Skip to main content

Why does everybody try to sell everything? Is it because they can, or is it just out of sheer greed?




The supermarkets have been at it now for a long time. Once one of the big ones diversified away from their core grocery business, the rest followed.

We seem to have long-since accepted that the big supermarkets sell clothes, white goods, brown goods, magazines, greeting cards, crockery, gifts, in fact you name it, they sell it.

Originally, and to a degree still representing a good deal for the consumer - apart from their fake special offers that they always claim when exposed on the TV consumer programmes as an “error” – it would be more acceptable if they didn’t kill the local high streets and suburbs with their total unethical, and at times, dishonest attitude to the small local business.

But this can be partially explained by lack of reality and short-sighted councils who just see these metro supermarkets as reliable businesses that can and will stump up premium business rates, month-in, month-out, without question. Despite it being we the residents who pay these councils their wages.

And the National lottery is not much better, often granting these metros a lottery terminal even though they may open within 100 yards of a local newsagent who already has a terminal, yet who faces ruin by the metro supermarket’s unwanted presence.

It was interesting to see an organisation from the most untrustworthy sector in the UK as I write this, a bank, (this particular one being the one with three scandals behind it and another one on the boil) running a campaign offering one of their 7,000 digital eagles to “help Roy set up a facebook page, post a video and collect subs for walking football”.

This, at a time when there is a huge campaign to get this particular bank to stop promoting tax havens in Africa!

And bearing in mind the heartache and trouble all the banks landed the UK and its residents with as a result of their cavalier actions since 2007-08 - the repercussions from which are still being felt today - should banks perhaps concentrate more on cleaning up their act and just provide core banking services?

PPI, interest swops, LIBOR rigging, currency rigging are all still rumbling on in the industry. Perhaps cutting bonuses and to cease pretending they need to pay the outrageous salaries they continue to do under the falsehood of “paying to attract the best”.  

Just look where banks “paying for the best” has got the UK over the past seven years! Nowhere fast.

Banks should stop twee, unbelievable advertising that attempts to infer they are squeaky clean and forthright, because they are not. Very far from it.

Banks are foul, dishonest, untrustworthy pirates, and a key target for nationalisation if ever there was one. They are so plainly incapable of running their own sector, either honestly or properly.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The "Win a Million" free scratch card newspaper inserts

One of those three-panel "Win a Million" scratchcards fell out of my newspaper this morning. Not a major or in anyway newsworthy event in itself, but I must admit my surprise. I didn't think anyone bothered with them anymore, or, to be a little more technical, I didn't think anyone was taken in by them anymore. Firstly, it actually is printed on the bottom of each panel that "Every card has a set of 3 matching symbols, 2 matching symbols and no matching symbols". Right, so you are going to 'win', half-win and not win respectively. Then, while the prize list is somewhat impressive with 1x£1m, 1x£100k, 2x£20k, 3x£10k and other things like holidays, tablet PC's city breaks all the way down to 1000 "faux" fashion watches, 1000 salon  makeovers and 1000xVIP Thames cruises. Now should I be stupid enough to spend the £1.53 a minute for the 6 minute phone call to claim my prize (that's almost a tenner, for those of you without cal...

Chancellor's letter of apology to Bob Diamond of Barclays

Thanks to my contacts at the new News International business "Phonetaps'R'Us", I was exclusively sent a copy of a letter sent to the Chief Executive of Barclays Bank, Bob Diamond, from the Chancellor yesterday. "Dear Bob Trusting you and yours are well. Listen mate. Sorry the F inancially S tupid A sses wrote to your bank yesterday to demand £290million as a fine. It's nothing personal, and just because your bank head office people are a bunch of dishonest, thieving bastards, I thought there was no reason to carry on that way and fine you. I made this clear to the FSA yesterday as soon as I heard the news. I told them that the taxpayer would have been more than happy to bail you out. And also. Look mate. Sorry you've had to give up your bonus this year. It must have come as quite a shock, and was a wonderful thing for you to volunteer to do. I only hope you've put something by from the £17million you received last year. No doubt the bank pay...

"Q". My name is Bond. Oh. not THAT Q.

I was sent a story today by a friend who knows my feelings on the subject - that is, about one of the consummately greatest of all British activities, namely, queuing. It seems some Danish Professor or other has come up with the theory that those who queue the longest should actually be served the last. He claims it makes purchasing something altogether more efficient and smooth through the idea of 'contra-queuing' (whatever the devil that may mean). 'Serve the people at the back of the queue first', he says, with profound wisdom. Altogether very professorial, albeit demonstrating a somewhat keen lack of understanding of the purchasing psyche. The Nobel Prize-chasing Prof suggests that if, for example, a popular entertainment act was to announce a tour, with tickets going on sale at 11am one morning, using the theory of 'contra-queuing', no one will want to be first to buy said tickets. So no one will turn up 14 months in advance and venues will...