The Olympics are over for another 4 years.
Didn't we (GB) do well. Apparently, yes, according to the medal table. Well, one of the medal tables... I'm not sure that any of them really mean much. But we certainly won a lot of medals.
I say "we", as if I had anything to do with it. I don't even play the Lottery. I did cheer from the side of the road in the 2012 road race, which might have inspired Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins a bit. No. Probably didn't help much.
This was a weird games for me.
I watched some of it on TV. But because of the time difference I didn't stay up late to watch any of the "main" events. So lots of it was second-hand viewing.
The BBC did a decent job, apart from the mad channel switching. I mean, Olympics all night on BBC1 apart from Eastenders... please switch over to BBC2 for half an hour because we have to game the ratings.
Amazingly they did delay the 10pm news for Jason Kenny in the keirin. Which then over-ran massively with those 2 restarts. Go Kenny!!! And Laura!!!
Watched a bit of the Tae-kwon-do ... mixed feelings about that ... should probably call it Tae-do now that punches almost never score?
Even watched some horse things?!? And swimming.
What the hell is BMX about? Top riders got run off the course on lap 1... and out. Madness.
Hazel Irvine presenting. Slightly less annoying than when she ruins the snooker.
Lots of excitement about Usain Bolt (only saw the replays).
Distance runner Brendan Foster declaring distance runner Mo Farah the best British sportsman of all time. Yeah, not at all biased.
But overall a very fragmented experience. Didn't feel like one event at all this time.
Wonder what Tokyo will be like? Would love to go!!!
Monday, 22 August 2016
Sunday, 7 August 2016
BBC Sport for everyone and no-one
Last week's BBC coverage of the Ride 100 Classic was pretty poor. Especially when they lost picture for the crucial last 5km with Geraint Thomas trying to cling on to his lead.
But at least they had David Millar on his motorbike giving us some insight.
Yesterday's coverage of the Olympic road race was awful.
For a start, it was bounced between BBC 1 and the "Red Button" channels that I can't get... so I watched a lot of it on the PS4 app... with no commentary initially, plenty of buffering and mediocre picture quality.
When we did get commentary it was Chris Boardman and some stato who kept talking over him to tell us that the guy on the front was 4th in the Tour of Nowhere 2 years ago !?!
It may have been the sound quality, but several times it sounded to me like Chris and Stato were eating something and trying to talk with their mouths full.
And clearly they had very little information about what was going on. Probably not their fault, but in that situation you need someone like David Millar who can fill in the gaps with educated guesses.
I have massive respect for Boardman, who has done a huge amount of work for cycling in the UK, but he is best as a pre-race and post-race analyst, not as an in-race commentator. Have the BBC never seen the excellent ITV4 coverage of the Tour de France?
So the live coverage was a bit dodgy. But what really made me angry was the potted summary which was shown later.
In the summary Steve Cummings was shown pulling over and Chris Boardman said "That's disappointing". Which gave the impression that Steve had done a poor ride. He did a brilliant job. The full quote was "That's disappointing he had to do a team job early on rather than having a chance to go for it himself".
Very poor editing.
There was also very little respect for Geraint Thomas who was shown in the gutter after his crash, without any mention of the fact that he had done an excellent ride and was in contention for a long time.
All the talk was about Chris Froome finishing 12th. As if he was ever a serious contender for gold. He's never won a major one-day race. He's a Grand Tour rider. Don't the BBC understand that? Or do they think the audience are too stupid to understand? He won the TdF, and this is only 200km, so he should win easy... right?
Even worse, I heard one piece that said "Just like Mark Cavendish's failure to win 4 years ago, Team GB favourite Chris Froome was disapointed to be out of the medals."
Really?
Cavendish is a bunch sprinter. There wasn't a bunch sprint in London 2012, so he didn't win. Froome was heavily marked yesterday, he never had a chance.
The ignorance of the BBC is astounding. Come on. You can do better than this. The BBC coverage of some sports is excellent. Surely you can find some decent journalists to write up a fair summary for all the events?
