Chloe's Claims - Page 2





Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45

Thread: Chloe's Claims

  1. #11
    Pinkpussycat Guest

    Default

    Anyway, thank you to Anettka for drawing me back to this thread. During the same show I also heard Ms Chloe Cole/Jolie/Beckham Marshall state that the export of raw tanzanite was definately affecting TJC and that was why she had hardly any pieces in her hours to sell; she was followed by Sarah-Lou who then said that they (TJC) didn't know how the tanzanite ban might affect them. Uhm, I know who I believe out of the two of them and guess what....TJC had a dedicated tanzanite clearance show this afternoon. Hardly the actions of a channel struggling to source it. CM needs to reign in her runaway gob a bit imho. :rolleyes:


  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    101
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkpussycat View Post
    I also heard Ms Chloe Cole/Jolie/Beckham Marshall
    I think the name calling is the issue here PPC. It really is upsetting to the presenter.

    Were you watching at the weekend? You may have heard her explanation for the claim...

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    946
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I've got to say that Chloe's Bond Street / Red Carpet / Celebrity references are awful. Honestly, how many of us shop in Bond Street or go to red carpet functions and does anybody give a fig what a Z list celebrity may be wearing? To be honest that'd be enough to put me off a piece!

    More worringly, if Chloe has suggested that the diamonds in some of the New York range are of a better quality and akin to the more luxurious range then it's only right and proper that TJC are either asked to verify these claims OR make Chloe apologise. I'm sure that if this were to be reported to the appropriate watchdog, they would be happy to investigate also. I bet what's happened is that one or two people have bought items, had them appraised and found that one or two of the diamonds are of a better quality than expected. This wouldn't surprise me but it's a way off actually advertising the New York range like this - it's misleading.

    At the end of the day we're a consumer forum so people here are entitled to their opinion and express concern at what they hear/see but Anettka why you think it right and proper, with your first post, to give a regular poster "what for" is beyond me. Unfortunately, this happens more and more regularly and over time it normally becomes clear that the person has an agenda or works for a channel or is a friend of a presenter etc etc. Honest opinions are welcome but veiled personal attacks are not.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    101
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    In fairness to the presenter, an explanation was given at the weekend.

    If any of you were watching on Saturday you may understand why Anettka may have felt compelled to post his/her opinion on here.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    946
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avid View Post
    In fairness to the presenter, an explanation was given at the weekend.

    If any of you were watching on Saturday you may understand why Anettka may have felt compelled to post his/her opinion on here.
    Avid - there are still ways of making a point without resulting to a personal attack and Anettka, regardless of how she felt should not have been so rude to PPC. If you want fairness then it should be applied both ways and PPC should be treated in the same manner.

    To be honest, I haven't heard either the claim or the explanation BUT if people just heard the claim and not the explanation then there of course will be speculation. Unfortunately over the years, Chloe has made ridiculous claims (as have other presenters and it's certainly not limited to Chloe) and on occasion this has led to action against a channel (not just limited to TJC) so this forum most definitely has a part of play in "defending" the consumer.

  6. #16
    Pinkpussycat Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avid View Post
    I think the name calling is the issue here PPC.
    It's not name calling, it's a reference to her repeated use of celebrity name dropping and as good as TJC jewellery is there is no comparison to the kind of pieces that these people wear, plus it's boring in the extreme.

    It really is upsetting to the presenter.
    Do you know her then??

    Were you watching at the weekend? You may have heard her explanation for the claim...
    Nope, can't put up with her waffle for long.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    101
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meeshoo View Post
    Avid - there are still ways of making a point without resulting to a personal attack and Anettka, regardless of how she felt should not have been so rude to PPC. If you want fairness then it should be applied both ways and PPC should be treated in the same manner.
    My post was referring to fairness to the presenter. There was an explanation in the show aired at the weekend.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    946
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Avid View Post
    My post was referring to fairness to the presenter. There was an explanation in the show aired at the weekend.
    I understood that. As I said, fairness works both ways.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Planet Earth, mostly...
    Posts
    2,020
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    From Meeshoo's post "there are still ways of making a point without resulting to a personal attack"

    Perhaps all sides should take on board Meeshoo's comment above

    There have been a number of very personal and aggressive attacks by various people via this forum aimed specifically at Chloe Marshall. Maybe Annettka first post was a response to previous regular posts on the subject as well as this one.

    Other presenters infuriate me and are just as bad at times with spurious claims. It was absolutely right to raise the issue here, and presumably with TJC direct, after all they are ones who should regulate what their presenters say. The criticism is valid, however, unfortunately it comes over as a veiled opportunity to "have another go" at this particular presenter

  10. #20
    Pinkpussycat Guest

    Default

    Explain how repeating what CM said becomes a personal attack, veiled or otherwise.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •