Ebay And Shopping.

[FastFreddy2 282]

12 hours ago, Heels said:

My guess it that it will be 4.5 or a 5 inch heel with a 0.5 inch platform

There is no way that is a 4½ inch heel.  

I'm going to be very surprised if it isn't greater than 5 inches (my money is on 5½), but I'm literally going to be shocked if it's under 5. I flatter myself in being able to size-by-eye most heels, and tend to be a little pessimistic. We'll see soon enough though.  I hope they fit and you like them. A very attractive shoe. 

 

Edited November 28, 2015 by FastFreddy2

[Heels 27]

I see they look longer then 5 inches but from experience but most manufacturers will only go up to a 5 inche heel with out a platform. We see in a few days time. All good fun.

 

[Puffer 258]

Well, my guess is a 5.0 - 5.25" heel and a platform (albeit cunningly concealed) of 0.5 - 0.75" - which will almost certainly be at its full thickness just under the ball of the foot.   And that is on the size 8 or 9 shoes which appear to be the purchase here.   If it is a much smaller size pictured and the heel height is the same, that would explain the illusion of extra height.

Edited November 29, 2015 by Puffer
Clarifying platform size.

[FastFreddy2 282]

 

And here is our "celebrity" mannequin, modelling the River Island shoes for us ...  

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by FastFreddy2
Grammar faux pas. Now remedied....

[Puffer 258]

Hmmm.   Of the two, I think I prefer James; her sandals are certainly the better pair (and Eamonn's are dreadful: fussy and clumpy).

[FastFreddy2 282]

12 hours ago, Puffer said:

Hmmm.   Of the two, I think I prefer James; her sandals are certainly the better pair (and Eamonn's are dreadful: fussy and clumpy).

 

Had to read this 4 times before I understood it ....  

 

My defence is; working late last night, eating later still, (hence my grammatical faux pas on the original comment), followed by a slow morning. (In the 'mental agility' sense. )

I've remedied my grammatical error, with a different word (care of a Thesaurus) that is more appropriate on about 3 levels I can think of, despite my suffering from a dose of the 'morning after the night before', without the dubious benefit of the 'night before'.  

 

Edited November 29, 2015 by FastFreddy2

[Puffer 258]

I don't recall a 'grammatical faux par' (sic) - perhaps I was tired too (and/or under the influence of some prescription drugs for muscle pain - ouch!) but I thank you for correcting it.  But, alas, you now have further need of the 'ethereal Tipp-ex' to amend another (see supra).

And see me in my study after prayers, Master Freddy, for suitable punishment.   (Secreting your Latin Primer down the back of your trousers may be beneficial.)

[Forgive my ignorance - but are either of the girls known to the world (apart from me)?]

[FastFreddy2 282]

13 hours ago, Puffer said:

And see me in my study after prayers, Master Freddy, for suitable punishment.   (Secreting your Latin Primer down the back of your trousers may be beneficial.)

The advice was taken, but I fear it did little good. Some parts do feel to be 'smarting', which they did not before the visit to your study sir. 

 

Quote

[Forgive my ignorance - but are either of the girls known to the world (apart from me)?]

Some years ago, what passed as a singing 'talent contest', the (cough) lady on the right secured a place in a manufactured-for-television singing group. Two years later, she left the poorly received group. Four years later still, she joined the worlds longest running soap, Coronation Street. Or Murder Street, as some might be inclined to refer to it.

Her daughter, the girl on the left with the ineloquent taste in foot attire, recently failed to impress on a similar but updated version of the TV talent show.   

Were you bored enough with life to feel the need to research Ms Marsh, you would find her personal life produces more column/line inches than her singing and acting career combined. She has shown the world two things in this. Firstly, she can not survive long without a man to hold on to. Secondly, she has shown a stunning ability to make poor choices of these men. I'm sure her hair is dyed black, she is almost always seen with heavily kohled eyes and black clothing. One might be tempted to call it her signature style.

She did have a significant personal loss in 2009, I'm sad to report, and she can act. But other than that, complete train wreck.

 

Edited November 30, 2015 by FastFreddy2
Ooops.

