Indeed not, but it is only a certain type of poster that chooses to do it, the type of poster who believes everything they say is right, and everyone else who disagrees is wrong.

I know a few like that too

Wow, I'd love to see your scientific proof that those who chose to have themselves in their avatar are always right.

I have mine because I presented Danny Houghton with an award at the POTY and I was rather proud I was chosen to do so, not because I think I'm right on an insignificant RL Fans forum. HTH

It's not that simple. The main factor is increased competition. Their decision-making was no doubt (especially in the early days of internet trading) not as good as others. But, even with strong management companies go under - look at the car industry - oversupply.

I have seen some bizarre theories on this forum over the years, but to suggest that someone's avatar / picture somehow impacts on their credibility as a poster takes it to the extreme.

Unless, of course, the avatar is a Hull KR badge. In which case the poster can rightly be dismissed as a sub-moronic idiot.

We probably won't see Standee for the rest of the afternoon now, as per usual when he doesn't like something he disappears.

That's what politicians do - talk rather than do. The global financial crisis didn't affect us, but Labour's mismanagement did for us. However, the Eurozone crisis overwhelms anything our government do. Our government is on the right-track, even though Michael Heseltine has prepared a report for them saying they are not.

In this instance, I think Comet have failed to recognise the direction that retail is going.
They are not alone in that ... and there will will be more to come.

What I would like the government to do is to stop telling us that austerity is the key to our salvation.
Why do I say that? Because it isn't and he has been told over and over again, and the stats are bearing it out, that too much austerity, too soon, will impact GDP and impact growth. He must know that to be the case but still he persists, why? because he's doing it for reasons of dogma rather than economics, that is to say he is dismantling the welfare state becuase he doen't like it.
Osborne has already stopped telling us that the private sector would soak up the human resource that was being released by public bodies ... Why has he stopped saying that? Because it simply isn't doing so, that's why, he had put forward the utterly silly idea that the public sector was hoarding resource that the private sector needed and the truth is now out so he's dropped that line. I don't believe he ever thought it was true anyway.

Is Comet's failure the fault of the government?
No ... but the drop in GDP and disposable income must have accelerated it.

In the case of large companies folding, what would I like the government to do?
Intervene, that's what ... by which I obviously don't mean prop up a dead retaler but get in there with expert assistance to retrain, advise, assist and encourage those becoming unemployed, offer tax breaks for new business start-ups in the right places, move government departments to where the labour is cheaper and where unemployment is high.
They won't do that though, what they will do is lump these obviously lazy, feckless individuals into the bracket of common people who don't deserve any better. Apart from that? ... they'll let the "Big Society" sort it out, which means do absolutely nothing except moan about how is being paid out in benefits.

For you to have a go at HWS is hugely unfair, unless you want her to write the next tory manifesto.

What would YOU want the government to do?

Oh ... and if you decide to respond to this post, please do me the courtesy of actually reading it before replying to something that's not in it.

Me and a few other people, eh? Couldn't you have thought of something even a teensy weensy bit more pathetic?



As opposed to you. Of course. Who continues to spout factually incorrect rubbish about Labour having spent the country into the financial crisis, because it suits you to hang on to such a myth just as much as religious people hang on to their beliefs, and which attitude you freely rubbish.



This really is the biggest amount of drivel you've posted yet – and that's saying something.



What link have I posted here, pray tell? And for goodness sake – the idea that I only post what someone else has said first is taking these fantastical assertions to a new extreme. You might agree with not a single thing I post (and that's absolutely fine), but that suggestion is just plain barking.



Ah. So 15 years ago equals now? Yes? Wow. That's staggeringly recent and up-to-date knowledge.



Go and read your posts on this thread alone back to yourself.

Your attitude – or at least the one revealed here – is to tell people off for daring to comment negatively. You've done it before too.



"Bully?" From you? Oh that's ripe, Standee, that's really ripe. Your hectoring, nasty, abusive posts to various people are okay, eh? No, Standee's posts are all of the highest originality and intellectual thinking – and he's never abusive to people.

If you think I "bully", then you really need to toughen that very thin hide of yours – particularly given the amount that you dish out to others.

Nicely put.