Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #3879 > unrolled thread

The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!

Started byChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net>
First post2012-03-01 17:52 +0000
Last post2012-03-08 13:35 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 309 — 58 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc


Contents

  The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! ChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net> - 2012-03-01 17:52 +0000
    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-01 17:57 +0000
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ian Hamilton <Ian.Hamilton@AAUG.net> - 2012-03-01 18:10 +0000
    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-01 18:17 +0000
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Ste (news)" <steve@revi11.plus.com> - 2012-03-01 22:20 +0000
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Richard Torrens (News)" <News+15404@Torrens.org.uk> - 2012-03-05 12:42 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 16:35 +0100
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-05 18:36 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 19:14 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-03-06 09:26 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 10:45 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-06 15:19 +0000
                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 19:22 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2012-03-06 20:45 +0100
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-03-07 15:44 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-06 17:13 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! church <church@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 19:35 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-07 09:11 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 10:18 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 09:48 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 11:26 +0000
                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-09 12:23 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 13:46 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! David Pitt <pittdj@pittdj.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 15:37 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 16:11 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-09 18:01 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 18:51 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 14:40 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-09 17:28 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 19:13 +0000
                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 20:15 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 19:28 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 16:38 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 09:05 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 09:11 +0000
                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-10 10:46 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:23 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Bailey <bbailey@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:29 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 16:13 +0000
                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Wisnia at home <david@wisnia.net> - 2012-03-11 17:28 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-11 18:25 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Wisnia at home <david@wisnia.net> - 2012-03-11 23:25 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-11 20:13 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-12 20:55 +0000
                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Wisnia at home <david@wisnia.net> - 2012-03-12 22:35 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 12:57 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-13 10:21 +0000
                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 13:19 +0000
                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-14 18:13 +0000
                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 20:10 +0000
                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-15 21:30 +0000
                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 17:18 +0000
                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-15 08:42 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-15 11:03 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-18 10:04 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-11 09:48 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-10 10:54 +0000
                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 11:52 +0000
                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Graham Pickles <graham@durain.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 12:26 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:03 +0000
                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Graham Pickles <graham@durain.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:26 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:40 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-10 16:23 +0000
                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-10 16:57 +0000
                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-10 17:48 +0000
                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-10 21:19 +0000
                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 22:44 +0000
                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 04:09 +0100
                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 06:52 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 08:38 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-11 10:35 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-11 11:04 +0000
                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 18:37 +0000
                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-11 10:31 +0000
                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 18:34 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-11 20:13 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 21:18 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 22:31 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 08:23 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-12 15:46 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 17:15 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> - 2012-03-13 07:12 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 05:15 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 08:26 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 09:49 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-14 11:48 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-17 20:54 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-17 21:14 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-03-17 22:54 +0000
                                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 00:45 +0100
                                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-03-18 09:25 +0000
                                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 15:36 +0000
                                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 16:52 +0100
                                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT) Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 16:40 +0000
                                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT) "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 17:56 +0100
                                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT) Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-18 20:12 +0000
                                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT) Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-18 21:05 +0000
                                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT) Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-18 22:40 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 11:07 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-19 14:39 +0100
                                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-20 13:32 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 14:56 +0100
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 05:09 +0100
