Jump to content

Recommended Posts

a bloke Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You forgot to mention whether your pants would

> have skids on them.



of course... different skid every day, sometimes resembling a gaelic knot, sometimes a mystic hindi phrase and sometimes chinese characters for "always wear scks with crocs".

Frankito Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Maxxi, you are my fashion inspiration, how tou

> manage to rustle up tgat looks is nothing short of

> genius.. Post pics



Can't do that Franki - am too busy working on a three-quarter length skinny-jean trouser that can sit halfway down the thigh and is part shell suit and part stone-washed denim (of course my long hair keeps getting in the way so I tied it back into a ponytail which I am not sure whether to tuck under my baseball cap or through the hole at the back) and now have to change the whole colour scheme so it matches my football shirt. But keep it under your bucket hat eh?

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't tell me M&S pants are made from recycled

> Guardians UDT!? So THAT'S the intrinsic link

> between them. Cunning.


Do you mean this maxxi? Guardian journalist making his fashion statement.

A Fashion Editor doing a puff piece for M&S just because it was their 125th anniversary - the swine.


I believe your unproven scattergun approach to conspiracy theory and having looked at her other articles can charge that the Guardian is clearly also sponsored by Versace, Dior, McCartney, Lagerfeld, H&M, Moschino, Reiss, McQueen, Sarah Burton, Marc Jacobs and the colour Orange.


She even did a similar puff piece piece on a bag maker of all things - typical fashion editor.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/19/mulberry-luxury-brand-sales-up

forgot to say I also occasionally wear an elasticated, gaudily patterned snood or bandana and now that I have seen Ben Westwood's 'riding coats' I shall be doing my best to acquire one so I can wear it wear with my Akubra.


*does unshaven impression and makes whip- noises*

Resistance is futile, maxxi, as I will continue the m&s theme. As for the other sponsoring fashion companies they didn't appear on my radar when I first done my research on the Guardian four years ago. Oh yes, I now deem Versace, Dior, McCartney, Lagerfeld, H&M, Moschino, Reiss, McQueen, Sarah Burton, Marc Jacobs and the colour Orange unworthy! This remind me when American Apparel became Guardian's label of the year. Talk about kiss of death.

Maxxi wrote

--------------------------------------------

forgot to say I also occasionally wear an elasticated, gaudily patterned snood or bandana and now that I have seen Ben Westwood's 'riding coats' I shall be doing my best to acquire one so I can wear it wear with my Akubra.


*does unshaven impression and makes whip- noises*


Fair play to you Maxxi you don't care what you look like:))

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I think you might mean 'repossession' rather than 'reprocessing'.  
    • I think this is a bit of a myth.  It's true that some of the current owners are pension funds (chiefly the Ontario Universities') but they're global outfits, big enough to know what they're about. As for ordinary UK pension funds, they mostly invest in publicly-tradeable stocks, which Thames no longer is (it's a private limited company, not a PLC), so even those that lazily track the markets by buying everything in the index won't be exposed as Thames isn't in any index. In other words, it's a lot less complicated than Thames, the Government or innumerable consultancies and PR outfits would like you to believe. In case, incidentally, the idea of a cooperative offends any delicate Thatcherite sensibilities, I'd argue that it fits the Thatcherite vision of a stakeholding democracy much better than selling tradeable shares to the public very cheaply. The public, despite their blessable cottons, are too easily tempted by the small but easy win (which is how they sold off their own building societies, preparing the ground for the credit crunch and then the crash) and, as became obvious after every privatisation before or since, their modest stakes inevitably end up in the hands of financial engineers whose only priority is to siphon off the assets and leave the husk to either go bankrupt or get "rescued" by the taxpayers (who thus get to pay twice for nothing). The root of that is the concept of "limited liability" which makes it all possible, but even the most nauseating free-market optimist would struggle to predict the demise of that.  
    • Repossession? Oh no, that's really sad 😢 
    • That's a really interesting possibility!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...