Peter Simon

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

Oh you are awful, Mommabear......but I like you! (as the late, great Dick Emery would have said!). However, I feel bound to add "in his dreams"!!!!
Mommabear said:
He said he had bought the Vax. When they had the stupid 'Presenter Picks', he'd 'chosen' the Bosch vac, he'd bought that too!

He must like lots of suction going on..........[/QUOTE]
Click to expand...
 
I'm as puzzled as you, Petespants......Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall us being told not so long ago by this poster words to the effect that he was just entertaining people and we were being judgmental???? I hasten to add, Pope Pete has never, in the course of his whole life, seemed remotely like an 'entertainer' to me, and the only reason I've watched is to take the mickey out of the silly old....(insert own choice of word here, please)

Petespants said:
Paz I was under the impression you were Peter's #1 fan.The tone of the above post leads me to believe otherwise.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
historymystery said:
Oh you are awful, Mommabear......but I like you! (as the late, great Dick Emery would have said!). However, I feel bound to add "in his dreams"!!!!
Mommabear said:
He said he had bought the Vax. When they had the stupid 'Presenter Picks', he'd 'chosen' the Bosch vac, he'd bought that too!

He must like lots of suction going on..........[/QUOTE]
Click to expand...

Well I did catch him the other day, with his hand near his nether regions, saying it's been a while since anybody's been down there. Yes, he said 'anybody'........not vacuum nozzles :mysmilie_11:

You'd never think this talk was from a shopping channel would you?
Click to expand...
 
Mommabear said:
historymystery said:
Oh you are awful, Mommabear......but I like you! (as the late, great Dick Emery would have said!). However, I feel bound to add "in his dreams"!!!!

Well I did catch him the other day, with his hand near his nether regions, saying it's been a while since anybody's been down there. Yes, he said 'anybody'........not vacuum nozzles :mysmilie_11:


You'd never think this talk was from a shopping channel would you?
Click to expand...


I get the feeling that he is trying to get a better job offer by seeing how far he can push his innuendo's and smutty references. I don't think there is anywhere else for him! I dont watch him much as I think he is becoming more and more repulsive. If any one say's why not turn off then, well I do! When will I/W wake up to this old duffer?
Click to expand...
 
It depends who he's on with. He's as good as gold with Juliette Maris-Piper who does the EG stuff. Caroline Garrard, the same. After his intro of her, she'll lean in for the double cheek kiss and he often leaves her hanging. Now Tim, it's another story. If he was flogging watches, he wouldn't be leaving him hanging, he'd be in there first. He's at his most playful with him, I think he has a thing for him. He's very childish.

When he's in the kitchen with Jore or the big lad, well........there's chicken inuendo all over the shop.
 
The way he keeps saying 'not only'. Obviously a vile, foul pervert.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paz said:
You really do all hate him, don't you?
Click to expand...

I know someone who has met Peter Simon in real life and he comes over as a decent and well-meaning person, but that's when he's not under any pressure to sell anything. However there's three things I don't like about him when presenting on Ideal World:

His groping of models' clothing during fashion presentations. No implied permission is given for this to happen and no other presenter does anything like this; it's by far the most objectionable thing about him on Ideal World. Anyone who thinks that this is an acceptable thing to do in any shape or form should have a word with themselves.

Attempts at outright deception by feigning forgetfulness; case in point being his repetition of a 'Flexi-pay' monthly installment cost without making it clear what it is, meaning that casual viewers could mistakenly think that it's the total cost of the item if they're not paying full attention.

Unsubtle and excessive use of innuendo; I don't personally find it offensive as such but it comes over as tacky and at times cringeworthy. Innuendo should always be used sparingly and 'appropriately'.

And why do you keep editing your posts Paz? You've changed your last post at least three times so far.
 
Mommabear said:
He said he had bought the Vax. When they had the stupid 'Presenter Picks', he'd 'chosen' the Bosch vac, he'd bought that too!

He must like lots of suction going on..........
Click to expand...