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-20 11:34 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ollie Clark <usenet@ollieclark.com> - 2012-03-29 10:38 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-29 11:52 +0100
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-29 15:29 +0100
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-29 21:50 +0200
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-30 08:53 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-30 17:57 +0200
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-31 22:17 +0100
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-31 23:06 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-31 23:24 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-03-31 23:43 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> - 2012-04-01 05:51 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-04 07:11 +0100
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-04-07 12:16 +0100
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-04-07 12:16 +0100
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-04-12 12:42 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-04-12 20:08 +0100
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-04-13 12:46 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-12 21:50 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-13 00:16 +0100
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-12 21:53 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-13 09:40 +0100
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-13 09:49 +0100
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-31 23:18 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-31 23:41 +0100
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-01 11:26 +0100
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-04-01 11:32 +0100
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-04-01 14:41 +0100
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-01 01:01 +0200
                                                                OT (Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-04-07 13:54 +0100
                                                                  OT (Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-04-07 20:16 +0200
                                                                    Re: OT (Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-04-07 19:50 +0100
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-29 20:28 +0100
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! John Rickman Iyonix <rickman@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 21:02 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 22:28 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-11 22:54 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 22:13 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 22:36 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 01:04 +0100
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 08:27 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-12 15:55 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 17:30 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-15 10:39 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-20 12:08 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-21 22:27 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Griffin <ajg@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 09:07 +0100
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 09:55 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Calder <alan_calder@o2.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 10:34 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 16:34 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 20:03 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-22 21:12 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-23 10:53 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-23 11:35 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-23 12:49 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-23 11:07 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 08:29 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 00:53 +0100
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-12 05:51 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 05:07 +0100
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-20 12:14 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-21 20:23 +0100
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-21 21:41 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-21 22:34 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 07:19 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Kevin Wells <kev@kevsoft.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 09:47 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 16:41 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-22 20:48 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 22:11 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-22 22:26 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 17:57 +0100
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 17:38 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-22 18:12 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess Hampshire <jesshampshire@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-23 11:59 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-23 13:15 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Brian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-23 13:56 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 19:36 +0100
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-22 19:58 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-03-23 09:55 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-23 11:37 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-03-23 16:35 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-23 16:56 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-22 20:00 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-22 21:02 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-23 11:12 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Kevin Wells <kev@kevsoft.co.uk> - 2012-03-23 00:47 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Barry Gray <barrygray@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-23 08:14 +0000
                                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-23 08:24 +0000
                                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! ChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net> - 2012-03-23 15:48 +0000
                                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-23 21:15 +0000
                                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! John Rickman Iyonix <rickman@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-23 22:26 +0000
                                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:56 +0000
                                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Higton <davehigton@dsl.pipex.com> - 2012-03-24 16:54 +0000
                                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-25 00:13 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 18:04 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 05:08 +0100
                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 18:35 +0000
                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 19:19 +0000
                                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 21:23 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Griffin <ajg@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-11 11:22 +0100
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 00:49 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 03:26 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-12 06:01 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 15:49 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-12 16:04 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-12 17:34 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 10:45 +0000
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-12 01:07 +0100
                                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-13 11:56 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-13 18:20 +0000
                                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 09:44 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Dave Plowman (News)" <dave@davenoise.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 11:09 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-14 12:59 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-17 17:26 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-03-17 20:05 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-18 16:37 +0000
                                                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-18 18:29 +0000
                                                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-18 21:01 +0000
                                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-03-18 12:03 +0000
                                                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Barry Allen (news)" <evanallen@onetel.net.uk.invalid> - 2012-03-18 13:55 +0000
                                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-17 20:57 +0100
                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 21:09 +0100
                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-11 15:13 +0000
                                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-13 10:28 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-11 11:20 +0000
                            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 13:27 +0000
                              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-10 13:43 +0000
                                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 15:14 +0000
                                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! cferris@freeRemoveuk.com.invalid - 2012-03-10 20:13 +0000
                                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-10 22:43 +0000
                                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-10 23:53 +0000
                                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-11 16:18 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 17:40 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Sprow <news@sprow.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 23:38 -0800
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Alan Dawes <alan.dawes@argonet.co.uk> - 2012-03-06 14:25 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-03-06 14:40 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-06 16:47 +0100
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-02 00:35 +0000
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-02 10:12 +0100
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! T M Smith <thomas.smith57@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-02 20:14 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-02 23:27 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! T M Smith <thomas.smith57@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-03 19:29 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 21:37 +0100
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 22:18 +0000
                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 22:37 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-04 08:16 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 13:15 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! T M Smith <thomas.smith57@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-05 20:36 +0000
                          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 22:30 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! T M Smith <thomas.smith57@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-03 22:26 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-08 13:08 +0000
                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-09 01:58 +0100
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-11 14:57 +0000
                        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-11 19:19 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 20:37 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-03 20:31 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! T M Smith <thomas.smith57@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-03 22:25 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 12:58 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-03 17:27 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 20:07 +0100
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-04 14:11 +0000
            Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Harriet Bazley <bazley@feathermail.co.uk> - 2012-03-04 11:04 +0000
              Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-04 21:58 +0100
              Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-04 23:56 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Harriet Bazley <bazley@feathermail.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 01:00 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 13:02 +0000
                  Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Dave Wisnia at home <david@wisnia.net> - 2012-03-06 15:52 +0000
                  Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-07 11:37 +0000
                    Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Chris Bell <news@highpath.net> - 2012-03-07 12:11 +0000
                    Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) ChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net> - 2012-03-16 03:37 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Robin Hounsome <robin@hounsome.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 16:34 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-06 19:27 +0000
              Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 09:27 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-03-05 13:05 +0000
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-07 18:47 +0000
                  Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Jim Lesurf <noise@audiomisc.co.uk> - 2012-03-08 10:19 +0000
                    Re: Iyonix startup "Felicity S." <Flcty@rdsqurrl.com> - 2012-08-03 14:04 +0100
                      Re: Iyonix startup ChrisF <c.n.l.f@virgin.net> - 2012-08-03 22:34 +0100
                Re: Iyonix startup (was Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18!) Harriet Bazley <bazley@feathermail.co.uk> - 2012-03-13 21:32 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-08 13:37 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ron <beeb@woosh.co.nz> - 2012-03-09 11:42 +1300
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-08 13:06 +0000
    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Rob Hemmings (news2)" <robnews@rgvk.co.uk> - 2012-03-01 20:54 +0000
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-01 23:44 +0100
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-03 17:26 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Paul Sprangers <Paul@sprie.nl> - 2012-03-03 23:35 +0100
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-04 14:09 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> - 2012-03-04 16:42 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tony Moore <old_coaster@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-04 19:04 +0000
    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-01 22:37 +0000
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! C J Craig <Chris@skipton.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-02 07:34 +0000
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ian Hamilton <Ian.Hamilton@AAUG.net> - 2012-03-02 08:17 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! C J Craig <Chris@skipton.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-02 10:33 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Ian Hamilton <Ian.Hamilton@AAUG.net> - 2012-03-02 10:50 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-03-02 15:06 +0100
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Ste (news)" <steve@revi11.plus.com> - 2012-03-02 15:09 +0000
              Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-02 13:24 +0000
                Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-07 09:27 +0000
                  Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> - 2012-03-07 10:18 +0000
                    Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-03-07 21:06 +0000
                      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-03-11 10:10 +0000
      Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Felicity S." <Fliss@orpheusnet> - 2012-03-03 17:24 +0000
        Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 20:01 +0100
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Chris Johnson <chrisjohnson+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-03 20:35 +0000
          Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! "Ste (news)" <steve@revi11.plus.com> - 2012-03-04 01:43 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2012-03-04 11:47 +0000
            Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-08 13:35 +0000

Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16  Next page →


#4234

FromRussell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
Date2012-03-12 17:15 +0000
Message-ID<526f63d6fasee.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
In reply to#4225
In article <526f5ba900tim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill
<tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <526f332bfasee.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>,
>    Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
> wrote:
> > In article <526ef63b71ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk>,
> > Ron Briscoe <ron.briscoe@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <526ef043e8see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>, Russell
> > > Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid> wrote:

> > > [Snip.]

> > > > Documents that are given to customers are also all
> > > > Easiwriter documents, and so are all my order
> > > > forms. Some admin documents are done in Draw.

> > > Are these printouts of EasiWriter documents

> > Of course they are printouts.

> > When you go into a hotel you hbd over a paper voucher,
> > not show something on a computer screen.

> Of course the 'modern' way to do it - on the hotel chain
> websites and plane tickets - is to email a pdf file to a
> customer and tell them to print it themselves and take
> the printout with them.

It is called passing the cost on to the customer.

> Showing a barcode on the screen of a mobile phone has
> been a standard for rail tickets since 2008. My local
> operator - Chiltern Railways - even has several apps for
> that.

Again passing the cost onto the customer - and assumes that
they have a mobile phone that can display the graphics.

OK for simple journeys, not so good for a tickets from
Cologne to Zagreb which has to specify three border crossing
points and some intermediate routing too.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4246

From"David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk>
Date2012-03-13 07:12 +0000
Message-ID<9s8abdFlmjU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#4234
On 12-Mar-2012, Russell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
wrote:

> In article <526f5ba900tim@invalid.org.uk>, Tim Hill
> <tim@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Of course the 'modern' way to do it - on the hotel chain
> > websites and plane tickets - is to email a pdf file to a
> > customer and tell them to print it themselves and take
> > the printout with them.
>
> It is called passing the cost on to the customer.

Don't be silly; the cost is *always* passed on to the customer. Who else do
you think is going to pay? If a paper bill/voucher etc. is always sent then
the costs are included in companies' overheads so the bills will be slightly
higher. You just don't see it directly.

Many utility companies now charge extra for paper bills, usually around 1.50
to 2 GBP per bill, which should give you some idea of the cost (remember
there's postage too). I can download and print a PDF a LOT cheaper than
that.

-- 
David Holden  -  APDL  -  <http://www.apdl.co.uk>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4273

FromRick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2012-03-14 05:15 +0100
Message-ID<almarsoft.4416801830063089826@news.orange.fr>
In reply to#4246
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:12:45 GMT, "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> 
wrote:

> Many utility companies now charge extra for paper bills, usually 
around 1.50
> to 2 GBP per bill, which should give you some idea of the cost

No.
It should give you an idea of how stupid people are. An electronic 
bill should be *cheaper*, not a paper bill being more *expensive*.



The height of moronic behaviour, though, must go to Orange Mobile 
(France). I refuse to accept an electronic bill from them since they 
wanted a proper headed paper bill (and not a printout) for proof of 
address. When I renewed my contract, I took along their last 
statement. ;-)
Anyway, they're pushing hard to get me to go to electronic...by 
writing a short grovel notice in really big text on an entirely 
separate piece of paper. Yay, there's intelligence for ya! Surely 
that could have been fit onto the bill itself someplace?


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4275

From"David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk>
Date2012-03-14 08:26 +0000
Message-ID<9sb32kFnu5U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#4273
On 14-Mar-2012, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:12:45 GMT, "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Many utility companies now charge extra for paper bills, usually
> around 1.50 to 2 GBP per bill, which should give you some idea of
> the cost
>
> No.
> It should give you an idea of how stupid people are. An electronic
> bill should be *cheaper*, not a paper bill being more *expensive*.

And the difference is?

If item A is dearer than item B then surely item B is cheaper than item A,
unless there's some sort of quantum maths involved.

-- 
David Holden  -  APDL  -  <http://www.apdl.co.uk>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4279

FromChris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk>
Date2012-03-14 09:49 +0000
Message-ID<ant140947868pErr@client.cjemicros.co.uk>
In reply to#4275
In article <9sb32kFnu5U1@mid.individual.net>, David Holden
<URL:mailto:SpamBin@apdl.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> On 14-Mar-2012, Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:12:45 GMT, "David Holden" <SpamBin@apdl.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Many utility companies now charge extra for paper bills, usually
> > around 1.50 to 2 GBP per bill, which should give you some idea of
> > the cost
> >
> > No.
> > It should give you an idea of how stupid people are. An electronic
> > bill should be *cheaper*, not a paper bill being more *expensive*.
> 
> And the difference is?
> 
> If item A is dearer than item B then surely item B is cheaper than item A,
> unless there's some sort of quantum maths involved.

It's all in the perception.
"Special Offer", "Sale" even "Half Price" have no real meaning without
knowing what you are comparing it to.

Most humans are dumb! How often do you here "well they were on buy one get
one free"

Chris Evans

-- 
CJE Micro's / 4D                'RISC OS Specialists'
Telephone: 01903 523222             Fax: 01903 523679
chris@cjemicros.co.uk     http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/
78 Brighton Road, Worthing, West Sussex,     BN11 2EN
The most beautiful thing anyone can wear, is a smile!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4283

FromRussell Hafter News <see.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
Date2012-03-14 11:48 +0000
Message-ID<52704d9b2bsee.sig@walkingingermany.invalid>
In reply to#4279
In article <ant140947868pErr@client.cjemicros.co.uk>, Chris
Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> wrote:

> It's all in the perception. "Special Offer", "Sale" even
> "Half Price" have no real meaning without knowing what
> you are comparing it to.

Certain firms are notorious for changing their sale terms
from '50% Off' to 'Half Price'.

-- 
Russell
http://www.russell-hafter-holidays.co.uk
Russell Hafter Holidays         E-mail to enquiries at our domain
Need a hotel? <http://www.hrs.com/?client=en__blue&customerId=416873103>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4346

FromRick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2012-03-17 20:54 +0100
Message-ID<almarsoft.6828310829386724165@news.orange.fr>
In reply to#4279
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:49:47 +0000, Chris Evans 
<chris@cjemicros.co.uk> wrote:

> Most humans are dumb! How often do you here "well they were on buy 
one get
> one free"

That's dumb? I see paying for one and walking away with two...


Dumb are people buying multipacks. Here in France it's the law to 
indicate prices for something by kilo/litre/unit (as appropriate). 
I've lost count of the number of times buying individual packs has 
worked out cheaper - especially with chocolate, of which I am very 
fond. :-)


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4349

FromStuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk>
Date2012-03-17 21:14 +0000
Message-ID<52720ce155Spambin@argonet.co.uk>
In reply to#4346
In article <almarsoft.6828310829386724165@news.orange.fr>,
   Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Dumb are people buying multipacks. Here in France it's the law to 
> indicate prices for something by kilo/litre/unit (as appropriate). 
> I've lost count of the number of times buying individual packs has 
> worked out cheaper - especially with chocolate, of which I am very 
> fond. :-)

Here too in most supermarkets, on the price label on the shelf, you will
see price per kilo/litre/unit, all it requires is to use eyes and engage
brain.

-- 
Stuart Winsor

Only plain text for emails
http://www.asciiribbon.org


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4352

FromDev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid>
Date2012-03-17 22:54 +0000
Message-ID<527216155dspam-addy@no.spam.invalid>
In reply to#4349
In article <52720ce155Spambin@argonet.co.uk>, Stuart
<Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <almarsoft.6828310829386724165@news.orange.fr>, Rick
>    Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Dumb are people buying multipacks. Here in France it's the law to
> > indicate prices for something by kilo/litre/unit (as appropriate).
> > I've lost count of the number of times buying individual packs has
> > worked out cheaper - especially with chocolate, of which I am very
> > fond. :-)

> Here too in most supermarkets, on the price label on the shelf, you
> will see price per kilo/litre/unit, all it requires is to use eyes
> and engage brain.

You certainly do need to engage your brains as (a) similar items (or
same item, different weight packs) might well each be labelled as x
pence per [weight] but the [weight] could be 100gm or 1 kg or 25 gm (or
seemingly any random amount), and (b) the pence per weight doesn't
always have much relation to the actual price.

And then there's the Tesco scam which gives the price for the same item
in other shops, showing what good value Tesco is, conveniently not
mentioning that the slightly cheaper Tesco pack is 200 gm whilst the
slightly more expensive Aldi pack is 250 gm.

