FM Lover - in theory its supposed to find the best value b&b so a £40 place could be outstanding value and so win, or it could still be lacking even at 40 quid and so lose.
But in practice you're right - although I think the problem lies more with the cheaper end of the spectrum not being able differentiate what is 'good value' in a £150-£200 place. I would struggle myself with that.
Mind you some clearly are way overpriced - like the Porthmadog one this week. Whilst the big posh one last week I really would struggle with as I'd never pay £200 for one night but then I'm not in that market so don't know what to expect.
Yes, Seashells Guesthouse. In my opinion 3 dogs in a B&B is too much. The owner is weird too. I hate her laughter.
Nah, 3 small dogs in a dog friendly b&b is fine. You wouldn't choose to stay there if you didn't like dogs. One of my fave b&bs has 5 dogs which is partly why I stay there.
In the final episode she came over as unpleasant as the rest of them although was capable of humility at times. To be fair to her she took on board what was said about breakfast. Debbie and Karen were simply voting with their personal views of Toni. A waste of time having them in it really.
Seems the complete opposite of what it says in this article.
In a later episode, Toni finds herself leaping to the defence of the contestants from Cornwall, Debbie Williams and Karen Lucas, who run the Duke of Cornwall in St Austell.
"I got on incredibly well with the ones from Cornwall and I think possibly they might not have expected that, because we are very different people, but they were amazing," said Toni. "I've been down and had lunch with them since."
Habby, I wasn't on the board at all last weekend, only a quick peep on my phone, not posting, but there were negative posts from mostly names I'd never seen at all before.
Anyway, I'm always happy to engage with anyone who has genuine points to make about the programme, whether I agree or not.
I wasn't meaning you.
I was just answering your point about people posting something & going off again. They could be trying to cause a problem or maybe they don't want to stick around for some reason.
I always say what I like & if people don't like it they can ignore it or argue with me. I've been around too long now to worry about things like that.
I was just answering your point about people posting something & going off again. They could be trying to cause a problem or maybe they don't want to stick around for some reason...
Crossed wires.
Yes, I got what you were saying and didn't take it that you meant me.
My original point was that loads of posts were about the thread and the people posting in it and not the programme - which isn't very constructive to my mind.
I can't say any more than that as I didn't take any notice of screen names and then when I came back to the thread there were at least six pages missing (the way I have pages configured there were anyway)
By the way I think the article backs up what M@nterick said about Toni, Debbie and Karen. Karen and Debbie cut Toni a fair bit of slack and supported her against the others' comments, which they didn't feel was reciprocated.
Anyway, we've moved on now, from last weekend's posts I mean, and are looking forward to a new week.
Seems the complete opposite of what it says in this article.
In a later episode, Toni finds herself leaping to the defence of the contestants from Cornwall, Debbie Williams and Karen Lucas, who run the Duke of Cornwall in St Austell.
"I got on incredibly well with the ones from Cornwall and I think possibly they might not have expected that, because we are very different people, but they were amazing," said Toni. "I've been down and had lunch with them since."
That does not really contradict me. She was marked up by them, far more than she deserved.
Toni still does not get it with the very valid criticism about the luxurious stuff.
Hello thread! Hope you don't mind me butting in your clique
I just wanted to chip in my tuppenceworth about last week and general things.
I found last week's episodes pretty painful to watch as apart from the 'girls', all the personalities were so introvert and eccentric and annoying. Toni was pretty OK but even she crossed over to the dark side a bit. Yep Louis was the outstanding idiot male bigot with the italian bloke following a close second. I just can't imagine the level of dysfunction in their relationships. Having read the TA feedback on the sportsman, I think it's fair to say Louis is actually severely deluded - he reminds me of a very creepy and pompous local politician who lives in my area.
What I really want to point out though is the GAMEPLAYING is now getting ridiculous in this show to the point where it's destroying the whole point of it.
