There are companies selling women's clothes up to size 36 and beyond but very few of them will ever use a model above a size 16, if as 'large' as that.
It's about selling your customers an image of how they want to look in the product, not the reality. Bid TV were no more guilty of it than any other business in the fashion retail world.
To be honest I would have thought the administrators would have done something with the websites, parent company site and the broadcast feeds today. Purchasers still don't know where they stand.
Poor show KPMG!
How do you know that KPMG haven't emailed each purchaser advising them where they stand? Perhaps things aren't as straightforward or as simple as we'd all like them to be. Don't forget also that every piece of work which KPMG undertakes means the creditors get less. Updating TV broadcasts and EPGs when this will be done free in time by the respective organisations may not be cost-effective for them.
Sit-up Ltd seems an unusual case: a binding CVA was agreed by all creditors in March then something happened just before the long Easter bank holiday and it all unravelled. I don't think the same situation happened to other TV shopping channels that failed.
The channels were selling approx. 1500 to 2000 units a day over the last few weeks, still quite popular with many regular customers, especially with the reduction in p&p to £4.99
You "suspect" the channels were designed to get money from the vulnerable and elderly? What's your evidence for this libelous comment.
I don't see any harm in targeting the elderly providing you're not taking advantage of them. Elderly does not always mean vulnerable.
Speaking of the vulnerable, this clip posted by Rich Tea last week must be close to the limit of what they could get away with. I know the 'psychic' channel is barred from answering financial or health related questions, but here Bid TV market a product to people having problems including money and health issues -
Take a look at this from a couple of years ago on Bid with Mike Mason selling something I'd not heard of until this evening - Worry Angels. The most utter bullsh*t you will ever hear out of the mouth of any presenter on a shopping channel.
I also saw this from the related videos. She doesn't want to scare anyone but if you don't buy one, your children and everyone else you care about may die! A pound to save your life (plus phone call plus postage).
Speaking of the vulnerable, this clip posted by Rich Tea last week must be close to the limit of what they could get away with. I know the 'psychic' channel is barred from answering financial or health related questions, but here Bid TV market a product to people having problems including money and health issues -
I'm pleased you have brought that up again. I'd not heard of Worry Angels until the day I posted it or ever seen these things being sold. That clip was being widely posted and talked about on the shoppingtelly.com forum last week.
The fact is that the clip in question, and it's quite a long one which keeps powering away which I thought would just be some mildly amusing almost comical attempt to sell those things. Far from it. It actually becomes very sinister as it goes along and crosses well past the line of decency. The fact that the presenter actually uses a self conscious "some people think that we shouldn't" attitude at one point speaks volumes. However I was disgusted beyond belief that any channel, or this man, could seriously stand there attempting to sell a collection of unremarkable glass ornaments and make out it might be better for lonely, unhappy or ill people of any age to talk to these inanimate objects rather than choose to get professional help from another person, in this case he said a counsellor. It sickened me to be honest. This in itself was clearly "preying" or trying to tap into some very insecure, vulnerable, unhappy people who would have been watching in a tasteless and almost wicked way, and we all know and I have read comments that a lot of people would flick these channels on, not to shop, but just for some kind of companion, and at any age young or old.
I also saw this from the related videos. She doesn't want to scare anyone but if you don't buy one, your children and everyone else you care about may die! A pound to save your life (plus phone call plus postage).
Why would you hide it in a cupboard so no one can see it? Bad advice there as well.
I liked the start where she was suggesting doing some research, and then dismissing the need to give any facts and figures (which she clearly wouldn't have had) and constantly saying it wasn't about scaring people - but if you didn't have one, chances are you'd die!
I've got work to do so I really must resist following some of the links to other related videos.
Personally, I say good riddance to the channel. But then, I always prefer to buy from someone that has a product that I might wish to buy, and a fixed price. If I like it, fine. If not, I can haggle or search elsewhere.