-- 
Dev

Om Namah Shivaya | Om Avya-yaya namaha

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4357

FromRick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 00:45 +0100
Message-ID<almarsoft.3862963600053030936@news.orange.fr>
In reply to#4352
On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 22:54:41 +0000 (GMT), Dev 
<spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> You certainly do need to engage your brains as (a) similar items (or
> same item, different weight packs) might well each be labelled as x
> pence per [weight] but the [weight] could be 100gm or 1 kg or 25 gm 
(or
> seemingly any random amount), and (b) the pence per weight doesn't
> always have much relation to the actual price.

There's no law requiring standard weights?

When I said in France the price was per kilo/litre/unit, I didn't 
mean "arbitrary weight/arbitrary volume/arbitrary object", I meant 
*exactly* what I said. Per litre (100cl), per kilo (1000g) or per 
unit (where the other two are illogical, such as "per toilet roll"). 
This permits easy comparison of "is this product a better price than 
the other"?

This works, of course, purely on price.

There are other factors. A ready meal by a company called "Marie" is 
quite proud of the fact that they use exactly what the pack implies. 
But it is twice the price of a store-brand equivalent which has a 
much longer list of ingredients containing such wonders as lecithin, 
potato starch, reformed soya pieces, acidity regulators, 
preservatives, etc etc.

In one of my more enlightened moments, I bought both and ate them one 
after the other. The difference was akin to Grandma's beef stew and 
dumplings... vs Pot Noodle...


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4366

FromDev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid>
Date2012-03-18 09:25 +0000
Message-ID<52724fd1easpam-addy@no.spam.invalid>
In reply to#4357
In article <almarsoft.3862963600053030936@news.orange.fr>,
   Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 22:54:41 +0000 (GMT), Dev 
> <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> wrote:

> > You certainly do need to engage your brains as (a) similar items (or
> > same item, different weight packs) might well each be labelled as x
> > pence per [weight] but the [weight] could be 100gm or 1 kg or 25 gm 
> (or
> > seemingly any random amount), and (b) the pence per weight doesn't
> > always have much relation to the actual price.

> There's no law requiring standard weights?

> When I said in France the price was per kilo/litre/unit, I didn't 
> mean "arbitrary weight/arbitrary volume/arbitrary object", I meant 
> *exactly* what I said. Per litre (100cl), per kilo (1000g) or per 
> unit (where the other two are illogical, such as "per toilet roll"). 
> This permits easy comparison of "is this product a better price than 
> the other"?

Oh, yes. Say something like biscuits, purely for example, something
which per unit weighs x gms for one brand and y gms for the other. Both
come in packs of 9 (or other odd number) but one might be given as
pence per 100 gm, but the other as pence per biscuit.

More common is the same stuff in different weight packages where one is
pence per kilogram and the otherpence per 100 gm (or 50 gm).

> This works, of course, purely on price.

> There are other factors. A ready meal by a company called "Marie" is 
> quite proud of the fact that they use exactly what the pack implies. 
> But it is twice the price of a store-brand equivalent which has a 
> much longer list of ingredients containing such wonders as lecithin, 
> potato starch, reformed soya pieces, acidity regulators, 
> preservatives, etc etc.

> In one of my more enlightened moments, I bought both and ate them one 
> after the other. The difference was akin to Grandma's beef stew and 
> dumplings... vs Pot Noodle...

Depends on yer grannie...  ;-)

-- 
Dev

Om Namah Shivaya | Om Vishveshwa-raya namaha

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4380

FromStuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 15:36 +0000
Message-ID<527271d311Spambin@argonet.co.uk>
In reply to#4357
In article <almarsoft.3862963600053030936@news.orange.fr>,
   Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> There are other factors. A ready meal by a company called "Marie" is 
> quite proud of the fact that they use exactly what the pack implies. 
> But it is twice the price of a store-brand equivalent which has a 
> much longer list of ingredients containing such wonders as lecithin, 
> potato starch, reformed soya pieces, acidity regulators, 
> preservatives, etc etc.