My mind is certainly boggling at that.Yes perhaps he likes to clean top and bottom of his house at the same time.......somehow.......or something.....?
 
Price Plunge said:
I know someone who has met Peter Simon in real life and he comes over as a decent and well-meaning person, but that's when he's not under any pressure to sell anything. However there's three things I don't like about him when presenting on Ideal World:

His groping of models' clothing during fashion presentations. No implied permission is given for this to happen and no other presenter does anything like this; it's by far the most objectionable thing about him on Ideal World. Anyone who thinks that this is an acceptable thing to do in any shape or form should have a word with themselves.

Attempts at outright deception by feigning forgetfulness; case in point being his repetition of a 'Flexi-pay' monthly installment cost without making it clear what it is, meaning that casual viewers could mistakenly think that it's the total cost of the item if they're not paying full attention.

Unsubtle and excessive use of innuendo; I don't personally find it offensive as such but it comes over as tacky and at times cringeworthy. Innuendo should always be used sparingly and 'appropriately'.

And why do you keep editing your posts Paz? You've changed your last post at least three times so far.
Click to expand...

Because up until now I wasn't given any reason to believe I'd get a genuine response, so resorted to playing along with the tirade of personal dislike dumped on someone who is, after all, just someone making a living having a laugh whilst presenting on a shopping channel.

But thanks for your considered response. To give my answer to your points -

I'm sure that if Peter's handling of the model's clothing were any kind of problem, it would have been addressed off-camera by now, and any objections dealt with. I don't think Peter is a heterosexual (despite his various accounts of 'Bet', who I think is intended as a fictitious 'prop', much in the spirit of Larry Grayson's 'Slack Alice' etc) - not that that's any of my business - so has no personal gratification getting close to female models.

I think the accusation of deception would be valid regarding flexi-pay were the information not liberally shown on screen at all times. Any newcomer to Ideal World can, I think, easily spot the price at the bottom, and the divisions of that proce at the top. I think it's all fairly clear. He does forget to mention the intricacies of flexi-pay, but then doesn't always actually reach the end of a sentence!

Peter's innuendo. There I partially agree. Occasionally, I do find it inappropriate, but not excessive. It's on-the-edge silliness, and occasionally, it goes over the edge. I do feel that this kind of thing is more liberally used the later in the schedule he is.

Anyway, thanks for not resorting to the kind of name-calling used elsewhere on this often vitriolic thread.

L.
 
Paz said:
Because up until now I wasn't given any reason to believe I'd get a genuine response, so resorted to playing along with the tirade of personal dislike dumped on someone who is, after all, just someone making a living having a laugh whilst presenting on a shopping channel.

But thanks for your considered response. To give my answer to your points -

I'm sure that if Peter's handling of the model's clothing were any kind of problem, it would have been addressed off-camera by now, and any objections dealt with. I don't think Peter is a heterosexual (despite his various accounts of 'Bet', who I think is intended as a fictitious 'prop', much in the spirit of Larry Grayson's 'Slack Alice' etc) - not that that's any of my business - so has no personal gratification getting close to female models.

I think the accusation of deception would be valid regarding flexi-pay were the information not liberally shown on screen at all times. Any newcomer to Ideal World can, I think, easily spot the price at the bottom, and the divisions of that proce at the top. I think it's all fairly clear. He does forget to mention the intricacies of flexi-pay, but then doesn't always actually reach the end of a sentence!

Peter's innuendo. There I partially agree. Occasionally, I do find it inappropriate, but not excessive. It's on-the-edge silliness, and occasionally, it goes over the edge. I do feel that this kind of thing is more liberally used the later in the schedule he is.

Anyway, thanks for not resorting to the kind of name-calling used elsewhere on this often vitriolic thread.

L.
Click to expand...

Paz genuine question, The last statement you made in the final sentance you have picked up on "name calling / vitriliic thread" that obviously doesnt sit well with you at all.

So (In your opinion) do you think most posters would be saying these things if the quality and professionalism of the IW presenters was higher?