[euchrid 21]

1 hour ago, FastFreddy2 said:

Were you bored enough with life to feel the need to research Ms March, you would find her personal life produces more column/line inches than her singing and acting career combined. She has shown the world two things in this. Firstly, she can not survive long without a man to hold on to. Secondly, she has shown a stunning ability to make poor choices of these men. I'm sure her hair is dyed black, she is almost always seen with heavily kohled eyes and black clothing. One might be tempted to call it her signature style.

She did have a significant personal loss in 2009, I'm sad to report, and she can act. But other than that, complete train wreck.

 

All true,. But let's face it,. Given the chance, We'd all drill her until we struck oil !!! 

[Puffer 258]

11 hours ago, FastFreddy2 said:

The advice was taken, but I fear it did little good. Some parts do feel to be 'smarting', which they did not before the visit to your study sir. 

...

 

Were you bored enough with life to feel the need to research Ms March, you would find her personal life produces more column/line inches than her singing and acting career combined. ...

Next time you attend for correction, Freddy, you will leave with glowing testimonials.

I assume you refer to one 'Kym Marsh' (not 'March')?   I had no knowledge of her (carnal or otherwise) before your introduction and am content to preserve that status quo.

[FastFreddy2 282]

11 hours ago, euchrid said:

All true,. But let's face it,. Given the chance, We'd all drill her until we struck oil !!! 

 

Ahemm. "Guilty" m'lud. 

[FastFreddy2 282]

Those shoes from River Island are popular ....

 

More images of the same girl >> here <<

I have no idea why 'she' (Jasmin Walia) appears so often in the newspaper, and to be perfectly frank, I'm not interested enough to find out. Suffice to say, she ticks a lot of 'eye-candy' boxes. Since she obviously enjoys being 'papped', her evening attire seldom fails to be entertaining to a limited sector of male interest. (Limited to those with a workable testosterone level. )

A look at the other pictures linked, might further explain the media interest.

 

[Heels 27]

Jusr a quick up date about the Asos high heels. The platform at the  front is 14mm and the heel is 137mm or 0.75 inch or just under 5.5 inches.  The heel has a very small heel tip under 5mm. I bought a size 9 and the advert said they were a wide fitting.  Just managed to get my right foot in but is very tight, didn't even try my left foot. I would say they are more like a size 8 or maybe a 7. I will be returning this pair of high heels as soon as. The width measurement is about 83 mm. Not going add a photo since photos of this shoe have been already added.

I do own another pair of Asos heels and they fit ok, so I am a little disappointed that this pair don't fit. Returning this pair should be easy as there is a return label in the box and a parcel drop off point in walking distance from where I live. The only thing is I had to drive 5 miles to pick the parcel up. For some reason the Asos web site would not allow me to use my local shop.

[Puffer 258]

10 hours ago, Heels said:

Jusr a quick up date about the Asos high heels. The platform at the  front is 14mm and the heel is 137mm or 0.75 inch or just under 5.5 inches.  ...

Can you tell what the thickest part of the platform (probably under the ball) measures?   I expect it is 20-25mm, giving a true arch of around 115mm (4.5").

[FastFreddy2 282]

19 minutes ago, Puffer said:

Can you tell what the thickest part of the platform (probably under the ball) measures?   I expect it is 20-25mm, giving a true arch of around 115mm (4.5").

My money is on 20mm or a tad under.  But hard to measure without a little effort. I'm hoping for a 120mm rise....

 

How did the Zara shoes go? I'm quite interested .... 

[Heels 27]

The platform under the ball part measures about mm. I never bought the Zara heels, I just liked the look of them.

 

[Puffer 258]

1 hour ago, Heels said:

The platform under the ball part measures about mm. I never bought the Zara heels, I just liked the look of them.

 

??????????

[FastFreddy2 282]

2 hours ago, Heels said:

The platform under the ball part measures about ??mm. I never bought the Zara heels, I just liked the look of them.

 

 

If you are using a phone to reply, the two characters did not register .... 

I liked the look of the Zara shoes too, and missed out on a new size 8 pair at £25 about 6 months ago. I was feeling poor (not unusual) and didn't want to risk buying them expecting them to come up small, which was likely. A Zara size 9 might have fitted me very well.

[Heels 27]

Was using a computer to post on here/ It's 20mm.

Trying to make my mind up now if I want to keep them or return them. Was able to wear them for 30 minutes before I had to take them Very tight fit. I might be able to stretch out them out a bit.I seem to be having more and more with the bunion on my right foot these days.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Heels

[FastFreddy2 282]

On 28/11/2015, 10:16:44, FastFreddy2 said:

There is no way that is a 4½ inch heel.  