> In one of my more enlightened moments, I bought both and ate them one 
> after the other. The difference was akin to Grandma's beef stew and 
> dumplings... vs Pot Noodle...

Ah yes.

I was making myself a sandwich for my supper one evening and I had a fancy
for lemon curd. Now, we hadn't got any and I hadn't had any for years, so
I put it on the shopping list for my wife to get some. She does most of
her shopping in Sainsbury's and came home with some Sainsbury's own, it
was the most disgusting stuff ever. 

A few days later I was in Waitrose and spotted some Tiptree brand Lemon
curd, obviously more expensive than the Sainsbury's, but I bought some, it
was beautiful and tasted like what I had been imagining.

Read down the ingredients on the Tiptree jar and it looked like a recipe
you might find in Mrs Beaton, all good honest simple ingredients. Look at
the ingredients on the Sainsbury's jar and it put me in mind of the lab
sheets we used to get handed in chemistry lessons at school!

-- 
Stuart Winsor

Only plain text for emails
http://www.asciiribbon.org


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4381

From"John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 16:52 +0100
Message-ID<5272734ad1UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>
In reply to#4380
In article <527271d311Spambin@argonet.co.uk>,
   Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

> Read down the ingredients on the Tiptree jar and it looked like a recipe
> you might find in Mrs Beaton, all good honest simple ingredients. Look at
> the ingredients on the Sainsbury's jar and it put me in mind of the lab
> sheets we used to get handed in chemistry lessons at school!

And does RISC OS do what it says on the tin?

I'm keen to discuss recipes, ingredients etcetera - even dieting, my
current pre-occupation for which I rely on the functionality of RISC OS  -
but what will the great Druck in the sky think?

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4382 — Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)

FromPeter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 16:40 +0000
SubjectRe: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)
Message-ID<71af777252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>
In reply to#4381
On 18 Mar 2012  "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <527271d311Spambin@argonet.co.uk>,
>    Stuart <Spambin@argonet.co.uk> wrote:

>> Read down the ingredients on the Tiptree jar and it looked like a recipe
>> you might find in Mrs Beaton, all good honest simple ingredients. Look at
>> the ingredients on the Sainsbury's jar and it put me in mind of the lab
>> sheets we used to get handed in chemistry lessons at school!

> And does RISC OS do what it says on the tin?

> I'm keen to discuss recipes, ingredients etcetera - even dieting, my
> current pre-occupation for which I rely on the functionality of RISC OS  -
> but what will the great Druck in the sky think?

I think marriage has mellowed him a bit. He has even been known to 
post off-topic himself. How are the mighty fallen :-)

With best wishes,

Peter.

-- 
Peter   \  /      zfc Hf     \     Prestbury, Cheltenham,  Glos. GL52
and      \/ __            __  \                              England.
family   / /  \ | | |\ | /  _  \      http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
        /  \__/ \_/ | \| \__/   \______________ pnyoung@ormail.co.uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4385 — Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)

From"John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 17:56 +0100
SubjectRe: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)
Message-ID<5272791df8UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk>
In reply to#4382
In article <71af777252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>,
   Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote:

> I think marriage has mellowed him a bit. He has even been known to 
> post off-topic himself. How are the mighty fallen :-)

Please quote message IDs to use for the defence!

John

-- 
John Williams, Brittany, Northern France - no attachments to these addresses!
Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject!
Who is John Williams? http://petit.four.free.fr/picindex/author/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4398 — Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)

FromPeter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk>
Date2012-03-18 20:12 +0000
SubjectRe: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)
Message-ID<741a8b7252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>
In reply to#4385
On 18 Mar 2012  "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> In article <71af777252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>,
>    Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote:

>> I think marriage has mellowed him a bit. He has even been known to
>> post off-topic himself. How are the mighty fallen :-)

> Please quote message IDs to use for the defence!