Example being Peter NEVER ends a sentance and NEVER says clearly its £100 or 4 flexi payments of £25....No no no Peter happily rolls out "buy this now its £25 today" thats it zip zilch nada nothing else said!

So in my opinion as stated previously most posters comment on what a presenter says and does and once a reputation is built up by an individual...........its like the old saying goes usually...........no smoke without fire.
 
Paz said:
Because up until now I wasn't given any reason to believe I'd get a genuine response, so resorted to playing along with the tirade of personal dislike dumped on someone who is, after all, just someone making a living having a laugh whilst presenting on a shopping channel.

But thanks for your considered response. To give my answer to your points -

I'm sure that if Peter's handling of the model's clothing were any kind of problem, it would have been addressed off-camera by now, and any objections dealt with. I don't think Peter is a heterosexual (despite his various accounts of 'Bet', who I think is intended as a fictitious 'prop', much in the spirit of Larry Grayson's 'Slack Alice' etc) - not that that's any of my business - so has no personal gratification getting close to female models.

I think the accusation of deception would be valid regarding flexi-pay were the information not liberally shown on screen at all times. Any newcomer to Ideal World can, I think, easily spot the price at the bottom, and the divisions of that proce at the top. I think it's all fairly clear. He does forget to mention the intricacies of flexi-pay, but then doesn't always actually reach the end of a sentence!

Peter's innuendo. There I partially agree. Occasionally, I do find it inappropriate, but not excessive. It's on-the-edge silliness, and occasionally, it goes over the edge. I do feel that this kind of thing is more liberally used the later in the schedule he is.

Anyway, thanks for not resorting to the kind of name-calling used elsewhere on this often vitriolic thread.

L.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be ok (to manhandle the models) JUST because he is gay though.
 
S C O said:
Paz genuine question, The last statement you made in the final sentance you have picked up on "name calling / vitriliic thread" that obviously doesnt sit well with you at all.

So (In your opinion) do you think most posters would be saying these things if the quality and professionalism of the IW presenters was higher?

Example being Peter NEVER ends a sentance and NEVER says clearly its £100 or 4 flexi payments of £25....No no no Peter happily rolls out "buy this now its £25 today" thats it zip zilch nada nothing else said!

So in my opinion as stated previously most posters comment on what a presenter says and does and once a reputation is built up by an individual...........its like the old saying goes usually...........no smoke without fire.
Click to expand...

You say you are asking a genuine question, and then go on to tell me how Peter NEVER finishes a sentence (which he quite clearly does. Not all the time, but he does), and he NEVER mentions the flexi-pay instalments (which he quite clearly does. Not all the time, but he does). You are basing your question on at least two untruths - and telling untruths is what Peter is often accused of.

If we're rolling out cliches, you say 'no smoke without fire', I say 'two wrongs don't make a right.'

So (In your opinion) do you think most posters would be saying these things if the quality and professionalism of the IW presenters was higher?
Click to expand...

I take your point, but I doubt it. If Peter was sacked tomorrow, people would simply complain about the rest of the presenters. It seems to be default setting. Complain, moan and whinge. If Ideal World was closed down, people would complain about other television channels. If television didn't exist, people would complain about something else.

Rather than listing down Peter's comments etc, why don't people watch/do something else if he is clearly so detestable? Surely there are many other people in the media more deserving of such unabashed hatred? I just find it odd that a presenter on a Shopping Channel should attract such bile, other than reasons of boredom of those who - let's be honest - make the choice to watch him.

Thank you for your question.
 
mr tom said:
It shouldn't be ok (to manhandle the models) JUST because he is gay though.
Click to expand...

Yep - absolutely fair point. But is he really manhandling them? I don't watch him all the time - usually on a Friday night - and I see him touching the fabric and the items, but as I said, I'm sure if there was any problem, it would have been addressed before hand. And, the girls are models - they are there to display the clothes and have the clothes displayed. That is all Peter is doing, at least as far as I can see.
 
Paz said:
You say you are asking a genuine question, and then go on to tell me how Peter NEVER finishes a sentence (which he quite clearly does. Not all the time, but he does), and he NEVER mentions the flexi-pay instalments (which he quite clearly does. Not all the time, but he does). You are basing your question on at least two untruths - and telling untruths is what Peter is often accused of.