People have really copped on to the fact that if they really want to thwart others not only can they vote them down but they can at the same time overpay another. That tactic was most notably used against Borrowby Mill and really no matter how annoying Amanda was, it wasn't a fair way to settle matters. Then 'retaliatory' voting is getting out of hand so the B&Bs that host early in the week can wreak havoc on later hosts if they feel aggrieved at negative feedback. I know it's all 'the game' but the game is being spoiled in my opinion.
It's been suggested on this thread that people should pay what they think their stay is worth and disregard what the B&B claim to charge.
Why people want to be seen on TV being so nasty and vile is beyond me. I would have thought to be portrayed as open, honest, and decent should matter the most.
This is a friendly, welcoming, thread. Not sure where the clique stuff came from really.
That does not really contradict me. She was marked up by them, far more than she deserved.
Toni still does not get it with the very valid criticism about the luxurious stuff.
I agree with that. If I was staying somewhere that billed itself as luxurious then I'd expect top quality bedding, furniture and fittings plus s very good en suite.
Luxury is not just having access to books and a flat screen TV
Agree FM Lover. I heard it somewhere that although a room is a commercial letting room, the guest should feel that it's been prepared especially for them and their stay - which isn't the same as being clinical and totally characterless.
What you don't want the room to overpower you with, is the sense of someone else's presence, which is what I felt from the portrayal of Toni's rooms.
To be fair to her though, her prices were very reasonable for the area, I think she's probably a far more sympathetic host than came across on the programme and her rooms wouldn't take a great deal of tweaking to make them so much better than they appeared to be
I imagine that Toni's a quick study, so either what she provides is going to fit her customers' requirements just fine, or, she'll soon sort out what's required and do OK.
Actually of all last week's contestants I think she's the most likely to listen and learn.
Hello thread! Hope you don't mind me butting in your clique
I just wanted to chip in my tuppenceworth about last week and general things.
I found last week's episodes pretty painful to watch as apart from the 'girls', all the personalities were so introvert and eccentric and annoying. Toni was pretty OK but even she crossed over to the dark side a bit. Yep Louis was the outstanding idiot male bigot with the italian bloke following a close second. I just can't imagine the level of dysfunction in their relationships. Having read the TA feedback on the sportsman, I think it's fair to say Louis is actually severely deluded - he reminds me of a very creepy and pompous local politician who lives in my area.
What I really want to point out though is the GAMEPLAYING is now getting ridiculous in this show to the point where it's destroying the whole point of it.
People have really copped on to the fact that if they really want to thwart others not only can they vote them down but they can at the same time overpay another. That tactic was most notably used against Borrowby Mill and really no matter how annoying Amanda was, it wasn't a fair way to settle matters. Then 'retaliatory' voting is getting out of hand so the B&Bs that host early in the week can wreak havoc on later hosts if they feel aggrieved at negative feedback. I know it's all 'the game' but the game is being spoiled in my opinion.
It's been suggested on this thread that people should pay what they think their stay is worth and disregard what the B&B claim to charge.
Why people want to be seen on TV being so nasty and vile is beyond me. I would have thought to be portrayed as open, honest, and decent should matter the most.
That's the strangest thing of all to me. I mean, the programme is really one, long, free advertisement on tv for all the different contestants. Viewers are less concerned about who wins, it's more about who we like. Don't the contestants understand that ?
Even allowing for the editing, its almost as if some of them are determined to make themselves appear as unpleasant as possible. How can that help their business prosper ?
Even allowing for the editing, its almost as if some of them are determined to make themselves appear as unpleasant as possible. How can that help their business prosper ?