But at least they had David Millar on his motorbike giving us some insight.
Yesterday's coverage of the Olympic road race was awful.
For a start, it was bounced between BBC 1 and the "Red Button" channels that I can't get... so I watched a lot of it on the PS4 app... with no commentary initially, plenty of buffering and mediocre picture quality.
When we did get commentary it was Chris Boardman and some stato who kept talking over him to tell us that the guy on the front was 4th in the Tour of Nowhere 2 years ago !?!
It may have been the sound quality, but several times it sounded to me like Chris and Stato were eating something and trying to talk with their mouths full.
And clearly they had very little information about what was going on. Probably not their fault, but in that situation you need someone like David Millar who can fill in the gaps with educated guesses.
I have massive respect for Boardman, who has done a huge amount of work for cycling in the UK, but he is best as a pre-race and post-race analyst, not as an in-race commentator. Have the BBC never seen the excellent ITV4 coverage of the Tour de France?
So the live coverage was a bit dodgy. But what really made me angry was the potted summary which was shown later.
In the summary Steve Cummings was shown pulling over and Chris Boardman said "That's disappointing". Which gave the impression that Steve had done a poor ride. He did a brilliant job. The full quote was "That's disappointing he had to do a team job early on rather than having a chance to go for it himself".
Very poor editing.
There was also very little respect for Geraint Thomas who was shown in the gutter after his crash, without any mention of the fact that he had done an excellent ride and was in contention for a long time.
All the talk was about Chris Froome finishing 12th. As if he was ever a serious contender for gold. He's never won a major one-day race. He's a Grand Tour rider. Don't the BBC understand that? Or do they think the audience are too stupid to understand? He won the TdF, and this is only 200km, so he should win easy... right?
Even worse, I heard one piece that said "Just like Mark Cavendish's failure to win 4 years ago, Team GB favourite Chris Froome was disapointed to be out of the medals."
Really?
Cavendish is a bunch sprinter. There wasn't a bunch sprint in London 2012, so he didn't win. Froome was heavily marked yesterday, he never had a chance.
The ignorance of the BBC is astounding. Come on. You can do better than this. The BBC coverage of some sports is excellent. Surely you can find some decent journalists to write up a fair summary for all the events?
Friday, 22 July 2016
An Englishman In Prague
I was in Prague last week for the European Rubik's Cube Championship. It's the first time I have been to Eastern Europe and there were a few things I noticed.
0) Interesting
Don't take any of this as critical. I really enjoyed my visit. These are just my observations of differences between Prague and more western cities that I have visited.
1) Lack of vowels
Czech words are really hard to pronounce, because it looks like someone has stolen lots of the vowels. There are several types of accent too, which are used above both consonants and vowels. I tried to look up a few words before I travelled... but was worried that even the word for thank-you might trip me up.
2) Patchy English
Being a capital city popular with tourists, I thought there might be some signs in English. But I didn't see any. All the signs (even the ones to tourist attractions) are in Czech. Some cafes and restaurants have menus in foreign languages, but many do not.
Lots of people do speak quite good English though. One waiter got a nice tip from us after translating the whole menu for the restaurant!
3) Cash only
We almost got caught out a few times by cafes that did not accept card payments. I'm so used to places taking cards for anything over £10 so it was a bit of a surprise that cards weren't accepted at all sometimes. So make sure you have enough cash to pay your bill.
4) Clearing tables
It seems to be standard that waiters come and clear plates and glasses as soon as they are empty. Which feels odd if you are used to them waiting until everyone has finished. We had a large range of eating speeds; so there was often someone who had an empty setting and then later one person who was the only one with a plate left.
5) Transport
The trams and metro are brilliant. But where do you buy tickets? We were told that 3-day passes were the best value... but we couldn't find out where to buy them. The stations only seemed to sell 1-day tickets. Eventually a fellow tourist pointed us at a small shop that did sell them... even though there was no visible indication anywhere inside or out that they did.
