Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/16/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    I almost haven't bought any shoes for ages. What I should say is, I haven't bought any to keep/wear recently. These proved irresistible: Can't see a time or place where I could or would wear them, but as I said, irresistible. Missed these from Zara in my size: I also bought some flat stretch knee boots from Zara to try at home. The shafts were loose, despite being a stretch material.... Not sure why I keep torturing myself even trying to find some boots with shafts something close to the size of my thin legs. The eternal optimist may be?
  2. 1 point
    I entirely agree about the hyperbole that seems to attach to any press mention of 'high' heels. Although the Daily Mail, for example, gives fair coverage of heel-related fashion and stories, it does seem incapable of mentioning heels without attaching trite and unnecessary qualifiers. Enough to send my blood pressure 'sky-high'!
  3. 1 point
    The lovely, Helen Mirren. At 73 ......
  4. 1 point
    A regular high heel wearer .... Celine Dion Always a special pleasure to see a mature lady wearing high heels.
  5. 1 point
    I'd wear these two.
  6. 1 point
    Interesting, Freddy, and certainly illustrating the growing advantages of online shopping. I find myself buying 'over the counter' (of almost anything apart from food) quite rarely these days as the speed, convenience and greater certainty of buying online wins hands-down, quite aside from any potential 'return' requirement. The halfway-house is ordering (and maybe paying) online for collection at a local shop, with the likely advantages of speed, not missing a courier and minimising delivery charges. The sealant I wanted on Monday from Screwfix was in stock locally when I checked late on Sunday evening - but only one tube. So, a few minutes online secured it before someone else bought it and I had no wasted journey.
  7. 1 point
    If I thought it would achieve anything, I might be tempted. But realistically, the best option is Twitter (Zara must have an account) and I would need to open or reopen an account to do that, when I really don't want to waste any more time on them. I've put the unpleasant experience behind me, and any possibility I might buy from them again. And there we have a good reason to avoid in-store purchases, and returns. A protracted returns procedure the very reason I gave up buying from House of Fraser, which was just as effective as Zara seems to be during the sale period. As a reminder, I had returned some shoes to HoF Oxford Street bought online. I saved them the return carriage cost by making a personal delivery. Showing the delivery note with all my details, wasn't enough for the supervisor to put the money back in my account, I had to present the c/c too. Not usually required these days, but it was part of their procedure. Not only did I have to present my card, but I also had to 'sign in' the receipt. The supervisor didn't like my signature compared to the signature on the card. A heavy verbal debate ensued. My stand was that I was returning goods, not taking them. Would a crook return products (I was entitled to return as the delivery note confirmed). If I returned the goods by post, HoF would have pay carriage, and neither card nor signature would accompany the goods being returned. Worse still, during that time I could sign up for 'instant' store credit, and walk out with £200+ worth of goods based on providing a name and address. The supervisor conceded this too. I got a credit on my card. A day later I got a phone call from the store General Manager, who was apologetic and agreed all my points regarding the return procedure. But it wouldn't be changing. Well, how did that work out for the group of stores? A painless returns policy 'made' Marks and Spencer. That policy took hundreds and hundreds of pounds off me over the years. Many retailers realised it gave customers comfort when buying, so have copied their procedure. John Lewis and Screwfix being obvious nominees for the 'copycat' awards. Both offer pain free returns, both are very busy businesses. That isn't their only attraction of course, but pain free returns mean customers will take products away to try (JL) or buy more than they need (SF) knowing surplus can be easily returned. Not that everything bought with a view to returning if necessary, gets returned. A side benefit of the 'easy returns' is that the returns window is sometimes missed. Been there, done that. New Look started to make life difficult for buyers, when they decided any discounted stock could not be returned. Anything you bought in a sale, had to be kept - unless bought online of course. Idiotic? Same was true of Select. No in-store purchases at all could be refunded, only store credit was offered instead, unless you bought online!! Like New Look, Select is another retail group shrinking fast with high street shops just disappearing. Of course Select quality was never great anyway. A pair of their shoes I wore for the first time, all but fell to pieces. (Written up elsewhere.) I like to support the high street, and loathe the Amazon business model, I don't see why a high street should offer a lower service than one I get online. Just doesn't add up to me. But 30 minutes queuing for returns to be processed - not acceptable Zara.
  8. 1 point
    ... and which reminds me of a Plod encounter too: Some 35 years ago, I was travelling into deepest Lincolnshire on an unfamiliar road and had just come over the brow of a hill with a long slope down to the junction where I needed to turn right. A police car was parked across the major road at the junction and a copper with his back to me was bending down, speaking to its driver. There was obviously some problem or road closure so I gently coasted down the hill until I almost reached the copper, who only then turned round and walked the few paces to my open driver's window. Despite the fact that there were no signs out, he had not given any prior signal and I had pulled-up quite correctly, he enquired why I had failed to stop earlier 'as directed'. I pointed out to him, politely, that waving his arse in my general direction did not constitute any road traffic instruction known to the Highway Code. After a penetrating stare, he told me that there had been an accident in the major road ahead but I was OK to take the right turn I wanted. I proceeded accordingly and he resumed his arse waving.
  9. 1 point
    I have many bad stories of driving in the late sixties and early seventies, one comes to mind chasing a rover down the outside lane of the M3 flashing it out of the way in my souped up mk11 Cortina, then saw a sign in the rear window Thames valley high speed training car, opps quick change to the inside lane and drive home carefully, but I was flashing it out of the way at over 100mph.
  10. 1 point
    A truly sexist race then? I vaguely remember this all coming about, the high heel races, walks for charity - in heels, and what could have been more. What I can't quite remember was the name of the "banner" principle that the charity races were done under. I'm thinking "Pink" something, but that doesn't ring true. What I do (vaguely) remember, was the American version of these charitable enterprises, supported (in principle) those with or who had suffered, breast cancer. The same "banner" title in the UK, was and maybe still is, associated with women who had been abused by men. While this is still a very laudable cause, it's not one many people are happy to be aware of. Put another way, it's a bit of a 'hard sell' as charitable causes go (it seems to me). I wouldn't be surprised to find it's the reason why high-heeled races in the UK almost certainly never happened. I know sponsored walks did, but I don't recall (if they were mentioned) the charity/charities involved. But women only high heeled races, for prizes? In another era, that's the sort of thing Paul Raymond or Hugh Hefner would have dreamt up.
  11. 1 point
    Not seen one, or heard of one locally (meaning in the UK). I think they might have become less 'popular' generally, (less interesting) when men started to compete, and win. I have here some high-top plimsoll/trainers with a 4" heel. I would take on anyone while wearing those and potentially win because they are like wearing trainers. I don't know whether they would be outlawed in these runs, but wearing them would provide no handicap to my running speed at all. Six inch heels with a 1" or 2" platform, might as well tie my ankles together for all the speed I'd manage. I could barely walk in them, much less run.


×