I think that, with a lot of small b&bs, people open them to earn a bit of money (or, in some cases, to provide themselves with company - or an audience) and they do not have any applicable business experience, particularly customer-facing experence. They don't accurately analyse what they are doing, for eg:
good quality / size towels and one (at least) for hair washing
poly cotton bedding - easy to (not) iron but not nice, particularly in summer
chairs and a table in the room at which to eat breakfast if there isn't a dining room
the fact that no-one outside family wants to find a used bar of soap left out for them
who their market is and what that market expects in 2012/13 because it is not the same as in 2007, say
what to do if guests take the pee (a few do so you do need a touch of steel if necessary)
But anyway, to my point: they don't have applicable business skills to transfer to their enterprise and I believe they make the mistake of thinking their behaviour on 4iaB showcases their shrewd, no-nonsense business brain. Sadly, particularly in the cases of the Amandas but also (to a lesser extent) the Tonis, their behaviour does quite the opposite.
I think the Julians and the Louises (hmmm ) are the ones looking for an audience and their PGs are perceived less as valued customers and more unruly temporary employees who frustrate them greatly when they won't do what they are told.
Little random, but just watched the Julian episode plus payments and seen one of his replies in trip adviser and the guy is deluded to think it's worth £160.
Also interested in what the national internet system is and how it would affect internet access in rooms as per his reply.
A question: On the show with Dom & Steph, Andrea & Nick, etc., James said they would have paid Dom & Steph more, but they couldn’t afford it. How do payments work? Someone on this thread said that the contestants pay and are then reimbursed by the production company. But surely a requirement of the show would be that contestants bring at least enough cash to pay the asking price for everywhere they stay.
Hi and welcome.
I think remarks like that relate to the participants in real life would never pay £150 or £200 because they couldn't afford to. What they often lose sight of is that it's not what they can afford to pay in RL but what the room is worth if a guest in that bracket could afford / choose to pay it. In that respect, what they (as a participant) could afford to pay is irrelevant.
I think that 4iaB fund all the payments and if a guest pays less than the full amount for a room, then 4iaB makes up the difference. After all, if 4iaB has to pay a total of, at the most, £600 for 3 bedrooms for 4 nights each week of programmes, it's still pretty cheap tv - even with the fact they put up all participants in local hotels the night before filming.
That's the strangest thing of all to me. I mean, the programme is really one, long, free advertisement on tv for all the different contestants. Viewers are less concerned about who wins, it's more about who we like. Don't the contestants understand that ?
Even allowing for the editing, its almost as if some of them are determined to make themselves appear as unpleasant as possible. How can that help their business prosper ?
I think perhaps you have to stand back and think about this from Channel 4's perspective - what would the viewing figures for a show where everyone behaved like that be?
Its very much in C4's interest to 'make' conflict happen - either by actively approaching B&Bs with interesting reviews on Tripadviser or selective editing over the fortnight. I know they can only show what has been said, but context is never given (we only see the contestants vox pops - never the questions they are asked before).
Frankly I'd be suprised if there will be many more 4iab as the number of propriators willing to risk their livelyhoods and a drubbing from keyboard warriors (not us DSers, of course:D) must be dropping like a stone.
That's the strangest thing of all to me. I mean, the programme is really one, long, free advertisement on tv for all the different contestants. Viewers are less concerned about who wins, it's more about who we like. Don't the contestants understand that ?
Even allowing for the editing, its almost as if some of them are determined to make themselves appear as unpleasant as possible. How can that help their business prosper ?
Just watched the omnibus on 4 OD. Nancy didnt get it did she? I want to win/I don't want to win. I do think they had a downer on her (Paul did harasss her at Seashells over her humming and harring) but..I can't blame them. The woman couldn't find the TV switch and thinks people want to sleep in a cell. She hasn't the sense not to put pretty china jugs in a dishwasher by the looks of things.
Frankly I prefer to know my hosts are on the premises but other than that the frst veue was perfectly acceptable but my choice would be to stay at Seashells or the glorious winner ( as long as I could blot the golf out of my view..I live in a town imprisioned by the links LOL)
That someone can run a doggie/smoker B&B and people not smell either in the rooms is brillaint. However Sue ...there is nothing foreign in Kippers nor Kedgeree and although I would never expect the latter,I do like the former, on a breakfast menu. On the other hand I understand why people leave them off as once cooked for breakfast, you have their presence all day in the house!