Mainline trains were a bit trickier. We ended up getting out to Radotin on a coach and then trying to get back on the train. But the ticket office was closed. We got on the train hoping to buy a ticket from the guard... and didn't see one. Later someone said there was a 400 Kc fine for being on the train with no ticket... so it could have been bad... but what are you supposed to do???
6) Tour groups
The castle was swamped with big groups of tourists. We went into a cafe that looked half empty but all the tables were reserved for tour groups. To get a decent look at anything you had to track the groups and try to fit in between them.
I find it vaguely amusing to watch people in tour groups. They all shuffle along taking photos of everything without actually looking at anything. I pity the poor families back home who have to look at the pictures... "What's that?" ... "Another church in Prague."
7) Reasonably priced
Even the inflated tourist areas weren't very expensive. And the normal priced bars and restaurants were very reasonable. Makes a nice change from other capital cities where everyone just tries to rip off as much of your money as they possibly can.
0) Interesting
Don't take any of this as critical. I really enjoyed my visit. These are just my observations of differences between Prague and more western cities that I have visited.
1) Lack of vowels
Czech words are really hard to pronounce, because it looks like someone has stolen lots of the vowels. There are several types of accent too, which are used above both consonants and vowels. I tried to look up a few words before I travelled... but was worried that even the word for thank-you might trip me up.
2) Patchy English
Being a capital city popular with tourists, I thought there might be some signs in English. But I didn't see any. All the signs (even the ones to tourist attractions) are in Czech. Some cafes and restaurants have menus in foreign languages, but many do not.
Lots of people do speak quite good English though. One waiter got a nice tip from us after translating the whole menu for the restaurant!
3) Cash only
We almost got caught out a few times by cafes that did not accept card payments. I'm so used to places taking cards for anything over £10 so it was a bit of a surprise that cards weren't accepted at all sometimes. So make sure you have enough cash to pay your bill.
4) Clearing tables
It seems to be standard that waiters come and clear plates and glasses as soon as they are empty. Which feels odd if you are used to them waiting until everyone has finished. We had a large range of eating speeds; so there was often someone who had an empty setting and then later one person who was the only one with a plate left.
5) Transport
The trams and metro are brilliant. But where do you buy tickets? We were told that 3-day passes were the best value... but we couldn't find out where to buy them. The stations only seemed to sell 1-day tickets. Eventually a fellow tourist pointed us at a small shop that did sell them... even though there was no visible indication anywhere inside or out that they did.
Mainline trains were a bit trickier. We ended up getting out to Radotin on a coach and then trying to get back on the train. But the ticket office was closed. We got on the train hoping to buy a ticket from the guard... and didn't see one. Later someone said there was a 400 Kc fine for being on the train with no ticket... so it could have been bad... but what are you supposed to do???
6) Tour groups
The castle was swamped with big groups of tourists. We went into a cafe that looked half empty but all the tables were reserved for tour groups. To get a decent look at anything you had to track the groups and try to fit in between them.
I find it vaguely amusing to watch people in tour groups. They all shuffle along taking photos of everything without actually looking at anything. I pity the poor families back home who have to look at the pictures... "What's that?" ... "Another church in Prague."
7) Reasonably priced
Even the inflated tourist areas weren't very expensive. And the normal priced bars and restaurants were very reasonable. Makes a nice change from other capital cities where everyone just tries to rip off as much of your money as they possibly can.
Friday, 1 July 2016
True Colours
It has been a long week. In fact I can hardly believe it has only been one week since the UK voted to leave the EU.
A lot has happened and not much of it makes me proud to be British.
The worst of us have shown their true colours.
Firstly the racists didn't delay in telling as many migrants as they could to "go home". I even heard of someone who actually thought voting Leave was a vote for all the migrants to leave the UK. Morons.
Then the EU bureaucrats showed us why many reasonable people voted with the racists to leave. Jean-Claude Junker basically said "OK, piss off then, we never liked you anyway". Cheers. As a remain voter, you actually made me wonder why I ever bothered defending the EU to my leave friends.