I'm going to be very surprised if it isn't greater than 5 inches (my money is on 5½), but I'm literally going to be shocked if it's under 5. I flatter myself in being able to size-by-eye most heels, and tend to be a little pessimistic. We'll see soon enough though.  I hope they fit and you like them. A very attractive shoe. 

 

 

On 05/12/2015, 10:22:23, Heels said:

Jusr a quick up date about the Asos high heels. The platform at the  front is 14mm and the heel is 137mm or 0.75 inch or just under 5.5 inches.  

 

On 05/12/2015, 20:29:15, Puffer said:

Can you tell what the thickest part of the platform (probably under the ball) measures?   I expect it is 20-25mm, giving a true arch of around 115mm (4.5").

 

On 05/12/2015, 20:50:57, FastFreddy2 said:

My money is on 20mm or a tad under.  But hard to measure without a little effort. I'm hoping for a 120mm rise....

 

 

10 hours ago, Heels said:

Was using a computer to post on here/ It's 20mm.

 

 

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssss.  117mm rise is close enough. 

 

I think leather (natural skins) will stretch, and I've read PU will 'give' a little too, but I've not experienced that. Manufactured materials seem to be fairly stable, with or without a hair dryer. 

The bunion doesn't sound like good news. Does anyone else in your family have them?

Edited December 6, 2015 by FastFreddy2

[Heels 27]

I don't think others in my family have bunions. It's just in the last few months my right foot have become  painful in a shorter time. Never used to have much pain in my right foot. It used to be my left foot which was the problem. Depends on what heels I,m heels I'm wearing but seems to be a bigger problem now.

 

[FastFreddy2 282]

At this time (he says touching some wood) I've yet to experience much foot discomfort at all. I expect that to change in the fullness of time as none of us are getting any younger.... It might be 'age' induced joint pain perhaps? Bunions tend to grow and bend the large toe over the smaller ones. Is it discomfort. or are you getting swelling and shape changes too?    

[Puffer 258]

On 12/5/2015, 8:29:15, Puffer said:

Can you tell what the thickest part of the platform (probably under the ball) measures?   I expect it is 20-25mm, giving a true arch of around 115mm (4.5").

 

On 12/5/2015, 8:50:57, FastFreddy2 said:

My money is on 20mm or a tad under.  But hard to measure without a little effort. I'm hoping for a 120mm rise....

 

9 hours ago, FastFreddy2 said:

 

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssss.  117mm rise is close enough. 

... but my 115mm is closer! 

As to bunions, I have slight protrusions on both feet, a little larger on the right.   They give no trouble (apart from making some shoes a little tight for width) and are probably hereditary, although some experts discount that as a cause.   My father did have a very enlarged joint on one of his very large feet; all his shoes had to be stretched.

[Heels 27]

I have large bunion on my left which cause me huge problems on poor fitting  shoes. As in heels not mens shoes. These days it the right foot that causing the problem. Not sure now if its a joint pain or bunion causing the problem. The few minutes I was able to walk in those Asos heels I find them easy to walk in and comfortable but are a very tight fit. . I would now say they are a small 9. Did try to wear them today and failed so I think I will return them.

[FastFreddy2 282]

5 hours ago, Heels said:

 Did try to wear them today and failed so I think I will return them.

 

Seems sensible.  If a bit disappointing, as they do look very attractive. 

Sorry to hear about the condition of your feet. I have two girlfriends who have both suffered enormously through wearing heels for extended periods, like at work. I've mentioned them before ... And I think posted pictures. I doubt I can find the pictures again easily but if I do ... I'll re-post them. It's an indicator or what 'excess' can do I suppose. I sometimes wonder what my feet would be like if I had enjoyed wearing heels for 10 hours a day, five or six days a week.

I asked about family history, because at least one of the two women had family history of bunions, and I've read that even wearing sensible shoes won't necessarily stop bunions forming if they are in the family gene pool. 

 

Links ..... To comment #7 >> here <<   and following comment  >> here <<  

To picture >> here <<

To picture >> here << What appears to be creases in the skin, are actually surgery scars. 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2015 by FastFreddy2
Links added.