|
||||||||
Would you have paid £15 for a photo on paper? |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,376
|
It's not really a 'real" situation for the punters either. You are surrounded by studio lights, boom mikes, cameras, igns saying "filming for the apprentice", people waving disclimer forms in your face for you to sign before you can even have your picture taken etc etc. You know exactly what is going on, an you know that you might be on telly. You may not want to appear rude or miserable. Besides, it may be 15.99- but it's proof you met the apprentices etc etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,375
|
Quote:
I had an emailer. It was rubbish.
"I've put a lot of Amstrad sky boxes in people's houses, and some of them actually work..." |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Berkshire
Posts: 851
|
I did think it was a rip off, considering that decent photo paper isn't that expensive. They should have learnt how to have processed in the back office properly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 215
|
Quote:
It's not really a 'real" situation for the punters either. You are surrounded by studio lights, boom mikes, cameras, igns saying "filming for the apprentice", people waving disclimer forms in your face for you to sign before you can even have your picture taken etc etc. You know exactly what is going on, an you know that you might be on telly. You may not want to appear rude or miserable. Besides, it may be 15.99- but it's proof you met the apprentices etc etc.
I'm sure I read somewhere that when they went round negotiating the best prices for a list of items they weren't allowed to mention the show. Assume that principle would apply for the other tasks also. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Banned User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,402
|
I agree it's shoddy to produce it on A4 rather than quality photo print. However, the nature of the task means, that despite footfall, there is a limit to how many people can be photographed (ie takes about 2 mins to take photo), so to recoup the £500.
Also Sralan/ the BBC knows that you guys may moan on here but none of you will actually complain.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 39,227
|
If people are thick enough to pay £15 for that, let them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a Whittle Wonderland!
Posts: 37,511
|
I think if it was a ordinary portrait photo then a lot more people would complain but, they were having their picture taken with "David Beckham" so although they may have been disappointed with the quality they handed over the cash. If I'm honest in that situation I probably would have paid the money as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
I wouldn't have paid for a photograph on paper like that. I'm amazed that SAS didn't pull them up about that (assuming he knew about it - wouldn't Nick have let him know)? To be honest, it was pretty disgraceful, but if people are willing to pay, more fool them.
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,629
|
No way would I have paid up
Mind you if your child had just had a photo taken with his fav footballer lookalike and started whinging you might just to keep the peace. But I would have been fuming and complained to Bluewater Management team |
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 56
|
Its not so easy to complain when you have eager children desperate for their Beckham photo! Rather be ripped off than disappoint them.
But it is still a rip off. Perhaps Sralan wasn't too upset about it as he's not exactly famous for quality products himself! As long as it looks okish, it'll do! |
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,629
|
Quote:
Its not so easy to complain when you have eager children desperate for their Beckham photo! Rather be ripped off than disappoint them.
But it is still a rip off. Perhaps Sralan wasn't too upset about it as he's not exactly famous for quality products himself! As long as it looks okish, it'll do!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
Its not so easy to complain when you have eager children desperate for their Beckham photo! Rather be ripped off than disappoint them.
But it is still a rip off. Perhaps Sralan wasn't too upset about it as he's not exactly famous for quality products himself! As long as it looks okish, it'll do! |
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 645
|
Ok, I rewatched the programme and the narrator is very clear "STANDARD a4 paper" was used.
I am flabbergasted. Even you average Lakeside shopper weighed down with a load of unused neurons and a shell suit surely should have realised that some dull-coloured photo on flimsy, easily-torn, paper is not worth £15? Perhaps they didn't get a chance to feel the product? |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 56
|
Never mind the quality... feel the width!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,486
|
I'm not sure which team used the A4 paper. I think it was Helene's. Well the Beckham lookalike was good so maybe that's why, but I think both teams customers had to hang around for quite a bit before the pictures were completed.
How much was Simon's team charging? I don't know how near both teams were to each other but Simon's team had an uphill task competing against a Beckham lookalike. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 645
|
Yes it was Helene's team that used "standard" A4 paper, which according to the narration was something to do with Lucinda's shortcomings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 9,825
|
If I offered them an A4 printout, I would have at least taken their email addresses to send them a digital copy. Scandalous.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:04.


