Sainsburys Job?

Les79

74jax wrote: »

I think he means people speculated about Thomas Cook too and said it was only some shops in trouble, the online booking system and people who worked in that area would be OK. Unfortunately that want case. So even though there was still demand online, it affected the whole business. Blatchford is then comparing that scenario to your speculation..... I think.

Spoilsport

Blatchford

Les79 wrote: »

What has any of that to do with anything?

You suggested that looking at what might be scaling back now means something. 14 months ago Thomas Cook were scaling back Scandinavian flights and trying to sell them off. Mothercare are selling wonderfully... not. You are guessing, as you so often do, with not a shred of evidence, which is so often the case. I have not a clue how any part of Sainsburys will weather the storm. Neither do you. But I admit it. You try to assert an authority that you do not have.

Les79

Blatchford wrote: »

You suggested that looking at what might be scaling back now means something. 14 months ago Thomas Cook were scaling back Scandinavian flights and trying to sell them off. Mothercare are selling wonderfully... not. You are guessing, as you so often do, with not a shred of evidence, which is so often the case. I have not a clue how any part of Sainsburys will weather the storm. Neither do you. But I admit it. You try to assert an authority that you do not have.

In case you missed the point, I was being obtuse by copy and pasting the reply you gave to keepcalm.

TELLIT01

Les79 wrote: »

In case you missed the point, I was being obtuse by copy and pasting the reply you gave to keepcalm.

The reply/question to keepcalm was valid as nothing in that post made any sense. Not that that is anything new.

Les79

TELLIT01 wrote: »

The reply/question to keepcalm was valid as nothing in that post made any sense. Not that that is anything new.

It did make sense.

KatrinaWaves

The first line is on topic. The second is again a random diatribe about some jobs their friend has gone for and how you have to do things over and above your job.

The last paragraph makes no sense.

Overall, it makes no sense

[Deleted User]

Blatchford wrote: »

But I admit it. You try to assert an authority that you do not have.

That's usually you.

Those that have an issue with keepcalm's posts should use their ignore button, instead of going for the annoying judgemental comments when keepcalm posts.

Davy_Jones_II

[Deleted User] wrote:

That's usually you.

Those that have an issue with keepcalm's posts should use their ignore button, instead of going for the annoying judgemental comments when keepcalm posts.

I don’t agree. When someone is posting things which are wrong then it’s a good idea to point it out.

Les79

Davy_Jones_II wrote: »

I don’t agree. When someone is posting things which are wrong then it’s a good idea to point it out.

I agree with amazonian. Instead of posting the same thing whenever keepcalm makes a comment why not put them on your ignore list?

KatrinaWaves

Why not put the people who respond to ‘keepcalm’ on ignore?

No reason for anyone to be policing who can and cannot respond to whatever is posted on an open forum. Ignore or respond, stop trying to dictate what people post.
I personally do not put them on ignore as they post misleading and incorrect info which people may not realise is such.