2 for 1s- load of rubbish.

shelly

studentphil wrote: »

I do not like them, something about putting stuff in your eyes.

Give them a go you might like them. Hubby was same as you, didn't like the thought of putting things in his eyes but wearing a skid lid with glasses on is neither safe nor comfortable. He only uses lenses when going out for the evening or on his bike and wouldn't be without them for the times he uses them.


It was funny one night tho when we both went out drinking and he was hammered and I had to take the lenses out :rotfl: Dropped them on the floor but didn't realise till we found them in the morning all dried up and crispy.

studentphil

shelly wrote: »

Give them a go you might like them. Hubby was same as you, didn't like the thought of putting things in his eyes but wearing a skid lid with glasses on is neither safe nor comfortable. He only uses lenses when going out for the evening or on his bike and wouldn't be without them for the times he uses them.


It was funny one night tho when we both went out drinking and he was hammered and I had to take the lenses out :rotfl: Dropped them on the floor but didn't realise till we found them in the morning all dried up and crispy.

I might ask about them at my next eye test in the summer.

elisebutt65

Catseyez wrote: »

What subject are you studying?

Tourism Business Management.

I did my dissertation on technology and how it's affecting customer buying behaviour. Really, really interesting and came to a surprising conclusion- lol

Catseyez

elisebutt65 wrote: »

Tourism Business Management.

I did my dissertation on technology and how it's affecting customer buying behaviour. Really, really interesting and came to a surprising conclusion- lol

Which was? Seriously, I'm interested....

studentphil

elisebutt65 wrote: »

Tourism Business Management.

I did my dissertation on technology and how it's affecting customer buying behaviour. Really, really interesting and came to a surprising conclusion- lol

I hope you got your Marx and so forth in that.


But considering your topic is completely different to mine, I am naturally going to need less refrences.

studentphil

Catseyez wrote: »

Which was? Seriously, I'm interested....

Technology can con you into buying any old junk.

Catseyez

studentphil wrote: »

Technology can con you into buying any old junk.

But so can in-store advertising which doesn't rely on technology.

Kilty_2

I presume you bought your two pairs of glasses from Specsavers.

Specsavers suck, and I'll never return there for another pair after having two pairs of frames break whilst cleaning and having the !!!! of a store manager tell me that I should simply take better care of them. Charged me £25 for repair despite me reciting the sale of goods act to her. Paid it since I had no choice (did not have another pair and I'm short sighted) but wrote to head office and got the money back.

Definately not going back to them.

studentphil

Catseyez wrote: »

But so can in-store advertising which doesn't rely on technology.

Of course it depends on technology. The first rule of shop keeping is having neat signs that are done on a computer and not hand done. Therefore, you use technology as an intrument of making things look better to achieve sales through more attractive signage and that signage then encourages the customer to buy what they they really don't want.

studentphil

Kilty wrote: »

I presume you bought your two pairs of glasses from Specsavers.

Specsavers suck, and I'll never return there for another pair after having two pairs of frames break whilst cleaning and having the !!!! of a store manager tell me that I should simply take better care of them. Charged me £25 for repair despite me reciting the sale of goods act to her. Paid it since I had no choice (did not have another pair and I'm short sighted) but wrote to head office and got the money back.

Definately not going back to them.

I do not honestly know where are good places to get specs from. Specsavers is not as good as it was in the quality of its glasses.