FIAB is making me want to visit the UK again so I can stay in some of the B&Bs on the show.
A question: On the show with Dom & Steph, Andrea & Nick, etc., James said they would have paid Dom & Steph more, but they couldn’t afford it.... But surely a requirement of the show would be that contestants bring at least enough cash to pay the asking price for everywhere they stay. After shorting the other two B&Bs, James should have had some extra cash.
Hello Kip
A FIAB tour sounds fascinating, but your post made me wonder how much fresh trade FIAB actually generates (or discourages). An article on its oft repeated predecessor indicates that for one contestant at least it has been worthwhile, and it has some interesting insights on filming (http://www.thebandber.com/2012/05/channel-4s-three-in-a-bed-good-or-bad-for-sales/#_ftnref2)
As for James's payment, he paid the asking price but said he didn't have enough to pay any extra. Maybe he no longer had the money from his underpayments, and hadn't brought his own cash. Otherwise, how would the Wizard's Thatch couple been able to pay extra?
Habby, I wasn't on the board at all last weekend, only a quick peep on my phone, not posting, but there were negative posts from mostly names I'd never seen at all before.
Anyway, I'm always happy to engage with anyone who has genuine points to make about the programme, whether I agree or not.
I have posted a few times on here recently basically because I've really for into watching Four in a Bed in recent weeks. Are you saying people are not allowed to post negative posts? I have only been commenting on what I've seen and my honest opinion. Does a post have to been positive for it to be genuine?
As it is only a few people replied to some of my posts but that's fine.
I thought this place was for different people to air their different opinions yet seemingly it seems to be having a go at folk for what they truly think.
Are you saying people are not allowed to post negative posts? I have only been commenting on what I've seen and my honest opinion. Does a post have to been positive for it to be genuine? <snip> I thought this place was for different people to air their different opinions yet seemingly it seems to be having a go at folk for what they truly think.
You're looking at the wrong end of a stick.
Last weekend there was a rash of posts (which had nothing to do with the show) stating how some members felt unable to post in this thread because of an All-Powerful Clique. Some of those posts were negative because they criticised other posters who were perceived to be in this (undefined) clique. So the comment you reacted to was nothing to do with negative or positive comments about the show itself.
Postively or negatively, feel free to post away... :cool:
I love dogs but I wouldn't like 4 dogs in a B&B where I stayed.
Seashells website is very dog centered so I imagine guests would know what to expect. I tend to stay in dog friendly hotels usually only when bringing dogs myself. Although I would never allow them on hotel beds. I'm not sure everyone's the same. Mind you, it's probably no worse than sleeping on a mattress previously occupied by a stranger. When it comes to owners' dogs, I've rarely found them much in evidence. 'Dog friendly' seems a bit of a double edged sword as it can put off as many guests as it encourages. The most amazing doggy hotel I ever stayed in was at Dunkery Beacon. It's since closed (not my fault:D) but specialised in doggy guests, to the extent that they ate in the dining room, and were welcomed in the bar, which had a tiled floor, accessorised by a bucket and mop!
I agree with that. If I was staying somewhere that billed itself as luxurious then I'd expect top quality bedding, furniture and fittings plus s very good en suite.
Luxury is not just having access to books and a flat screen TV
If Tony was quoting the OED, which she seemed to be, then she didn't finish the definition. The dictionary actually defines luxury as "an inessential, desirable item which is expensive or difficult to obtain:".Toni only stressed the "inessential, desirable" part, but the expensive etc. bit is more relevant. As others have said, Toni's B&B is homely, not luxurious, which is fine. However, she seems determined to insist on calling it luxurious, and her website has several references to "luxury" and "de-luxe".
