FastFreddy2

Almost impossible, though some manage with practice. Better example ..... (go to 2 mins into vid for walking bit) Expert review ..... Pure, (intentional) voyeuristic entertainment.

Daughter of a Kosovo refugee family, who can sing. Her singing career faltered (label difficulties) and she dated a fairly well-known designers son. Still makes the occasional singing appearance, but is now better known as a judge on a talent show (or two). Being treated as a full-bodied model/fashonista. Growing into being famous, because she is well known (in some circles). The picture above with her in the Zanotti heels and white shirt, was when she might have been doing some work with Karl Lagerfeld.

Latex ..... (512k limit? I don't think so, 300k more like ....) Black latex dress under coat ... And finally .....

Leather .....

More heels (baby blue shoes are 130mm Hot Chick).

More likely PVC. Rita in heels ....

As you might guess, I'm more the Primarni end of the market ...... I buy 2 pairs from ADSA for £10, or two pairs from Sainsbury for £12, unless I buy at one of their 25% off clothing weekends. Merino would be nice, but way too warm for all year use. It's VERY seldom too warm for me to be wearing leggings underneath trousers, but it has been known. Even while digging in an allotment in the height of summer, I was wearing leggings, but then mostly to avoid insect bites (ticks). Hopefully it worked, as I have an unusually high reluctance to get Lymes. Thinking about it, I don't wear leggings while cycling in summer. I have some very nice 'scuba' leggings for cooler weather though. They are REALLY nice to wear. I thinks she has a taste for fetish. I'm not a fan. She seems to be popular in the celebrity circle, but I've no idea why? Rumour had it she was a singer, but no songs?

Leggings underneath the PVC - I'm never without them. Unless it's 30' outside, then maybe .... And while I'm here .... Rita Ora (who?) Not one image of her from the side, to show her heels. Typical of the DM picture editor, who is very obviously a breast man, not a leg man ....

Desperate to get out in some heels, I went to one of my usual haunts last night, basically, to have a cup of coffee and what I had expected to be a piece of banoffee cheese cake. Arriving at 7pm (after busy day with stone cutter) there was barely time for refreshment, but a voucher held by my walking companion needed using. (Last months was not used, wasted, and we didn't want a repeat performance.) Arriving at the donor store, there were tears when we discovered the reason for the trip (banoffee cheesecake) which is apparently part of he 'Winter' menu, is no longer available due to implementation of the current 'Summer' menu. Having just read a slice of this stuff might carry as many calories as 500 (yikes), one might be thinking it was just as well it wasn't available? Well yes, except it was replaced by some chocolate cake that tasted like it had circa 800 calories in it, 90% of which was undoubtedly sugar..... I won't be trying that again. A brief walk around the mall was made, before returning to the car. Needing some cat-specific-milk, it was necessary to visit a couple of supermarkets on the way home. Being sufficiently distant from my home, I kept my heels on. Visit to the first supermarket went off without event, including finding suitable milk for 'tiddles'. The second store, not quite so event-less. It's possibly only half a mile away from a community that generally lives in caravans. Three children of juvenile age were there, entertaining themselves - at 9pm mind you - using a couple of store provided wheelchairs for toys. The two moving around in the chairs would have been around 13-14, the elder (6ft x 15st giant) probably a little older at around 16. The bigger fella was pushing one of the younger boys around the back of the store, and the other little chap in the second chair, was rolling himself behind them. Why 'security' was allowing this, I don't know, but generally members of this community seem to be either revered or feared. Meaning, they do bad things with impunity, including using facilities offered for the handicapped, as toys. While I probably should have made more of an effort to avoid them, it wasn't very long before my footwear got spotted. I've mentioned many times that people sitting are more likely to notice a heel than someone standing, and children (generally shorter than adults) are again, more likely to spot/hear a heel on a man. In this store, I had the dubious benefit of a third aspect, mobility care of wheelchairs. It meant multiple passes were possible, in quick succession. Being aware of the 'wacky racers' wasn't hard, it's not like they were making any attempt at being discreet. Ignoring them worked, but the multiple passes as I walked around the back of the store, meant my shoes were 'discovered'. While I had moved to an alley where wheelchairs and shoppers couldn't pass, (being shown something by a store worker), the wheelchair team rolled past trying to catch a glimpse of my heels. Because of my location, it just wasn't possible as they were hidden by food stands. Eventually we had to move on, and in doing so I had to walk past the 'leader' in a chair with his 6ft pusher stood still behind him. (They'd rolled into a dead-end and I walked past them to leave the aisle through the open end.) The little fella in the chair could see I was approaching, and maybe thought I was going to challenge his need for a wheelchair, and looked at me. I held his eye and didn't stop looking at him until I passed. To be honest, we were both probably waiting for the other to speak, and neither did. He spoke to his 6ft buddy as I passed, and I heard him laugh, but in holding my stare he did not have the chance to look at my shoes (yay). After that, we didn't see them again, and that may have been because we left minutes later, empty-handed for the second time. The third and last store visited, was huge and had the items so far not seen. By this time it was approaching 10pm, though the store was far from empty. It's close to a college, close to some film and TV studio's, and quite a lot of offices. There might also be a swimming pool and sports/health facility quite close by, so plenty of opportunity for late-night shoppers. Oh, and my walking companion has a work colleague that lives a stones throw away from the store. It wouldn't be the first time we've bumped into them with me in a heel. though not in that store .... This visit was uneventful though, but for finding some cat milk ....

She's not getting any slimmer .... But them's nice heels. Look like her St Laurent's "Paris 120". (Sold out. ) For anyone interested.

My thinking on 'multiples', is to have a wearing pair, and what used to pass as a Sunday pair. The idea being, I would always have a pair that looked very smart. Sadly, with styles I really like, four pairs isn't that unusual.... And I tend to keep the wearing pairs in good nick too. The very real danger of me spending a three figure sum on boots (and maybe anything really), is that I may never use them. I have some very nice Gucci boots here I paid reasonable money for, fit like the proverbial .... Been out of the box, maybe twice? And unworn. I have a £350 Milwaukee all singing/all dancing cordless drill bought some 4-6 weeks ago. Charged the batteries and everything has been repacked back into the kit case. I don't have a great record of using 'nice' stuff. Even if it's cheap. I have a pair of New Look wedge shoe boots with a high heel that are really nice on my feet. Cost around £15 in a sale. Never been used, still with price label on the sole.

There might be some 'economies of scale' involved in that banding too? When tooling is used infrequently (maybe once every other year) getting that tooling paid for has to be done by loading the cost of the product accordingly. Buying lasts, even in small batches, must be cheaper than ordering one. Hitting 40 nails, must be more expensive than hitting 30 or 35. Cutting shapes of the leather, must produce more waste with a larger shoe or boot. While incremental cost increases could be more accurately reflected in selling prices, a two-tier banding keeps things simple - for everyone. Mindful these boots are being made in a fairly expensive country, in a largely uncompetitive market, they offer good value for money. I'm aware there are others who make larger sized heeled shoes for men, but compared to some brands these boots are good value. High street names are charging over £200 for very poorly made boots. £500 for hand made, custom sized boots is a very attractive prospect. If you have the money for the investment of course.

