|
||||||||
Four in a Bed :: New Series (Part 4) |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1801 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: 🇬🇧
Posts: 60,766
|
Quote:
Does anyone remember a character called Grotbags from children's TV in the 80s? Apparently there were two characters in her show called Grumble and Lumpy. Just saying.....
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1802 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,263
|
Quote:
Helen is just jealous of Louise imo
How old is Helen? She doesn't look well. So she probably looks older than she is. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1803 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 59
|
i have always thought it would be a lot better if they didnt give things away in the comments as to who they are. would make it more fair
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1804 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: France
Posts: 3,592
|
Quote:
The least they could have done to try and match establishments up was ignore the buffet and have them cook individual breakfasts to order, just like the other places.
Quote:
They're sticking to the original and theoretically still applying brief of the concept, to judge the place on value for money, not to compare, say, a back street b&b with a hotel on the Yorkshire moors. Where they go wrong, if that's what people think they do, is in selecting contestants who couldn't grasp the concept if it was nailed to the floor in front of them with 'Judge on value for money not comparison with yours or whether you'd spend that much normally' in flashing lights, or who are so hell bent on getting air time that they are happy to make idiots of themselves. Some weeks three of the four manage to understand it perfectly well - there might even have been some weeks where everyone understood what they were meant to be doing played fair, although I can't bring any to mind atm. But as with the silly games, obviously included to ramp up any existing tension having created it on the first day, the production team apparently decided early on that letting most people play it this way is more entertaining.
I'm not a conspiracy theorist when it comes to 4iaB - I don't believe there's any planting of hairs, stained bedding, pee spots, etc) except that I am sure the production team deliberately pick the chippiest and... well... least intelligent to go on day one because they just know that delivers the most conflict and controversy as the visits take place. Quote:
Got to say I agree with them, not sure would like to stay somewhere dogs were allowed.
Quote:
I doubt their breakfast was cold.
Quote:
The fourth place couple have done their business no end of good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1805 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East London
Posts: 9,496
|
Just caught up with todays.
Note to self: Don't stay at the cheating fat chavs place!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1806 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
|
Quote:
Helen actually looks very pleased with herself! Look at her smirking at Liz. This was personal, nothing to do with the room being small.
The thing is ANYONE who stays in a hotel which allows dogs RARELY allow them in the restaurant. To be honest I believe they would have limit anyway. It wouldnt be like the film 101 dalmations, mind you we have the perfect cruella to take the part of that cruel and nasty lady lol.... The underpayment was UNFAIR. As was the underpayment to the last hotel. What for a few fibres on the bed. They were from the overthrow that was on the bed. I think if you rewatch it, its not there when she so discovers 20 hairs..................ridiculous. This show is crap now, and I am really not sure i want to be bothered to watch it, as its always the gameplayers who win. A hollow victory. I predicted, Beck Hall first, then the tall guys place second, but yesterday i changed my mind to Skegness first, and Beck Hall last I just knew she underpaid. I see her excuse of a friend is on the Fan page and something she said made me realise they were winners, and yesterday on Facebook around 4pm Helen Coy was shoving up loads of photos of her place, and that was a good clue enough for me. Whats the point? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1807 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
|
Quote:
Well that wasn't a surprise result, was it? Pathetic excuses for underpayments. And funnily it's the posher (for a better word) couples that got underpaid. Helen clearly didn't mind pee stains on the toilet, where as fibre fluff was underpayment worthy .
NO MONEY OFF for pee on the toilet and they didnt like the room. 20.00 OFF for a cold breakfast 20.00 OFF for a few fibres on bedding............... Give me a break. Do these people think we are all stupid. What is so annoying they had a product worth being paid full for, and had a chance of winning through fair means not foul. It was FOUL means they won that. I am going to write to the producers as I am sick of this now. Its spoilt a really good programme. I would rather watch Home or Away then this toss now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1808 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 672
|
I think this is how it is:
The producers have a pool of establishments which they have to divide into groups of four. They identify who they think may be potential gameplayers, and allocate at least one of these per group of four. Then they make sure the gameplayers' establishments are the first to be visited. That way they maximise the drama and mayhem, which is their aim. If the gameplayers behave really badly, their business suffers, despite winning the plaque - and serve them right. The "losers" get their good publicity, and are the real winners. But didn't we just get 2 weeks of absolute shockers! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1809 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: pembrokeshire
Posts: 615
|
The last 2. Weeks have me feeling that I don't think that I want to watch this anymore as it gets me so annoyed it is not the enjoyable programme it once was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1810 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ashington, Northumberland
Posts: 9,003
|
I'm not a dog person but I'd happily stay at Beck Hall. It's weird that a dog owner wouldn't stay a hotel that allowed dogs, it wasn't like the place was dirty,
|
|
|
|
|
#1811 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
|
Quote:
The last 2. Weeks have me feeling that I don't think that I want to watch this anymore as it gets me so annoyed it is not the enjoyable programme it once was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1812 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
|
Quote:
I'm not a dog person but I'd happily stay at Beck Hall. It's weird that a dog owner wouldn't stay a hotel that allowed dogs, it wasn't like the place was dirty,
We always bathe our dog and flea her before we go on holiday, and I expect a lot of other owners who love their dogs enough to share their holiday with them do the same. There is being a dog lover, and having a staffy (I expect), as a chav dog. I wonder what dog she has....... place your bets lol...... I bet its a staffy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1813 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,121
|
Quote:
I'm not a dog person but I'd happily stay at Beck Hall. It's weird that a dog owner wouldn't stay a hotel that allowed dogs, it wasn't like the place was dirty,
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1814 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,121
|
Quote:
Ridiculous isnt it. I never go anywhere without my dog she is part of our family. I have been to several dog friendly places and they smell clean and never see any dog evidence to be honest.
