30-Oct-2007
Christmas idea for the ladies in your life?
Makoosh has been running a promotional 15% discount on first orders for some time, but between 1st Nov and 31 Dec 2007, the offer is getting even better as they will also include a bottle of Moet & Chandon champagne with every order over £50 and there is no limit to the number of times you may order and get a free bottle of bubbly in that timeframe - it could even be worthwhile splitting your order to take advantage of an extra bottle(s) of bubbly....my maths say that 15% of £50 is £7.50 and that is the discount you would forego on a first order if you split the order. But have you ever seen a half-decent bottle of champagne in the UK for £7.50? I haven't until now.
The lady in your life will really think you have splashed out on her if you present her with a nice piece of Jewellery and a bottle of champers for Christmas.
Here is some of Makoosh's blurb:
"Makoosh stock a large number of affordable designer jewellery pieces from some of the most talked about jewellery designers in the UK; such as Anna Lou of London and Pistachio. Makoosh brands have been gracing the pages of Grazia, Vogue, Cosmopolitan and more on a regular basis; and are a firm favourite with a host of celebs!
Don't forget you can still receive your 15% discount if this is your first order; simply enter the code MAKNEW15 during the checkout process and the 15% will be automatically be deducted.
Stuck for inspiration? Visit Makoosh now to have a look at some of our designer jewellery items you can get with your £50 and claim your free bottle of Moët &
Chandon."
This isn't an endorsement of Makoosh as I haven't used them before. But I often struggle to think of a present for my wife and this attractive offer might just mean that my cash goes that little bit further than I thought.
My mum might just be surprised by a better than normal Christmas present too.
Remember, this is a sneak preview of the additional offer - the offer is a couple of days away from proper launch. Although Makoosh have the offer on their website, it is hidden from the general public right now, so show a couple of days patience before ordering as I can't guarantee that it will be honoured if you order before before the advertised start date of 1st November.
Labels: bubbly, Champagne, Christmas, Makoosh, Offer
04-Dec-2006
Cyberman Helmets without rip-off prices
Following the success of Dr Who, a new generation of kids are enjoying the new series making Daleks and Cybermen the must-have toys for Christmas.My kids already have one of the Radio Controlled Daleks and have been looking at the Cybermen voice-changing helmets and it is on their wish list, but it seems like it is the real must-have for everyone and the major retailers have all been sold out for some time.
Recently some profiteering so and sos have been trying to sell them for more than double the retail price and those that know me will know that I don't want to be ripped off.
Anyway, today I found out that Amazon.co.uk has now got new stock of the Doctor Who - Cyberman Voice Changer Helmet at £29.99 if anyone else has been struggling and put off by the prices previously demanded by rip-off merchants.
Next problem.....do I buy one for some sharing or is it so good that they will fight over it.....? need to tread carefully there.....it wouldn't be good to have a war of the Cybermen on Christmas Day.
Labels: Christmas, cybermen, Dalek, Dr. Who
01-Dec-2006
Motley Fool calls for "FarePak" legislation
Those of you that read my earlier posts will know that I got quite angry over a BBC Breakfast News article on TV whereby a representative (David Kuo) from The Motley Fool implied that the victims had only themselves to blame even although it would appear that FarePak has stolen their money away to shore up their parent company.
As someone not connected to the scandal, but very saddened by its impact, what appalled me during the BBC Breakfast News segment was David’s apparently dispassionate approach suggesting that these consumers had a myriad of choices and had only themselves to blame, yet he failed to recognise that the very alluring attraction of the FarePak product was precisely the fact that it tied up the money in such a way that there could be no temptation to get at it until Christmas came round. For the majority of these consumers, a bank account was still not a suitable product even if they had access to open one.
I found it an offensive suggestion that the consumers were effectively “stupid” in giving money to FarePak (the company has been around for ~40 years for goodness sake) and I do not think that David’s comments and approach would have won many supporters for Motley Fool…..I do think that this was bad PR for Motley Fool and that had more attention been given to the reasons why those poor people used schemes such as FarePak and the need for Government legislation to protect them, then the news item could have been much more sensitive and constructive.
Clearly, someone from The Motley Fool was aware of my blog and I received an email from the PR Manager drawing my attention to a new article on their site entitled "Farepak: A Disaster Waiting To Happen!". I wholeheartedly support all that is now said there, especially given that it now properly appreciates that the customers were the victims.
I am very happy now to see Motley Fool recognise that consumers were the victims – This is not unlike Enron, but affecting people typically at the opposite end of the financial spectrum to those that would be buying shares for investment returns and for the most part knew that they were having a gamble. The US brought in Sarbanes-Oxley to deal with Corporate scandals such as that and I agree with Motley Fool that the UK needs to look much wider into the need to legislate around other financial arrangements.
For the other savings schemes out there operating in that same space (e.g. Park Hampers, Tesco, Sainsbury etc.. savings stamps schemes), perhaps it is time that at a minimum and in time for next Christmas that a voluntary code of conduct is put in place to ringfence an appropriate proportion of customers deposits to provide some form of guarantee.
Thanks to the Motley Fool for taking the time to find and contact me directly outside of the blog. I endorse everything that David now says in his new article, especially now that the consumers are appreciated to be the victims and I am now happy to regard the statements during the BBC report to be an unfortunate set of statements from a company that I have always held in high regard for the advice that they offer.
As someone not connected to the scandal, but very saddened by its impact, what appalled me during the BBC Breakfast News segment was David’s apparently dispassionate approach suggesting that these consumers had a myriad of choices and had only themselves to blame, yet he failed to recognise that the very alluring attraction of the FarePak product was precisely the fact that it tied up the money in such a way that there could be no temptation to get at it until Christmas came round. For the majority of these consumers, a bank account was still not a suitable product even if they had access to open one.
I found it an offensive suggestion that the consumers were effectively “stupid” in giving money to FarePak (the company has been around for ~40 years for goodness sake) and I do not think that David’s comments and approach would have won many supporters for Motley Fool…..I do think that this was bad PR for Motley Fool and that had more attention been given to the reasons why those poor people used schemes such as FarePak and the need for Government legislation to protect them, then the news item could have been much more sensitive and constructive.
Clearly, someone from The Motley Fool was aware of my blog and I received an email from the PR Manager drawing my attention to a new article on their site entitled "Farepak: A Disaster Waiting To Happen!". I wholeheartedly support all that is now said there, especially given that it now properly appreciates that the customers were the victims.
I am very happy now to see Motley Fool recognise that consumers were the victims – This is not unlike Enron, but affecting people typically at the opposite end of the financial spectrum to those that would be buying shares for investment returns and for the most part knew that they were having a gamble. The US brought in Sarbanes-Oxley to deal with Corporate scandals such as that and I agree with Motley Fool that the UK needs to look much wider into the need to legislate around other financial arrangements.
For the other savings schemes out there operating in that same space (e.g. Park Hampers, Tesco, Sainsbury etc.. savings stamps schemes), perhaps it is time that at a minimum and in time for next Christmas that a voluntary code of conduct is put in place to ringfence an appropriate proportion of customers deposits to provide some form of guarantee.
Thanks to the Motley Fool for taking the time to find and contact me directly outside of the blog. I endorse everything that David now says in his new article, especially now that the consumers are appreciated to be the victims and I am now happy to regard the statements during the BBC report to be an unfortunate set of statements from a company that I have always held in high regard for the advice that they offer.
Labels: Christmas, FarePak, legislation, Motley Fool, saving, victim
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]