Money BBC2

[NavSat]

Hilts said:

What's up with the two grifters in the white Merc fleecing mentoring the teenagers ?

Hmm yes, paying someone to tell you to smile. Where do i sign?

[Eric Mc]

NavSat said:

Hilts said:

What's up with the two grifters in the white Merc fleecing mentoring the teenagers ?

Hmm yes, paying someone to tell you to smile. Where do i sign?

I am always saddened when I hear people congratulating shysters for ripping off the young and naieve or the mentally ill - which I think accurately described some of the participants in the programme .

[Hilts]

Jimslips said:

Hilts said:

What's up with the two grifters in the white Merc fleecing mentoring the teenagers ?

Good on them. Bugger them if they are so stupid.

Yes, let's see them move on to some OAPs next.

[jas xjr]

I really felt sorry for some of these people.

[anonymous-user]

Jimslips said:

Frik said:

Didn't I hear them say they were making £40k pa from 29 properties? How small are these places?

They said the total property worth was ~£4million. She also made a comment about needing DSS tennants to house them, so presume she is paid by the council.

According to their maths that's a 1% yield, would assume that's a net figure after all costs are paid otherwise they are doing something wrong.

[jas xjr]

Inkyfingers said:

According to their maths that's a 1% yield, would assume that's a net figure after all costs are paid otherwise they are doing something wrong.

Depends on how much equity they have . I would say they would probably not own the properties outright

[over_the_hill]

Inkyfingers said:

Jimslips said:

Frik said:

Didn't I hear them say they were making £40k pa from 29 properties? How small are these places?

They said the total property worth was ~£4million. She also made a comment about needing DSS tennants to house them, so presume she is paid by the council.

According to their maths that's a 1% yield, would assume that's a net figure after all costs are paid otherwise they are doing something wrong.

They might be using a management company who will take a hefty cut, but for that they get no grief and a cheque at the end of the month plus still own the properties. Also it depend on how many are occupied at any one time as well.

Even so £40k a year sounds low. 29 properties at ~£4M is about £138k per property. In most parts of the country that will get you something half way decent, so we are not talking about some stty flats on a run down sink estate that you couldn't give away. Therefore rental income should be reasonably good.

I can only think that they still owe hefty sums on each property that have to be paid before "profit" is taken. In which case they are probably sweating a bit now that the bubble has stopped expanding.

[Frik]

They sound like liabilities rather than assets to me...

[carmonk]

Eric Mc said:

NavSat said:

Hilts said:

What's up with the two grifters in the white Merc fleecing mentoring the teenagers ?

Hmm yes, paying someone to tell you to smile. Where do i sign?

I am always saddened when I hear people congratulating shysters for ripping off the young and naieve or the mentally ill - which I think accurately described some of the participants in the programme .

You do realise that all advertising relies on people being naive, don't you? And I wouldn't say any of those people are mentally ill, just stupid and greedy. I'd be happy to take their money and I probably will.

[Frik]

carmonk said:

You do realise that all advertising relies on people being naive, don't you?

No it doesn't. Only misleading or dishonest advertising does, which reinforces Eric's point.

I'd take no satisfaction from exploiting people for my own gain.

[carmonk]

Frik said:

carmonk said:

You do realise that all advertising relies on people being naive, don't you?

No it doesn't. Only misleading or dishonest advertising does, which reinforces Eric's point.

Silly me, I'm forgetting all the honest and straightforward adverts that don't rely on gimmicks and audience suggestibility and 'small-print' a thousand and one other weasel methods of getting the consumer to buy what they don't want or need. Let's see, there's... um...

ah...

mmmmmmmm....


I'll get back to you when I've thought of one.

[Kudos]

I think there was a common theme amongst all those that were shown - namely "something" was missing. They were either a bit simple or lonely or to be honest just needed to loved.

Those who exploited it seemed to be doing ok at their expense.

[Eric Mc]

carmonk said:

Frik said:

carmonk said:

You do realise that all advertising relies on people being naive, don't you?

No it doesn't. Only misleading or dishonest advertising does, which reinforces Eric's point.

Silly me, I'm forgetting all the honest and straightforward adverts that don't rely on gimmicks and audience suggestibility and 'small-print' a thousand and one other weasel methods of getting the consumer to buy what they don't want or need. Let's see, there's... um...

ah...

mmmmmmmm....



I'll get back to you when I've thought of one.