Yes, there are limits. A battery with limited use, ought to show it's limited use by overall condition. A well used battery, like a well used car, will show itself as such. The converse is true also, in that a battery exhibiting a 'concours d'elegance' condition, is unlikely to have spent much time on a building site. Regardless to the skills of the photographer (thank you), buying completely blind would in my opinion be a gamble I wouldn't consider for an instant. (An instant is given to mean a fraction of a second.) You might prefer to do otherwise, and you are of course completely free to do that. The advantage of buying a modern technology lithium battery, is that they are very clever. "Abuse" of them is difficult. Charging condition is shown, so early cell failure can be recognised. The brand has a good reputation, and while I don't like their cordless drills, their batteries are really good. They are so well thought of, batteries that may not have spent their life on a building site, fetch quite good money. P.S. Having re-read your reply several times, I have been trying to pinpoint the message in your post that I found so bothersome. I think I have it in that your belief is; since every scratch and mark can't be identified in a photograph (though it can) you think a photograph holds no value as a selling point? And further, since no certificated test is offered prior to the sale, even a good quality photograph has no value when selling a battery anyway? While you will doubtless revel at the challenge, Evilbay are fairly insistent a photograph accompanies the item on sale, to the point (IIRC) they won't allow the listing without one. (I had -self-evidently- used a stock Makita advertising image of the battery type offered in the listing, with the narrative regarding 'actual photograph of item to follow' as previously mentioned.) The photograph rule is one us 25 million sellers adhere to, with good cause. Transaction failures are best avoided. No-one wants them, no-one likes them, and a point you will support; they are a waste of someone's money - as I have already pointed out. It's not just me who thinks a good quality photograph of the item is an important contribution toward a successful sale, the whole global business does.

I do tend to use that term where it's grammatically feasible. Not that I have much in the way of PU shoes, but I do own some. Which, I tend to wear when there's a chance of wet weather. Surplus or poor fitting PU shoes get moved. When I remember to do it.

I would never buy anything "used" without seeing it, or an accurate photograph of it. I would expect anyone that did otherwise, to be courting disappointment. It's fairly important for my own protection, that a buyer agrees they are happy with the condition of the item, before I send it. Otherwise I open myself up to the possibility of a complaint that it "wasn't as described". I only have to miss mentioning a scratch or a mark somewhere on the item, and it becomes 'not as described' and I open the door to a return request and potentially £12's worth of carriage with no sale to show for it. It's a pointless risk. I sent the battery because I'd mentioned in the listing 'pictures to follow' and sent the pictures to the buyer a day before posting. I also sent better quality photo's to his email account and had no response from either attempt at contact. If the buyer is up to no good, thinking they can swap their duff battery for my good one, they are mistaken. There is a unique identifier on the casing, and casings can't be swapped without messing with the Makita security seal. I'm sure everything will be okay, but the signs of this are missing at the moment. I'll know in a day or two, as will you all.

Thank you. I think you have mentioned the company before, but I couldn't remember the name. I've had a quick search, and the "Emma" seems to be a perfect match. And ordered from outside the EU, €100 cheaper.

Which is why I don't understand anyone who could have their shoes made for them, would choose to buy footwear made for the general public. Even I know people who own Louboutins, (2 women and a man) so it's not like they are in any way unique. "Branding" is of course the answer. Showing off your wealth, rather than looking for a better product. Ummmm, have you published the maker of your boots at all? While I don't have £500/£600 lying around for a pair of boots, I'd quite like to aspire to a pair and your man sounds a more attractive prospect than Mr Louboutin.

Two days in, and still no response from the buyer. I've sent it anyway.

I completely understand. If I owned a pair like these, they'd never be off my feet, unless I was bathing or under the shower. Sadly, no longer available, which is just as well at £1100 a pair.

Took me a little while to work it out, but got there in the end.

I think the temptation is translate literally false=faux as the words are so similar. It works better as "imitation". (Or fake, or counterfeit. All three words are found as translations of faux.) It may well have started as a phrase-familiar in (French) Indo-China, somewhere like Vietnam where there is production of plastic (PU) shoes.

These are the men's version of thigh boots. Turns out the 32 inch boots were from Wesco: The MJ ones come with shafts up to 34 inch it would seem? Shame you didn't find more money to buy JC shoes ... I put £5 into the whip-round but had none since.