If someone wants to play games with me, by making up ridiculous retail prices and then hide other fees (P&P, phone calls, any other admin charges or how you'd deal with returns, such as having to call another special rate number etc) then they can sod off. They've instantly lost my respect.
Same with any salesperson that offers a 'time limited' deal to put the pressure on someone. It's a con, nothing more, nothing less.
That some people might be happy, or ignorant of the fact they could have got a better deal, is almost coincidental.
Nothing. DMOL's rules don't allow LCNs to be traded.
No, but dependent on the contractual arrangements, the capacity could be traded. The difficulty being that Bid are obviously/probably in default to Arqiva.
I liked the start where she was suggesting doing some research, and then dismissing the need to give any facts and figures (which she clearly wouldn't have had) and constantly saying it wasn't about scaring people - but if you didn't have one, chances are you'd die!
I've got work to do so I really must resist following some of the links to other related videos.
Personally, I say good riddance to the channel. But then, I always prefer to buy from someone that has a product that I might wish to buy, and a fixed price. If I like it, fine. If not, I can haggle or search elsewhere.
If someone wants to play games with me, by making up ridiculous retail prices and then hide other fees (P&P, phone calls, any other admin charges or how you'd deal with returns, such as having to call another special rate number etc) then they can sod off. They've instantly lost my respect.
Same with any salesperson that offers a 'time limited' deal to put the pressure on someone. It's a con, nothing more, nothing less.
That some people might be happy, or ignorant of the fact they could have got a better deal, is almost coincidental.
A good post. Mentioning the facts and I've just looked at the clip and then checked out the commonest causes of house fires and she must have literally made it up. She said electrical fires were the number one cause. This is not factually correct.
House fire causes;
1) Cooking Equipment, and leaving things unattended in the kitchen.
2) Heating Equipment, from portable heaters, fireplaces or gas appliances.
3) Smoking, and careless behaviour with cigarettes.
4) Electrical items, overloading plugs sockets, malfunctions etc.
5) Candles.
6) Children playing with fire/matches.
7) Inadequate electrical wiring in older homes.
Such a cavalier attitude to facts, or not wanting to give them accurately. Electrical not even top three, and infact old wiring throughout a house is 7th, as opposed to appliances and plugs.
Also the most obvious fact about fires is that people die because of the smoke caused by a fire, not with direct contact with fire itself. Fire blanket is useless against smoke. They are much more useful and better required in an industrial setting than domestic in reality.
You do have to wonder looking at both the Worry Angels and Fire Blanket clips whether these presenters knew full well what they were going to say beforehand or just let their idiotic mouths run away with themselves.
Listen the fire blanket sales were a disgrace worst offender was Andy Hodgson. I felt so strongly about his coverage I remember emailing either him or the company.
If you search through shopping telly forum you will see threads I did on this.
As he kept insisting your nan should stand there and throw a fire blanket to save her life.... err no she should get out and let the fire brigade deal with the fire.
The also sold fire extiguishers at one point and told people to fight the fires themselves.
In a virtually unblemished career at Bid Andy really et himself down with this sitting in front of a screen with huge flames on it.
I used to watch these channels quite a lot back in 2010 or so, and it's quite a shame to see them end, yet I do think that they only ruined it for themselves with the changes they kept making - Specifically the most recent "Shop at Bid" and the Price Drop Winners thing (Though as I haven't watched these channels for a long time, I only got to hear about these changes as the channels were gone before I could view them).
I feel pretty bad for the staff there, especially those who were on air at the time, as I guess it must have been pretty bad to be in the middle of presenting an item and then to be told they no longer have a job. Though, did the presenters know beforehand, as this tweet seems to have been posted nearly 3 hours before they went off, unless thats something to do with timezones.
I wonder if something similar will happen on the TV Channels, as on the websites, which are now finally updated with the following message:
Also, I was watching the Bid and Price Drop streams on Streema a few days ago and noticed that the Speed Auction/Bid Plus stream was still active, simulcasting Bid. I haven't been able to get a connection on either stream since then.