We always bathe our dog and flea her before we go on holiday, and I expect a lot of other owners who love their dogs enough to share their holiday with them do the same. There is being a dog lover, and having a staffy (I expect), as a chav dog. I wonder what dog she has....... place your bets lol...... I bet its a staffy. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1815 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
|
Quote:
Yeh see now i didnt get that. They made such a song and dance about the pee on the rim and marked down, yet gave full marks....WTF is all that about. I think they deliberatly paid in full, as to under pay ridiculous marks would have made them even more like game players.
NO MONEY OFF for pee on the toilet and they didnt like the room. 20.00 OFF for a cold breakfast 20.00 OFF for a few fibres on bedding............... Give me a break. Do these people think we are all stupid. What is so annoying they had a product worth being paid full for, and had a chance of winning through fair means not foul. It was FOUL means they won that. I am going to write to the producers as I am sick of this now. Its spoilt a really good programme. I would rather watch Home or Away then this toss now. Now it is gettig silly, £20 for what was fabric fibres, I just do not think they should be allowed to get away with that. Its like people comlaning when there is the smallest of small spiders web, they crop up in seconds, it doesn't make the place unclean. It is as if these people do not live in the real world at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1816 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
|
Quote:
How it used to be and how I see it, you shouldonly take the money off if you really would do it in real life or if the place is overpriced.
Now it is gettig silly, £20 for what was fabric fibres, I just do not think they should be allowed to get away with that. Its like people comlaning when there is the smallest of small spiders web, they crop up in seconds, it doesn't make the place unclean. It is as if these people do not live in the real world at all. Can I just say to all the haters Hotel Picadilly was underpayed by £20.00 because the £100 for the room was actually for bed breakfast evening meal and dance lesson..... Errr I dont get it lol. So she is saying for £100.00 you get. Bed Breakfast Evening Meal Dance Lesson So basically under pay by 20.00. Jeez give me a break. What they mean is I suppose they never had a dance less or a dinner but surely that isnt the bloody point is it. God you couldnt make it up could you. THICK OR WHAT. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1817 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,055
|
Quote:
Hi amelia_Lee; well i just saw this on Helen Coys facebook page.
Can I just say to all the haters Hotel Picadilly was underpayed by £20.00 because the £100 for the room was actually for bed breakfast evening meal and dance lesson..... Errr I dont get it lol. So she is saying for £100.00 you get. Bed Breakfast Evening Meal Dance Lesson So basically under pay by 20.00. Jeez give me a break. What they mean is I suppose they never had a dance less or a dinner but surely that isnt the bloody point is it. God you couldnt make it up could you. THICK OR WHAT. Ok, that makes perfect sense, some places charge £100 or more for a room like that plus breakfast. She should stop talking, the more she speaks the more stupid she looks! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1818 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,781
|
[quote=amelia_lee;80269518]So she underpaid because she actually gets MORE for the money!
Ok, that makes perfect sense, some places charge £100 or more for a room like that plus breakfast. She should stop talking, the more she speaks the more stupid she looks![/QUOTE] EXACTLY...... They did each other no favours, as to be honest for the first time i have watched FIAB, i think ALL of them should have won. Each one was good value for the money. ALL of them. I liked them all in different ways, but i wouldnt have stayed at skegness one as i dont do pubs and rooms simply because i had a bad experience. I felt for Louise too, as she actually LIKED the skeggy room, and was nothing but positive over it..... I bet she wishes she could take that back now lol.... Anyway non of them should have been underpaid....certainly not by 20.00. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1819 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,168
|
So the fact that we heard Terri say quite clearly "the price of the room is £100 and that includes breakfast" was just a figment of our imagination then? And we saw the get a dance lesson from Terri - and saw them eating dinner in the hotel restaurant..... So they got everything that was promised!
That woman is a total disgrace - the true winner this week was Beck Hall - played fair with all the others and had a gorgeous place themselves shame about the unfriendly dogs they had staying with them for the show! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1820 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
|
Quote:
So she underpaid because she actually gets MORE for the money!
Ok, that makes perfect sense, some places charge £100 or more for a room like that plus breakfast. She should stop talking, the more she speaks the more stupid she looks! Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. I take it the FB crowd are not to impressed either. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1821 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1822 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,726
|
Quote:
I'm not a dog person but I'd happily stay at Beck Hall. It's weird that a dog owner wouldn't stay a hotel that allowed dogs, it wasn't like the place was dirty,
Quote:
I feel the same. I've never known myself to be so annoyed by what is now a pathetic reality show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1823 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,726
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1824 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1825 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 52,176
|
Quote:
I've just read all that. Very interesting!
Four in a Bed - comment on results Quote:
If your hotel / guest house is selected to appear on "Four in a Bed", you're already a winner. And if you enjoy the experience, and come across well on the show too, you're a double winner. Who pays whom how much after each visit, and the basis on which the decision of "worth" is made, is interesting - but it's far from the most important aspect of the show. I would far rather have had an excellent shop front which encouraged people to come and stay with us than a competition in which we underpaid every other competitor in order to maximise our chances of winning - in my view that's a way to win the battle, but loose the war. You can end up with a plaque swinging over your gate, but no-one booked to come in and stay. The week that's just been broadcast (and I'm going to post this once the results are known) was close - very close. Calculated as a percentage of payments, one place won. But if it was calculated based on the amount under/overpaid, then victory would have gone elsewhere. And the result if you factor out consistent and game-playing underpayments by one of the four sets of owners would also have gone another way. Frankly, it doesn't matter. If one set of owners seriously underpay everybody else and win as a result, they just make themselves look manipulative and/or desperate.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:00.