Comments
But in practice you're right - although I think the problem lies more with the cheaper end of the spectrum not being able differentiate what is 'good value' in a £150-£200 place. I would struggle myself with that.
Mind you some clearly are way overpriced - like the Porthmadog one this week. Whilst the big posh one last week I really would struggle with as I'd never pay £200 for one night but then I'm not in that market so don't know what to expect.
Nah, 3 small dogs in a dog friendly b&b is fine. You wouldn't choose to stay there if you didn't like dogs. One of my fave b&bs has 5 dogs which is partly why I stay there.
Seems the complete opposite of what it says in this article.
In a later episode, Toni finds herself leaping to the defence of the contestants from Cornwall, Debbie Williams and Karen Lucas, who run the Duke of Cornwall in St Austell.
"I got on incredibly well with the ones from Cornwall and I think possibly they might not have expected that, because we are very different people, but they were amazing," said Toni. "I've been down and had lunch with them since."
I wasn't meaning you.
I was just answering your point about people posting something & going off again. They could be trying to cause a problem or maybe they don't want to stick around for some reason.
I always say what I like & if people don't like it they can ignore it or argue with me. I've been around too long now to worry about things like that.
Crossed wires.
Yes, I got what you were saying and didn't take it that you meant me.
My original point was that loads of posts were about the thread and the people posting in it and not the programme - which isn't very constructive to my mind.
I can't say any more than that as I didn't take any notice of screen names and then when I came back to the thread there were at least six pages missing (the way I have pages configured there were anyway)
By the way I think the article backs up what M@nterick said about Toni, Debbie and Karen. Karen and Debbie cut Toni a fair bit of slack and supported her against the others' comments, which they didn't feel was reciprocated.
Anyway, we've moved on now, from last weekend's posts I mean, and are looking forward to a new week.
Yes it was lovely. My favourite out of all of them.
That does not really contradict me. She was marked up by them, far more than she deserved.
Toni still does not get it with the very valid criticism about the luxurious stuff.
This is a friendly, welcoming, thread. Not sure where the clique stuff came from really.
Welcome aboard.
I agree with that. If I was staying somewhere that billed itself as luxurious then I'd expect top quality bedding, furniture and fittings plus s very good en suite.
Luxury is not just having access to books and a flat screen TV
What you don't want the room to overpower you with, is the sense of someone else's presence, which is what I felt from the portrayal of Toni's rooms.
To be fair to her though, her prices were very reasonable for the area, I think she's probably a far more sympathetic host than came across on the programme and her rooms wouldn't take a great deal of tweaking to make them so much better than they appeared to be
I imagine that Toni's a quick study, so either what she provides is going to fit her customers' requirements just fine, or, she'll soon sort out what's required and do OK.
Actually of all last week's contestants I think she's the most likely to listen and learn.
That's the strangest thing of all to me. I mean, the programme is really one, long, free advertisement on tv for all the different contestants. Viewers are less concerned about who wins, it's more about who we like. Don't the contestants understand that ?
Even allowing for the editing, its almost as if some of them are determined to make themselves appear as unpleasant as possible. How can that help their business prosper ?
- good quality / size towels and one (at least) for hair washing
- poly cotton bedding - easy to (not) iron but not nice, particularly in summer
- chairs and a table in the room at which to eat breakfast if there isn't a dining room
- the fact that no-one outside family wants to find a used bar of soap left out for them
- who their market is and what that market expects in 2012/13 because it is not the same as in 2007, say
- what to do if guests take the pee (a few do so you do need a touch of steel if necessary)
But anyway, to my point: they don't have applicable business skills to transfer to their enterprise and I believe they make the mistake of thinking their behaviour on 4iaB showcases their shrewd, no-nonsense business brain. Sadly, particularly in the cases of the Amandas but also (to a lesser extent) the Tonis, their behaviour does quite the opposite.I think the Julians and the Louises (hmmm
Also interested in what the national internet system is and how it would affect internet access in rooms as per his reply.