Remainers lost their minds in despair and started crying for a second referendum because... er... they lost and didn't expect to. Millions signed a petition asking for the rules of the referendum to be changed. Sorry guys, 6 months too late.
People said "But what about the youth? It affects them so much more than the old people who voted out". And yet the turnout for under-25s was estimated at 30% compared to an overall 70%. Since this was about their future, why did so few of them bloody vote?!?
With the country in turmoil I thought we might be able to rely on our sportsmen to lift the mood. But no. Once again the mightily over-hyped millionaire footballers of England choked at a major footballing tournament and lost to the valiant amateurs from Iceland. All our hopes rest on Wales now... although I know England fans who actually want Wales to lose so they don't make England look too much like the mighty losers than we all really know they are!
Do the English want the UK broken up? I wonder sometimes. I certainly think London wants to break away from the rest of the UK next. And I've heard people say that they wish Scotland had already gone. Jesus Christ. What is going on?
With Cameron resigned but not gone what did Labour do? Their MPs suddenly decided that this was a good time to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn. The leader they never wanted. A vote of no confidence. And what happens if the party members re-elect him by a big majority again? Will all the MPs have to resign from the party? What a mess. And how depressing. Opportunism at its worst.
The other smaller parties might have been saying things, but the media didn't report anything other than Nigel Farage going to the EU to say "Na na na na na".
Then finally the Tories had to stand up to replace Cameron. In a fit of irony Michael Gove decided to knife Boris in the back, just as he had done to Cameron. Instead of standing anyway Boris just quit! So now we will probably get Theresa "snoopers charter" May as the next PM.
Bollocks. Was Orwell wrong on one thing; might Big Brother be a woman?
And it has rained a lot.
A lot has happened and not much of it makes me proud to be British.
The worst of us have shown their true colours.
Firstly the racists didn't delay in telling as many migrants as they could to "go home". I even heard of someone who actually thought voting Leave was a vote for all the migrants to leave the UK. Morons.
Then the EU bureaucrats showed us why many reasonable people voted with the racists to leave. Jean-Claude Junker basically said "OK, piss off then, we never liked you anyway". Cheers. As a remain voter, you actually made me wonder why I ever bothered defending the EU to my leave friends.
Remainers lost their minds in despair and started crying for a second referendum because... er... they lost and didn't expect to. Millions signed a petition asking for the rules of the referendum to be changed. Sorry guys, 6 months too late.
People said "But what about the youth? It affects them so much more than the old people who voted out". And yet the turnout for under-25s was estimated at 30% compared to an overall 70%. Since this was about their future, why did so few of them bloody vote?!?
With the country in turmoil I thought we might be able to rely on our sportsmen to lift the mood. But no. Once again the mightily over-hyped millionaire footballers of England choked at a major footballing tournament and lost to the valiant amateurs from Iceland. All our hopes rest on Wales now... although I know England fans who actually want Wales to lose so they don't make England look too much like the mighty losers than we all really know they are!
Do the English want the UK broken up? I wonder sometimes. I certainly think London wants to break away from the rest of the UK next. And I've heard people say that they wish Scotland had already gone. Jesus Christ. What is going on?
With Cameron resigned but not gone what did Labour do? Their MPs suddenly decided that this was a good time to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn. The leader they never wanted. A vote of no confidence. And what happens if the party members re-elect him by a big majority again? Will all the MPs have to resign from the party? What a mess. And how depressing. Opportunism at its worst.
The other smaller parties might have been saying things, but the media didn't report anything other than Nigel Farage going to the EU to say "Na na na na na".
Then finally the Tories had to stand up to replace Cameron. In a fit of irony Michael Gove decided to knife Boris in the back, just as he had done to Cameron. Instead of standing anyway Boris just quit! So now we will probably get Theresa "snoopers charter" May as the next PM.
Bollocks. Was Orwell wrong on one thing; might Big Brother be a woman?