So you think that we are all conned equally?
That we all have the same mental capabilities and that whenever we buy a product or use a service that we have been conned in some way/

[carmonk]

Eric Mc said:

carmonk said:

Frik said:

carmonk said:

You do realise that all advertising relies on people being naive, don't you?

No it doesn't. Only misleading or dishonest advertising does, which reinforces Eric's point.

Silly me, I'm forgetting all the honest and straightforward adverts that don't rely on gimmicks and audience suggestibility and 'small-print' a thousand and one other weasel methods of getting the consumer to buy what they don't want or need. Let's see, there's... um...

ah...

mmmmmmmm....



I'll get back to you when I've thought of one.

So you think that we are all conned equally?
That we all have the same mental capabilities and that whenever we buy a product or use a service that we have been conned in some way/

Where did you get that peculiar idea from? I said that advertising relies on people being naive, or at the very least suggestible. And it does. That's how it works.

[Eric Mc]

And I would suggest that some people are more prone to suggestion than others. As I said, not everyone has the same mental capabilities and levels of discernment as perhaps you or I do.

In your world, the less clever, the young, the old and the more mentally vulnerable are justified in being exploited by the sharks and the charlatans of the world?

[carmonk]

Eric Mc said:

And I would suggest that some people are more prone to suggestion than others. As I said, not everyone has the same mental capabilities and levels of discernment as perhaps you or I do.

In your world, the less clever, the young, the old and the more mentally vulnerable are justified in being exploited by the sharks and the charlatans of the world?

It depends on circumstance. Someone who targets the old or disabled or the mentally ill is scum. Someone who takes money from a greedy money-obsessive idiot - good luck to them. I'm in.

[Eric Mc]

carmonk said:

Eric Mc said:

And I would suggest that some people are more prone to suggestion than others. As I said, not everyone has the same mental capabilities and levels of discernment as perhaps you or I do.

In your world, the less clever, the young, the old and the more mentally vulnerable are justified in being exploited by the sharks and the charlatans of the world?

It depends on circumstance. Someone who targets the old or disabled or the mentally ill is scum. Someone who takes money from a greedy money-obsessive idiot - good luck to them. I'm in.

How do you decide which is which?

Unless you are a skilled psychoanalyst, you might not realisethat you are stiffing someone who has a mental problem.

Of course, if you are cold and ruthless, everyone will be considered a patsy.

Maybe that's the way you think.

I think it is shockingly deplorable and pretty contemptuous.

[carmonk]

Eric Mc said:

carmonk said:

Eric Mc said:

And I would suggest that some people are more prone to suggestion than others. As I said, not everyone has the same mental capabilities and levels of discernment as perhaps you or I do.

In your world, the less clever, the young, the old and the more mentally vulnerable are justified in being exploited by the sharks and the charlatans of the world?

It depends on circumstance. Someone who targets the old or disabled or the mentally ill is scum. Someone who takes money from a greedy money-obsessive idiot - good luck to them. I'm in.

How do you decide which is which?

Unless you are a skilled psychoanalyst, you might not realisethat you are stiffing someone who has a mental problem.

Of course, if you are cold and ruthless, everyone will be considered a patsy.

Maybe that's the way you think.

I think it is shockingly deplorable and pretty contemptuous.

And I think you're acting all hysterical. What measures are in place to filter out these people with 'mental problems' from being subjected to advertising and commercial pressure day-to-day? What difference is there from someone deciding to purchase something for £1000 and deciding to spend £1000 on a course? If the aims of the course are made clear - boost confidence, spot opportunity, maximise chances of become rich - then what's your problem? If a greedy idiot decides to spend their money because they want more, more, more and they want it now, now, now then that's their choice. Your talk of mentally ill people is no more valid for this than any other aspect of commercial influence. How many of the people taking these courses are actually mentally ill? Probably far less than an average cross-section of the high-street yet I don't see you frothing at the mouth in front of Dixons or Going Places.

[Eric Mc]

I'm only frothing at you because you seem to be demonstrating a fairly callous and insensitive view towards how you would like to do business with people.

Are you implying that in business, ethics don't matter?

[carmonk]

Eric Mc said:

I'm only frothing at you because you seem to be demonstrating a fairly callous and insensitive view towards how you would like to do business with people.

Are you implying that in business, ethics don't matter?

I'm not implying anything, I'm responding directly to the point you made.