If we're rolling out cliches, you say 'no smoke without fire', I say 'two wrongs don't make a right.'



I take your point, but I doubt it. If Peter was sacked tomorrow, people would simply complain about the rest of the presenters. It seems to be default setting. Complain, moan and whinge. If Ideal World was closed down, people would complain about other television channels. If television didn't exist, people would complain about something else.

Rather than listing down Peter's comments etc, why don't people watch/do something else if he is clearly so detestable? Surely there are many other people in the media more deserving of such unabashed hatred? I just find it odd that a presenter on a Shopping Channel should attract such bile, other than reasons of boredom of those who - let's be honest - make the choice to watch him.

Thank you for your question.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Let me amend a few of my previous points, 90% Peter NEVER finishes a sentance and 90% of the time Peter NEVER gives the full price of an item.

Hatred? Eh sorry I dont agree..............Most of us are simply pointing out things that we dont agree with thats all, nothing more sinister at my end Paz, I certainly dont wish ill on anyone.
 
Last edited:
Paz said:
Yep - absolutely fair point. But is he really manhandling them? I don't watch him all the time - usually on a Friday night - and I see him touching the fabric and the items, but as I said, I'm sure if there was any problem, it would have been addressed before hand. And, the girls are models - they are there to display the clothes and have the clothes displayed. That is all Peter is doing, at least as far as I can see.
Click to expand...

Personally I have no problem with you enjoying his act/shtick. (this probably should go without saying.. ) but you need to be prepared to be challenged on pretty much anything positive you say about the guy.

Surely he could touch the fabric, without them being inside it at the same time though. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they don't mind at all but still I feel it's inappropriate even if he is gay. It shouldn't be a licence to touch. We'd all go mad it Mike Mason did it.
 
mr tom said:
Personally I have no problem with you enjoying his act/shtick. (this probably should go without saying.. ) but you need to be prepared to be challenged on pretty much anything positive you say about the guy.

Surely he could touch the fabric, without them being inside it at the same time though. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they don't mind at all but still I feel it's inappropriate even if he is gay. It shouldn't be a licence to touch. We'd all go mad it Mike Mason did it.
Click to expand...

Oh, I am prepared to be challenged on being positive about anything. It just surprises me how much people seem to enjoy laying into Peter, that's all, and investing so much time in doing so, and then feeling sure I must either be Peter himself (or Bet!) for actually enjoying his shows. I'm not sure I need to be prepared for that!
 
Oh my stars, he's vomit-inducing but obviously someone at IW thinks this is the height of wit (yes, I did say 'wit' but what it actually is rhymes with another, far more descriptive word).
Mommabear said:
historymystery said:
Oh you are awful, Mommabear......but I like you! (as the late, great Dick Emery would have said!). However, I feel bound to add "in his dreams"!!!!

Well I did catch him the other day, with his hand near his nether regions, saying it's been a while since anybody's been down there. Yes, he said 'anybody'........not vacuum nozzles :mysmilie_11:

You'd never think this talk was from a shopping channel would you?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Apparently using the word 'Frigging' and going on about 'big boxes and packages' is acceptable to this grubby man...as is telling viewers that something costs 'Two tenners' when its 89.99. ASA, are you watching?
 
Last edited:
Peter's on now with some hideously-overpriced collectable bears, which at least gives him a chance to legally grope something :mysmilie_59:
 

Similar threads

O
What's happened to Peter Simon ?
Replies
10
Views
1,027
historymystery
H
M
Willy wonka's chocolate experince Glasgow!
Replies
4
Views
438
merryone
M
M
Unfunny comedians
2
Replies
28
Views
1,628
alter ego
A
T
Gemporia accounts - predictions?
Replies
6
Views
1,081
TheManWithNoName
T
M
Barred from a shop at my age lol!!!!
Replies
7
Views
1,137
mediastar
M

Latest posts

Back
Top