ECCOnoob

Corporate lawyer, formerly worked as a lawyer in the public sector dealing with local authorities and social services. Your few years experience as an onboard customer host will no doubt give you some insight into the day-to-day operations of the railways. But lets not pretend that gives anywhere near the insight, experience or qualification on national infrastructure, construction, build and procurement. I worked on a checkout in a store for a few years while at college - didn't make me an expert in how they should be running the company.

My my, you really have been a busy bee. Managed to squeeze in your illustrious lengthy career on the railways as a fully qualified snack deployment operative which you have now apparently "retired" from, plus your studying of two business diplomas all while still apparently being in your "mid 20s". None of which comes close to having any sort of skills, knowledge and experience of design, construction or management of railway infrastructure.

Were you born in this country? Are you a British Citizen?

Seriously? You sure you didn't buy your GCSEs and diplomas off eBay??

I might have a reputation of learning towards Conservatives but make no mistake I am not anywhere near the same planet as nut job GB news Fox news Trump supporter fanboys.

Its glorious. First a channel famed for its gammony opinions and whiny ranting about wokeness and cancel culture spectacularly suspending one of their primary faces. Now even more absolute shame of it. To be a deemed a cretin of such magnitude that even the Daily Mail are sacking you. Hopefully the other moron Fox will get knocked down a few pegs too. To think of such a prominent actor with a legacy and well respected family like that dumbing himself down to the level of spouting internet conspiracies and extremist nonsense on a low rent tabloid "news" network.

So not actually Hanrahans then after all that. Right, glad we finally cleared that up. Goodness sake, bet you'll be banging on about your happy memories of Cole Brothers and Redgates next.

If we are expected to believe Irene's alleged age, it wouldn't have even been the original Hanrahans in any event. It would have been in its post CASA rebrand and repeal era. Not that I believe a word of it anyway.

For children's meals right? Perhaps you have forgotten what poster you are playing today. Maybe it's one of your other characters who used to prop up the bar there.

Already addressed here: As for bragging about your own business web reviews.... 🙄. Just give it up. If you really can't see the delicious irony of a man who is notorious for bitching about modern life and it's petty rules and regulations and lack of good old common sense, suddenly whinging because he failed to apply such common sense and got caught out by a company doing some clever marketing - there's no helping you.

Why would it? It's the second page on the website which has already gone past all the detail about what the company is and their charges. Besides, even that form still contains a link to the terms of conditions which sensible people will have glanced at and thus have seen the references to the fact that they are not affiliated with the Australian Government and describing that they are a service which make applications on behalf of the applicant. Something I have just found within literally 10 second glance. If you are silly enough to go clicking on a link and filling in forms without looking at the website or even checking the terms and conditions how exactly is that the fault of the business?

Russell Brand has been accused of a very serious crime and possibly even multiple crimes. They have suspended his ability to use the broadcast service to make money until such time as the investigation is completed Talk TV was suspended because they were allegedly reporting false information about a very serious global issue which again was a suspected breach of their service agreement. Both suspensions are completely within Google's prerogative to do so because it's a private company. It is not a public broadcaster. It has no legal duty to display content. In fact like any sort of broadcast platform, it's boundaries are set far more on what it cannot be displaying. It is therefore obvious that allowing a suspected serial rapist to make lots of money through your platform isn't a good look. None of that crap of course has any comparison to your current misguided protesting and excuse making for your own failing to use some common sense by paying for a company to make an application on your behalf which you could do directly yourself for free. Like I said, sod all to do with virtual signalling.

The only hypocrite I can see in all this debacle is you. A man notorious for huffing and puffing about bloody silly red tape and petty rules and overbearing health and safety bollix and woke nonsense curtailing people's freedoms and lack of common sense and lack of autonomy...... who is now seemingly raising lots of complaints and demanding that Google should "cancel" a legitimate and legal business organisation just because they fell victim to some clever marketing and failed to use some of that very same common sense.

