Oh Jill Franks, you silly woman

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

Status
Not open for further replies.
Craftalot

Craftalot

Indigenouscommunities
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
1,383
Location
Central London and Dordogne, France
On presenting the £102 short trouser things on Yong Kim today, she said 'oh I'd definitely wear them as yoga pants'. Really Jill...don't you think that's just a little extravagant? Is that what we should be doing now then, to keep up with our North London Yoga Yummy Mummies? And a £118 top would apparently be 'great for teenagers' - presumably on their minimum wage job. What world does this woman live in!
 
Last edited:
She's just offering other options to potential buyers.

If the material is soft and flexible enough then why not - if you can afford it - use them for yoga?
 
I wouldn't pay that much for a pair of flaming trousers for best never mind yoga! Jill Franks must live in some sort of parallel universe coming out with claptrap like that. To be honest this sort of comment is making me watch QVC less and less!
 
Craftalot said:
Oh stop it woman, it's so unnecessary. Find someone else to flame.
Click to expand...

Flame - sorry but is holding an opinion that is contrary to yours considered 'flaming' now?

I've simply said that I don't think it's a major issue for Jill to suggest wearing these pants for yoga... it's not like she suggested using them for straining tea or piping icing!
 
Tiddlywinks said:
Flame - sorry but is holding an opinion that is contrary to yours considered 'flaming' now?
Click to expand...

Flame might be a bit harsh so I've deleted it: how about 'unnecessarily obtuse' instead? Anyway, whatever you say, love: you're always right (and I suspect always have been) so there's not much point in disagreeing with you. As for the straining tea/icing: don't give her ideas.
 
Last edited:
To be honest when I see certain people posting on a thread I know it's doomed,no names mentioned of course.
 
This is a sales pitch they use repeatedly for many of the soft fabric trousers ,often when they are not smart enough to wear to formal events and to be honest I wouldn't pay some of the prices just to use them for yoga or to the gym ,there are much cheaper versions out there.On a previous YK hour the sylist (not Ingrid,) said the tops are so soft she sometimes sleeps in hers.Its a lot of money to sleep in something.if I was paying those prices I would want to keep the garment for everyday work or going out wear.
 
One would presume Ingrid gets given clothes free or at a huge discount and most of them are so awful that one would only wear them when no one else can see them so in bed. I have long wondered how clothes that look like they have just come from a jumble sale bag can cost so much. Awful brand imho.
 
Now come on ladies, let us be totally honest. We are not the demographic that QVC are aiming at these days.

They want the woman who drops money like water(or coconut water:mysmilie_14:) and doesn't worry about the price. The clothing ranges are getting more expensive, designer handbags, anything in gold is £££+ up, even the silver is ££+ these days. Usually the only way we can afford beauty is on easy pay. The magazines they advertise in are not your Marie Claire's or Grazia.
 
tbh if i want clothes for the gym i go to sports world. 2 tee shirts for a fiver and they go up to xxxl
 
I don't watch Yong Kim shows. There are a lot of people who have a big income and whilst it is a little insensitive to some to talk about buying a £102 pair of pants to use as yoga pants, the fact is that there are people who can afford to do that. So much bitterness, it doesn't make nice reading, and if someone is hated that much and you can't afford the range why watch? but perhaps the reason is to gather more fuel for a rant?

Threads are doomed the minute a difference of opinion is derided and/or attacked by others who are incapable of accepting and respecting a different view, and any response is jumped on. It's a put-down, it deters others from posting, and is unnecessary.
 
It's possible to voice an opinion contrary to one already posted without being snippy and implying the other is wrong. Once they get contentious it snowballs into personal nastiness and makes uncomfortable reading.

I belong to several forums and I always make sure my posts pass the "Costa Coffee" test - is it something I'd feel comfortable saying to a friend face-to-face over a latte and Choc chip muffin ?
 
Laughing my head off here. It amazes me how some people can complain that negative comments about YK or saying £102 for a pair of gym pants is extortionate is a sign of nastiness and to simply not watch if it bothers people etc and yet the very same person opened their own thread just a couple of days ago asking us to comment about guests, presenters and so on and what put us off them.
Ladies and gents, don`t rise to the bait, love or loathe products as you see fit and to coin a phrase, it`s Q`s playground, their rules ( or so we`re regularly told on here ) and they`ll say what they want, sell what they want, have whoever they want as guest or presenter, Tweet, FB or rabbit as much as they want and tell as many half truths as they think people will swallow. Long rule the Queen of forums and all who sail ( or sink ) in them I say !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I
The QVCers Part 5 - Through the Doors of Decadence
Replies
18
Views
6,811
HoodedClaw
H

Latest posts

Back
Top