Perhaps we could have a whip-round, might stir up a bit more cash? J.C. boots do come up on Evilbay from time to time, so they must be made. J.C. also do a 'Custom' service for their shoes, but largest size is 43, and being Italian (often meaning narrow) this quite likely equates to a UK 8½ - so nowhere near close enough for your good self. Puffer has had good service from a fella across the water, Miguel Jones of Los Angeles. As a world-wide traveller, you might find yourself there sometime, and maybe consult him about something you don't already own. He does a 32" high leather 'engineers' boot that might be of interest.

"Related", but slightly off-topic .... I have noticed that some (Evilbay) buyers struggle to read. I have twice sold strobe lighting with "Collection only" clearly mentioned in the listing, with buyers then asking about carriage costs. More recently, I listed a Makita drill with the same thing mentioned, bought by a chap 45 miles away. When asked about collection arrangements, I got no response so I had to refund, losing the benefit of the discount offer on fees I would have enjoyed if the sale went through. A couple of days ago, similar thing. I sold a Makita battery, with no picture of it shown at the time. (Why would someone bid on something they couldn't see?) I've since sent pictures of the battery, with the query; "Do you want?" The battery is 'as described' but I don't want it returned under the "Significantly not as described" clause .... I'd have to carry the cost of each way carriage in that situation (As unlikely as it might be.) I've not heard back from the bidder, and it's been some 25 hours at the time of writing. Sellers can be intellectually challenged too. I once bought a very cheap pair of New Look ankle boots with a decent heel. I had asked the seller if there was a platform on the shoe before bidding, and I was told "no". When they arrived, they had a 'hidden' platform. At the time, return costs would have made sending them back unattractive. Thankfully the rules have changed since and 'mis-sold' items are returned at the sellers cost, though actually getting that money can be a bit fraught (I've read). Not sure what to do about the battery. It's packed and ready to go .... The simple thing to do would be to send it. It couldn't be argued the buyer was unaware of what was going to arrive...

The 'good' thing about buying from a retail outfit, rather than a private seller, is that goods can be returned of course. If the fit or shape doesn't look good, then they go back. Even for me, I will risk circa £8 for both sets of carriage (though delivery is sometimes free), in the event I might end up with something I really enjoy owning. What I am noticing, is that 'brands' are getting fairly expensive compared, to say 8 years ago. A pair of shoes I might have acquired for £30, are now more than doubt that (Pleaser). Shoes I might have seen with sticker prices of £80 (Carvela/KG) are now £150/£160 when they first arrive. Even 'own brands' (Debenhams 'Faith') are now more expensive than not-so-long-ago. This has little to do with recent political events (Brexit) though it could be responsible for any recent push, but this movement toward doubling of prices has been consistent for some 5 or 6 years now. There is also a surge in the use of cheaper materials. 'Faux' suede has been disappointingly popular with retailers, and so with buyers (who either bought the faux suede or bought nothing). Denim has been attempted, with satin now having made an appearance, which could be this year's 'thing'. On the 'up' side for us with smaller feet, cheap Chinese shoes and boots are still available. (I just hope my feet don't get in bigger, or I'm in trouble too. ) I am trying to keep my weight down to help as much as possible. While it wasn't reported (IIRC) ** I eventually resolved my red patent courts desire, with a £20 pair of Jimmy Choo copies. The fit is surprisingly good, so keeping them wasn't a hard choice. In fact they fit better than the Office equivalent. There are some Louboutin 'Hot Chick' courts available, but only up to a slim UK7. No good to me at all. I'd love to walk around the ladies shoe stores in Selfridges, wearing a pair of these though .... I've still got one or two 'irons in the fire' regarding a slim legged OTK boot, but both versions are in 'faux' suede. so I don't know if they would be walking out boots. Faux leather (PU) is much more suitable of course. ** Oh yes it was >> here << As was the desire own a pair of Hot Chick Loubies.... And while I think of it ...... "Close" but no prize .... From Office .... Discovered this morning. I'd say there was a 'nod' to Hot Chick in there, and these have a full 5 inch heel too.