Why? How are you not understanding. The business you engaged with clearly advises they provide a service to apply for a visa on your behalf. They clearly set out the charge for that service which you agreed to. They stated on their website front page that one can go elsewhere to the government website and avoid their charge. Upon provision of that information, people then can either choose to use their service or not. Nowhere on the website do they spoof or fake or otherwise mislead into pretending they are the AU Government. Nowhere on their website do they use any sort of AU government branding, colours, logos, web address or otherwise to dupe people into giving their money to them. Therefore, given they are not any sort of scam, fake or engaging in any suspected criminal activity, why should Google block a legitimate business from advertising through their search engine.

No Google are not. As pointed out on your other thread the company you went to is a service provider and you paid for their service. It states exactly what they are on their own webpage so where is the scam? As far as Google is concerned, it's legitimate business as much as your own is. NOTICE: We are an agency not affiliated with the Australian Government website. The decision to grant any permit is made by the Australian Government. We provide services and assistance on a professional fee basis of $99 for. A request can be presented also on the official website for a lower fee but without our help and assistance. Virtue signalling is nothing to do with it.

What 'swindle'? Did you completely ignore the wording at the bottom of the page of their website. It makes it very clear what it is. I mean, come on, you don't expect companies to be dumbing down by having to fill their page with brightly coloured multiple notices to stop people from accidentally buying something they don't need or charged for something they shouldn't be. Surely businesses shouldn't have to be subject to such a ridiculous administrative burden like that filled with OTT overprotective rules and regulation bollix just to protect dumb consumers...... right? Oh, what's that? You mean you didn't read the small print? You didn't take time to actually do a little bit of research as to how to apply for visa the official way? You didn't actually look at some of the multiple advices about these sorts of companies and how they promote themselves to keep top of internet searches? At the end of the day, you unfortunately chose to pay for their service. They are company offering a facility and you agreed to their terms . Here it is in black and white: NOTICE: We are an agency not affiliated with the Australian Government website. The decision to grant any permit is made by the Australian Government. We provide services and assistance on a professional fee basis of $99 for. A request can be presented also on the official website for a lower fee but without our help and assistance. Buyer beware is the golden rule.

Last time I checked Anna, Manchester is in the North. As is Leeds Bradford as is Liverpool...some would argue, as is East Midlands. All established airports performing far better than Doncaster Sheffield ever did, even at its absolute peak. Manchester in particular already has a nice established relationship with a number of large international flag carrier airlines and handles vast numbers of passengers numbers. That 'levelling up' in the north you speak of has been demonstrated by MA's recent billion pound renovation of its main terminal and further multi-million fund raised to complete it's transformation project so someone's random opinion that it's an outdated dump is quite frankly irrelevant. (For balance, Sheffield too has received plenty of 'levelling up' monies including huge government grants towards the regeneration of Castlegate and all the building works around Attercliffe Olympic Park and funds to create the new cycleways and monies for what's happening right now on fargate for examples) Maybe you feel they should have been spent on donny airport instead but just why exactly should the government pee away taxpayer monies to try and prop up failed Doncaster when history has proven the business case is not there If private enterprise failed to attract big airlines and failed to increase its already dismal passengers numbers what the hell do you think has changed so dramatically to make it viable now?

This all seems to be some great vanity project from the local authorities and our totally pointless city regional mayor or whatever he's called. I'd love to know what these civil service pen pushers come aviation experts believe they can do sooo much better than the management running DSA during its 15 year operation. The hard reality is, even at its absolute peak most popular route DSA was recording passenger numbers between 5 to 10 times less than places like Leeds/Bradford, East Midlands, Manchester or even Liverpool airports. At its absolute best ever year back in 2007 DSA only just scraped over a million passengers. Whereas the same year Manchester was already serving over 22 million (even during covid years Manchester was still handling between 6 and 7 million passengers) During the surge in popularity of budget airlines DSA repeatedly fail to attract a single one to create a substantial hub there. All it could ever rely on was seasonal holiday flights and the more obscure destination carriers which likely held them to ransom on fees because they will be desperate for anyone to utilise the airport facilities. If they couldn't attract the 'big names' back then, I really can't see how they believe they are going to miraculously change the situation now. All the sentimental comments I read from "the public" all seem to be banging on praising how good the airport was because it was so much less crowded or how calm and quiet or peaceful and easy to get through. Well that's wonderful. But guess what.... quiet calm non-crowded airports don't make money. Its supposed to be a business and now is become a taxpayer funded business - so if it ain't going to make money in any way shape or form it ain't and certainly shouldn't be reopening. That is a sort of cold harsh business decision that needs to be made, not deluded public sentiment and nostalgia.

