iDont want to make any more of this stuff ...
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Why the iMac aint so good
Next: iPads here in the UK!
From: Jim on 27 May 2010 06:44 On 2010-05-27, Sak Wathanasin <sw(a)nan.co.uk> wrote: > > Don't have any Primark shirts so can't comment on those, but their > tracksuits and leisurewear just fall apart. My wife got me some ("hey, > we can get 3 of these for the price of 1 of the branded version"). > Well, I play badminton twice a week and coach on another 2 days, so > they get kinda sweaty and consequently, get washed a lot. None of the > Primark stuff survived more than a couple of months. Sounds a bit like the Sam Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness: "The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet." Jim -- Twitter:@GreyAreaUK "RESEARCH showing that men lie more than women is proof they should stop asking them awkward questions in the first place, say scientists." - The Daily Mash
From: Woody on 27 May 2010 06:56 Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > In article <l5gsv5lmgbcmvpjglehlabtabvpkbi4ea3(a)4ax.com>, > T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 May 2010 10:41:13 +0100, Tim Streater > > <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: > > > > >In article <51fsv5pn3bboislk68r8pa7cooemrug990(a)4ax.com>, > > > T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, 27 May 2010 09:52:21 +0100, usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk (Woody) > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > > > >> >I was recently wondering that. There was a shirt I looked at in M&S > > >> >which was �29. The same sort of thing was �7 in primark. I know that > > >> >primark stuff is all made from the blood of unicorns, the tears of > > >> >children and thread made from live skinned kittens, but on the label it > > >> >appears that M&S stuff is made in the same place. > > >> > > >> Ah, another example of the 'Apple TAX' then. > > > > > >No, cos with this shirt you are not getting anything extra. > > > > You must be or everyone would buy them much much cheaper in from > > Primark wouldn't they? Or is it that they are buying it in M&S because > > they think it's a better product? This is my point with 'expensive > > gear', just how much markup is done at the POS and wouldn't it be nice > > if that could be spread back down the chain? > > Primark? Oh, do clothes do they? I thought they sold paint. I hate > shopping for clothes at the best of times so it's not worth my while to > stooge around five or six possible clothes shops to find the "cheapest", OK, go to primark. It will be cheaper. Always. > especially since above it dint say "identical item �7 at Primark �29 at > M&S", it said "same sort of thing". I spose I could wear my PJ tops when > out shopping, its the same sort of thing as a shirt, isn't it? ok. What I was refering to up there are two shirts. One is in primark at �7, one is at M&S for �29. They are white linin shirts. I can't find a difference other than the pocket style is different. Some people on this thread have had primark stuff fall apart, and some havent. So in general I am feeling that buying stuff from primark is somehow bad even thoguh I don't see any supporting evidence that it is, but I can't actually find anything that proves that buying something from M&S for 4 times the cost is actually going to make anyones life any better (apart from employees of m&s). Not just those companies, others too. I have stuff one end of manufacturing to the other and to be honest the doesn't change hugely, and certainly isn't governed by price. > Some 25 years ago I went into Macy's in Palo Alto and bought about a > dozen lumberjack pattern shirts. As we speak, one or two are *just* > *about* starting to wear through at the collar. Now that's what I call a > good deal. Last shirt (tshirt) I bought in macys fell apart after two washes! -- Woody
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 07:02 On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:16:14 +0100, chris <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> wrote: >I guess the quality control is much more variable with Primark, as I've >had things literally fall apart at the seams with Primark. You can be >lucky and get a good batch. Whereas 'better quality' stuff from Gap, >Next, M&S, etc are on the whole more likely to survive more than a >couple of washes. But I guess it all depends what you want the clothes for and how much money you have to spend / waste. We went up to daughters / bf's parents over Xmas and the Mrs dragged me into M&S to get some new / clean / decent clothes. Because some of the items were more money than I would have spent on a whole bag full at Primark or the market I will only wear them 'for best'. Because I don't go out much (miserable git) and can at any moment be doing 'dirty stuff' I don't get to wear them. That's not completely true, we did at the same time buy some jeans for �9.99 in M&S and I've been wearing them when I'm not due to actually get greasy but they wouldn't stop me doing so if required. So, spending �29 on a T shirt that I could probably get for �1.99 and would more as not destroy it long before I wore it out is not good value for me. And who is to say any more of the �29 made it back to the factory it was made in? And isn't it like 'organic' or 'free range' foods. How do we actually know what goes on in the background (and why so many people still grow their own). Horses for courses etc.
From: Jim on 27 May 2010 07:11 On 2010-05-27, T i m <news(a)spaced.me.uk> wrote: > And isn't it like 'organic' or 'free range' foods. How do we actually > know what goes on in the background (and why so many people still > grow their own). We grow our own stuff purely because it's *fun*. Potatoes, garlic, onions, spring onions, courgettes(sp?), tomatoes, and lots and lots of chillis. Jim -- Twitter:@GreyAreaUK "If you have enough book space, I don't want to talk to you." Terry Pratchett
From: T i m on 27 May 2010 07:17
On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:45:25 +0100, Tim Streater <timstreater(a)waitrose.com> wrote: >> And that's the point with a lot of this isn't it, people believe the >> hype. > >But in order to believe it, you have first to pay attention to it. Or be aware of it subconsciously? > The >only M&S ads I look at are the hem hem bikini ones hem hem and I'm quite >selective about those. ;-) > >The only blokes who pay attention to (mens) clothing ads from the likes >of M&S are those twirps who buy the lad mags. Oh how old fashioned (and off target) of you. ;-) Whilst M&S still attracts a particular type of person I think because they are buying more stuff from the far East and they can now stock some of the better value lines they are attracting a wider range of customer than they once were. Like, I would only go in there if I needed a new suit or 'decent' work clothes where it was a need rather than a choice. The 'trendy' lad wouldn't be seen dead in M$S and would only buy in a small / high street, blokey / trendy shop. A mate runs a small chain of such shops and I've been in there when someone has walked round and picked a few items off the shelves and the bill was over a grand. I was actually in there when East 17 (boy band) turned up. ;-) I was also in the phone shop when someone came in and bought (another) 4 Motorola 'Razor' phones. My mate (who runs the shop) questioned the purchase .. that they 'weren't cheap, they didn't work very well and the batteries didn't last a day' but that didn't seem to put them off. Cheers, T i m |