Kleenex Velvet Tissues. Absolute rubbish

0scar123

We have just purchased a quantity of Kleenex Velvet toilet rolls. They are certainly not good value. The rolls have excessive amounts of adhesive on them, so that you have to discard at least the first 4 sheets, and the quality of the paper is awful.
Why do these companies think that they can foist this rubbish on the public?
Anyone else bought these and felt cheated?
I have heard that the rolls are now made under licence, which would probably explain things.

Dave_C_2

Cue John Wayne toilet paper joke ...

kermitfrog

0scar123 wrote: »

...Anyone else bought these and felt cheated?

I certainly felt something, but then I'm rather sensitive.

thatguy1

Annoys me the fact that people think Kleenex & Velvet are the same company, they are not!

Velvet is owned & manufactured by SCA.
Kleenex is owned & manufactured by Kimberly Clark.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Well, actually, they were originally sold by Kleenex under the name Kleenex Velvet; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qu-R3OvpGJo

When there was a business jig around in the mid nineties, they traded with SCA and they got the right to use the name Kleenex Velvet. But they, fairly reasonably, dropped the Kleenex bit pretty sharpish.


So there was 15 years of it being Kleenex Velvet first. And the number of people that still refer to Opal Fruits or Marathons shows how long brand names stick in the head.

George_Michael

thatguy1 wrote: »

Annoys me the fact that people think Kleenex & Velvet are the same company, they are not!

It's almost as bad as people who refer to Henry Hoovers when they should state Henry vacuum cleaners.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=43347478&postcount=1

Henry are made by Numatic Ltd and Hoover are an entirely separate company.

Sheldon_Cooper

George_Michael wrote: »

It's almost as bad as people who refer to Henry Hoovers when they should state Henry vacuum cleaners.

Not really. The word "hoover" has long been accepted as a synonym for "vacuum cleaner". Only the most anal pedant now objects to that usage.

George_Michael

But my point was even though people refer to most vacuums as "hoovers" it is still incorrect as Hoover is a specific brand name.

As it was thatguy1 who gets annoyed with people using incorrect company names, I just though I would point out that he is just as guilty of this as many other people.

oldagetraveller

George_Michael wrote: »

But my point was even though people refer to most vacuums as "hoovers" it is still incorrect as Hoover is a specific brand name.

As it was thatguy1 who gets annoyed with people using incorrect company names, I just though I would point out that he is just as guilty of this as many other people.

Ah, but do you say "Biro" instead of ballpoint pen?:)
Kleenex Velvet, no - bring back the "good old days" of newspaper rectangles impaled on a nail in the outside bog!

paddyrg

0scar123 wrote: »

We have just purchased a quantity of Kleenex Velvet toilet rolls. They are certainly not good value....the quality of the paper is awful.

For all the good it does, you may as well wipe your 4rse with it.

George_Michael

oldagetraveller wrote: »

bring back the "good old days" of newspaper rectangles impaled on a nail in the outside bog!

What are you insuating about me whan you refer to getting impaled in the outside bog?
I've had people up in court for less.