I agree they should be..... and we've got technology by a couple of taps on our phones to check statements and transactions almost on a real time basis multiple times a week. Majority of normal people don't need to be wading through and printing out reems of paper to be cross referencing with a written checklist. That again sounds very much a YOU problem. Most people seem perfectly capable of keeping a quick eye on their personal accounts periodically and easily recognising something that's unauthorised. I think its you who is missing the point. If you prefer to use cash and you find it easier than electric transactions for low value items (even though it makes sod all difference whether its £1 or £100) that is entirely your business. But grow a pair and just admit that. Let's not make stupid nonsensical pathetic excuses that somehow card payments are some massive administrative burden that messes up your bank statements which you have to spend significant additional time 'wading through'. Complete bull.

Completely a YOU problem. As I have pointed out of many times before, you are supposed to be running a business, you portray you run a business - so having your bank account statement "spammed up with transactions" should be part of the course. You will have to audit your accounts and check your supplier invoices and check your purchase ledgers, do your stock counting and maintain your supplies every day. So what exactly is the big problem? How do you keep account for your little crash transactions? Do you just do it by memory? Like has been demonstrated by others, my banking app shows me every single transaction within seconds of me doing it. Christ, I have done 10p transactions on my card for things like when I forgot a carrier bag and even used my card to access chargeable public toilets. It really isn't a big deal.

So from a quick skim read of that list, the only one with relevance for this forum is Hillsborough branch which is going to become a poundland now - probably do quite well there Not totally surprising only one Sheffield branch on the list either given city centre already has several Poundlands, Meadowhall and Parkgate Wilkos are nearby existing Poundlands so unlikely any of those would have been changed anyway.

Do you not think there are permits for change of use. What about for sales of alcohol, what about the nature of the attractions that have to a meet, various safety regulations and licencing. What about rules for permitted times for noise control, environment and waste impact, for light pollution.... Private property has sold all to do with anything. You'll be amazed what sorts of permits and licences businesses have to adhere to. Some places can't put up so much as a sign without permission.

That would only work if every single message I put on this forum to all users on all threads was deliberately for the purpose of antagonisation or completely nonsensical or trying to derail the subject. No love, what I am doing with you is calling you out and I'm certainly not the only one. But hey you can ignore me if you want. Now - as you are more than aware since you claim you have a tried to go twice - what Meadowhall had was not just 'a funfair'. It was a wider summer attraction including water splash area, street food vendors, bar and various entertainers, none of whom are going to paying their daily rental and/or staffing costs to be sat around all day waiting for the kids to get out of school for a couple hours trade, since most parents would be gone by early evening to get their kids ready for school the next day. That's before we get onto the glaringly obvious things regarding licencing and permits, all of which would have to be formally extended at great legal expense and can't just be simply swapped around on some whim. This is a major operation, not some bloke with an ice cream van. I am well aware that schools go back at different times but we are into September now. Even if there are some (which will be absolute minority number) that haven't yet gone back - they will be within days. As I have pointed out earlier, the attraction itself had a fixed run time which has now expired. Meadowhall now needs to get on with dismantling it all to get their car park back - something which again will have taken weeks of preparations, planning, technical specifications, method statements and timetables which all have to be a adhered to as failure will incur operational disruption and major expense None of this is hardly some great unknown, even for people who don't work in such sectors. It's just basics of how business works in real life. IF you seriously protest you're not a troll - it's disturbing you have no basic concept of such things.

Yes absolutely. Just like a comedian, court jester, a fool. In other words, someone to be laughed at. Someone who makes up nonsense and funnies purposely for gaining attention and reaction from their audience. Bit like the behaviour of internet trolls.

The fact you are desperately comparing a purpose built permanent theme park and coastal tourist resort in your pointless arguments just proves my point. I call you a troll because you are one.