Sorry, long since expired, but maybe I should have kept it!

With best wishes,

Peter.

-- 
Peter   \  /      zfc Hf     \     Prestbury, Cheltenham,  Glos. GL52
and      \/ __            __  \                              England.
family   / /  \ | | |\ | /  _  \      http://pnyoung.orpheusweb.co.uk
        /  \__/ \_/ | \| \__/   \______________ pnyoung@ormail.co.uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4400 — Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)

FromJess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com>
Date2012-03-18 21:05 +0000
SubjectRe: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)
Message-ID<62e78f7252.jess@itworkshop.invalid>
In reply to#4398
In message <741a8b7252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>
          Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote:

> On 18 Mar 2012  "John Williams (News)" <UCEbin@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

>> In article <71af777252.pnyoung@pnyoung.ormail.co.uk>,
>>    Peter Young <pnyoung@ormail.co.uk> wrote:

>>> I think marriage has mellowed him a bit. He has even been known to
>>> post off-topic himself. How are the mighty fallen :-)

>> Please quote message IDs to use for the defence!

> Sorry, long since expired, but maybe I should have kept it!

Wasn't about a sports car?

-- 
Jess                   Iyonix

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4410 — Re: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)

FromBrian Jordan <brian.jordan9@btinternet.com>
Date2012-03-18 22:40 +0000
SubjectRe: The good, the bad and the RO 5.18! (OT)
Message-ID<5272989ac4brian.jordan9@btinternet.com>
In reply to#4400
In article <62e78f7252.jess@itworkshop.invalid>,
   Jess <phantasm_39@hotmail.com> wrote:

[Snip]

> Wasn't about a sports car?

Look up "Manfred von Druck" AND "Fokker Triplane" in this ng.

-- 
______________________________________________________________________

Brian Jordan
From somewhere in North Hampshire. England. UK.
______________________________________________________________________

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4425

FromChris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk>
Date2012-03-19 11:07 +0000
Message-ID<ant191137fc4pErr@client.cjemicros.co.uk>
In reply to#4346
In article <almarsoft.6828310829386724165@news.orange.fr>, Rick Murray
<URL:mailto:heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:49:47 +0000, Chris Evans 
> <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Most humans are dumb! How often do you here "well they were on buy 
> one get
> > one free"
> 
> That's dumb? I see paying for one and walking away with two...

Yes but if the price had been jacked up....

It is the price paid for what you get that is key.
 
> Dumb are people buying multipacks. Here in France it's the law to 
> indicate prices for something by kilo/litre/unit (as appropriate). 
> I've lost count of the number of times buying individual packs has 
> worked out cheaper - especially with chocolate, of which I am very 
> fond. :-)
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Rick.
> 


Chris Evans

-- 
CJE Micro's / 4D                'RISC OS Specialists'
Telephone: 01903 523222             Fax: 01903 523679
chris@cjemicros.co.uk     http://www.cjemicros.co.uk/
78 Brighton Road, Worthing, West Sussex,     BN11 2EN
The most beautiful thing anyone can wear, is a smile!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#4436

FromRick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk>
Date2012-03-19 14:39 +0100
Message-ID<almarsoft.46817348622798593@news.orange.fr>
In reply to#4425
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:07:37 +0000, Chris Evans 
<chris@cjemicros.co.uk> wrote:

>> That's dumb? I see paying for one and walking away with two...
> Yes but if the price had been jacked up....
> It is the price paid for what you get that is key.

Fair point.

Over here, it is regulated by law that the price of something on 
offer must be not more than the price it was on general sale for X 
(six weeks? Something like that) exactly to stop this sort of 
practice.


They're also starting to come down on those charging extra for a two 
year guarantee. It's some EU directive that stuff should come with 
such by standard...


Best wishes,

Rick.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 5 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 16  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.misc


csiph-web