I think remarks like that relate to the participants in real life would never pay £150 or £200 because they couldn't afford to. What they often lose sight of is that it's not what they can afford to pay in RL but what the room is worth if a guest in that bracket could afford / choose to pay it. In that respect, what they (as a participant) could afford to pay is irrelevant.
I think that 4iaB fund all the payments and if a guest pays less than the full amount for a room, then 4iaB makes up the difference. After all, if 4iaB has to pay a total of, at the most, £600 for 3 bedrooms for 4 nights each week of programmes, it's still pretty cheap tv - even with the fact they put up all participants in local hotels the night before filming.
I think perhaps you have to stand back and think about this from Channel 4's perspective - what would the viewing figures for a show where everyone behaved like that be?
Its very much in C4's interest to 'make' conflict happen - either by actively approaching B&Bs with interesting reviews on Tripadviser or selective editing over the fortnight. I know they can only show what has been said, but context is never given (we only see the contestants vox pops - never the questions they are asked before).
Frankly I'd be suprised if there will be many more 4iab as the number of propriators willing to risk their livelyhoods and a drubbing from keyboard warriors (not us DSers, of course:D) must be dropping like a stone.
Very well put.
Frankly I prefer to know my hosts are on the premises but other than that the frst veue was perfectly acceptable but my choice would be to stay at Seashells or the glorious winner ( as long as I could blot the golf out of my view..I live in a town imprisioned by the links LOL)
That someone can run a doggie/smoker B&B and people not smell either in the rooms is brillaint. However Sue ...there is nothing foreign in Kippers nor Kedgeree and although I would never expect the latter,I do like the former, on a breakfast menu. On the other hand I understand why people leave them off as once cooked for breakfast, you have their presence all day in the house!
Hello Kip
A FIAB tour sounds fascinating, but your post made me wonder how much fresh trade FIAB actually generates (or discourages). An article on its oft repeated predecessor indicates that for one contestant at least it has been worthwhile, and it has some interesting insights on filming (http://www.thebandber.com/2012/05/channel-4s-three-in-a-bed-good-or-bad-for-sales/#_ftnref2)
As for James's payment, he paid the asking price but said he didn't have enough to pay any extra. Maybe he no longer had the money from his underpayments, and hadn't brought his own cash. Otherwise, how would the Wizard's Thatch couple been able to pay extra?
I have posted a few times on here recently basically because I've really for into watching Four in a Bed in recent weeks. Are you saying people are not allowed to post negative posts? I have only been commenting on what I've seen and my honest opinion. Does a post have to been positive for it to be genuine?
As it is only a few people replied to some of my posts but that's fine.
I thought this place was for different people to air their different opinions yet seemingly it seems to be having a go at folk for what they truly think.
Last weekend there was a rash of posts (which had nothing to do with the show) stating how some members felt unable to post in this thread because of an All-Powerful Clique. Some of those posts were negative because they criticised other posters who were perceived to be in this (undefined) clique. So the comment you reacted to was nothing to do with negative or positive comments about the show itself.
Postively or negatively, feel free to post away... :cool:
Seashells website is very dog centered so I imagine guests would know what to expect. I tend to stay in dog friendly hotels usually only when bringing dogs myself. Although I would never allow them on hotel beds. I'm not sure everyone's the same. Mind you, it's probably no worse than sleeping on a mattress previously occupied by a stranger. When it comes to owners' dogs, I've rarely found them much in evidence. 'Dog friendly' seems a bit of a double edged sword as it can put off as many guests as it encourages. The most amazing doggy hotel I ever stayed in was at Dunkery Beacon. It's since closed (not my fault:D) but specialised in doggy guests, to the extent that they ate in the dining room, and were welcomed in the bar, which had a tiled floor, accessorised by a bucket and mop!