Comments
There's not a lot than can be done, an administration heading for a liquidation requires severe legal consideration, especially when groups of large creditors may me in disagreement.
As we know, the sales weren't big so very few people will be caught out. Those that are are have the protection of both the distance selling regulations (funds in escrow before dispatch) and the protection of their credit cards (bid was 100% Visa and Mastercard).
Its clear that of the main creditors, a few weren't towing the line on the CVA which caused insolvency to be apparent the day before a bank holiday. If I were KPMG my major concerns would be (a) the payment of salaries due, and (b) to understand what value could be taken from the one remaining good freeview position. To re-reimburse unsecured creditors who were the last customers would involve an agreement of the big trade creditors, no doubt that would be forthcoming but there's a lot more to talk about as well!
I would think there should be gone in the next 2 months.
Nothing. DMOL's rules don't allow LCNs to be traded.
As I a stated in a previous post, I work at the distribution warehouse that handles all the orders for Bid TV and Price Drop TV plus all the web site sales.
At the time the channels went off air there were approx. 1300 items on the system which had been ordered and paid for by customers. These orders will be cancelled and the money refunded back to the customers payment cards.
She bought some shampoo products for like £4.99 each (£8 p+p) and then found the exact same product in the £1 shop a few weeks later lol
The channels were selling approx. 1500 to 2000 units a day over the last few weeks, still quite popular with many regular customers, especially with the reduction in p&p to £4.99
You "suspect" the channels were designed to get money from the vulnerable and elderly? What's your evidence for this libelous comment.
One example is they used to sell clothes which were for the older person but the very young model and presenter would make out that they would love to wear such item despite it being for someone 40 years old than them. I think that was designed to get the silver pound and was sneaky at best ....
I have emailed the administrators to see why they haven't put out a message
PJ
It may be sneaky but it's standard practice - the 50plus and Damart catalogues and websites both use younger models and all the 'granny shoe' companies show their shoes on young, smartly dressed women not over-70s in Bon Marche pleated skirts and beige quilted jackets.
There are companies selling women's clothes up to size 36 and beyond but very few of them will ever use a model above a size 16, if as 'large' as that.
It's about selling your customers an image of how they want to look in the product, not the reality. Bid TV were no more guilty of it than any other business in the fashion retail world.
How do you know that KPMG haven't emailed each purchaser advising them where they stand? Perhaps things aren't as straightforward or as simple as we'd all like them to be. Don't forget also that every piece of work which KPMG undertakes means the creditors get less. Updating TV broadcasts and EPGs when this will be done free in time by the respective organisations may not be cost-effective for them.
Sit-up Ltd seems an unusual case: a binding CVA was agreed by all creditors in March then something happened just before the long Easter bank holiday and it all unravelled. I don't think the same situation happened to other TV shopping channels that failed.
I don't see any harm in targeting the elderly providing you're not taking advantage of them. Elderly does not always mean vulnerable.
Nothing I said was libel.
Fire Blanket 070712: http://youtu.be/U1bbNEQyrrg
What if they don't have email?
I'm pleased you have brought that up again. I'd not heard of Worry Angels until the day I posted it or ever seen these things being sold. That clip was being widely posted and talked about on the shoppingtelly.com forum last week.
The fact is that the clip in question, and it's quite a long one which keeps powering away which I thought would just be some mildly amusing almost comical attempt to sell those things. Far from it. It actually becomes very sinister as it goes along and crosses well past the line of decency. The fact that the presenter actually uses a self conscious "some people think that we shouldn't" attitude at one point speaks volumes. However I was disgusted beyond belief that any channel, or this man, could seriously stand there attempting to sell a collection of unremarkable glass ornaments and make out it might be better for lonely, unhappy or ill people of any age to talk to these inanimate objects rather than choose to get professional help from another person, in this case he said a counsellor. It sickened me to be honest. This in itself was clearly "preying" or trying to tap into some very insecure, vulnerable, unhappy people who would have been watching in a tasteless and almost wicked way, and we all know and I have read comments that a lot of people would flick these channels on, not to shop, but just for some kind of companion, and at any age young or old.
Why would you hide it in a cupboard so no one can see it? Bad advice there as well.
I liked the start where she was suggesting doing some research, and then dismissing the need to give any facts and figures (which she clearly wouldn't have had) and constantly saying it wasn't about scaring people - but if you didn't have one, chances are you'd die!
I've got work to do so I really must resist following some of the links to other related videos.
Personally, I say good riddance to the channel. But then, I always prefer to buy from someone that has a product that I might wish to buy, and a fixed price. If I like it, fine. If not, I can haggle or search elsewhere.
If someone wants to play games with me, by making up ridiculous retail prices and then hide other fees (P&P, phone calls, any other admin charges or how you'd deal with returns, such as having to call another special rate number etc) then they can sod off. They've instantly lost my respect.
Same with any salesperson that offers a 'time limited' deal to put the pressure on someone. It's a con, nothing more, nothing less.
That some people might be happy, or ignorant of the fact they could have got a better deal, is almost coincidental.
No, but dependent on the contractual arrangements, the capacity could be traded. The difficulty being that Bid are obviously/probably in default to Arqiva.
A good post. Mentioning the facts and I've just looked at the clip and then checked out the commonest causes of house fires and she must have literally made it up. She said electrical fires were the number one cause. This is not factually correct.
House fire causes;
1) Cooking Equipment, and leaving things unattended in the kitchen.
2) Heating Equipment, from portable heaters, fireplaces or gas appliances.
3) Smoking, and careless behaviour with cigarettes.
4) Electrical items, overloading plugs sockets, malfunctions etc.
5) Candles.
6) Children playing with fire/matches.
7) Inadequate electrical wiring in older homes.
Such a cavalier attitude to facts, or not wanting to give them accurately. Electrical not even top three, and infact old wiring throughout a house is 7th, as opposed to appliances and plugs.
Also the most obvious fact about fires is that people die because of the smoke caused by a fire, not with direct contact with fire itself. Fire blanket is useless against smoke. They are much more useful and better required in an industrial setting than domestic in reality.
You do have to wonder looking at both the Worry Angels and Fire Blanket clips whether these presenters knew full well what they were going to say beforehand or just let their idiotic mouths run away with themselves.
If you search through shopping telly forum you will see threads I did on this.
As he kept insisting your nan should stand there and throw a fire blanket to save her life.... err no she should get out and let the fire brigade deal with the fire.
The also sold fire extiguishers at one point and told people to fight the fires themselves.
In a virtually unblemished career at Bid Andy really et himself down with this sitting in front of a screen with huge flames on it.
In fact when my flat was refurbished they didn't give us a new fire blanket as they don't expect you to fight a fire yourself just get out.
http://forum.shoppingtelly.com/forum/showthread.php?32472-Andy-Hodgson-stop-scaring-people&highlight=andy+hodgson+fire+blanket
http://forum.shoppingtelly.com/forum/showthread.php?41171-Andy-Hodgson-Fire-Blanket-scare-tactics-are-back&highlight=andy+hodgson+fire+blanket
I used to watch these channels quite a lot back in 2010 or so, and it's quite a shame to see them end, yet I do think that they only ruined it for themselves with the changes they kept making - Specifically the most recent "Shop at Bid" and the Price Drop Winners thing (Though as I haven't watched these channels for a long time, I only got to hear about these changes as the channels were gone before I could view them).
I feel pretty bad for the staff there, especially those who were on air at the time, as I guess it must have been pretty bad to be in the middle of presenting an item and then to be told they no longer have a job. Though, did the presenters know beforehand, as this tweet seems to have been posted nearly 3 hours before they went off, unless thats something to do with timezones.
I wonder if something similar will happen on the TV Channels, as on the websites, which are now finally updated with the following message:
Also, I was watching the Bid and Price Drop streams on Streema a few days ago and noticed that the Speed Auction/Bid Plus stream was still active, simulcasting Bid. I haven't been able to get a connection on either stream since then.