And it has rained a lot.
Friday, 27 May 2016
Advice for undecideds in the EU Referendum
I've been thinking about the EU Referendum and can't decide how to vote. But a few things have become very clear, so here are some of my conclusions :-
1) Don't beat yourself up over it.
There's nothing wrong with being undecided. It shows that you are thinking about the issues and trying to decide rationally. That's a lot more effort than the people who blindly follow a leader, or don't even vote, will be putting in. There's no right or wrong answer... and you only have one vote... so whatever you decide as an individual wont change the result in itself.
Life will go on whatever the decision. And we'll probably be OK either way!
2) There are no facts.
Whatever one side says, the other side has "facts" to say the opposite. It is pointless looking for impartial facts because everyone is biased in some way. The promise of an honest debate based on good information lasted about 5 minutes until each side found something dodgy that looked very convincing.
All the "information" about what might happen in the future is based on assumptions about what might happen if we stay or go. And all projections are subject to errors on top of that. You are better off looking at the past, not trying to guess who has the best crystal ball.
At the end of the day you are going to have to make a judgement based mostly on gut instinct. Sorry, that's how it is.
3) The turnout may be disappointing.
I wish voting were compulsory on things like this. If the turnout is such that the winning side gets less than 50% of the people who could have voted, then I think that leaves the door open for bad feeling on the losing side that can continue to fester for years.
A result like 30% for, 30% against, 40% don't know, tells you a lot more than 50% for, 50% against with a 60% turnout. Because you never know if people don't vote because they can't decide, or because they can't be bothered, or because they want to protest against the vote for some reason.
4) It will be close.
Which is bad. Because the arguments haven't been made convincingly by either side. So after the vote about half the country will probably be really pissed off that their choice was not the winner.
1) Don't beat yourself up over it.
There's nothing wrong with being undecided. It shows that you are thinking about the issues and trying to decide rationally. That's a lot more effort than the people who blindly follow a leader, or don't even vote, will be putting in. There's no right or wrong answer... and you only have one vote... so whatever you decide as an individual wont change the result in itself.
Life will go on whatever the decision. And we'll probably be OK either way!
2) There are no facts.
Whatever one side says, the other side has "facts" to say the opposite. It is pointless looking for impartial facts because everyone is biased in some way. The promise of an honest debate based on good information lasted about 5 minutes until each side found something dodgy that looked very convincing.
All the "information" about what might happen in the future is based on assumptions about what might happen if we stay or go. And all projections are subject to errors on top of that. You are better off looking at the past, not trying to guess who has the best crystal ball.
At the end of the day you are going to have to make a judgement based mostly on gut instinct. Sorry, that's how it is.
3) The turnout may be disappointing.
I wish voting were compulsory on things like this. If the turnout is such that the winning side gets less than 50% of the people who could have voted, then I think that leaves the door open for bad feeling on the losing side that can continue to fester for years.
A result like 30% for, 30% against, 40% don't know, tells you a lot more than 50% for, 50% against with a 60% turnout. Because you never know if people don't vote because they can't decide, or because they can't be bothered, or because they want to protest against the vote for some reason.
4) It will be close.
Which is bad. Because the arguments haven't been made convincingly by either side. So after the vote about half the country will probably be really pissed off that their choice was not the winner.
TV is dead
For the pedants I should probably qualify the title as broadcast TV is dead. But when I was young that was the only TV there was, so to me they are synonymous.
In the last year I have probably watched more video content than ever before... and yet hardly any of it has been broadcast TV. So much so that I am now seriously considering getting rid of my tuner. In the UK that means I wont have to pay the TV license any more, which is currently £145.50 per year.
How things change. A year or two ago I was a big fan of the BBC and wouldn't have dreamed of not having a TV. That's mostly down to a few BBC programmes that I really used to love like Dr Who and Sherlock. I can't remember the last thing I watched on a commercial channel... because I hate in-programme adverts with such a passion. It was probably Endeavour, recorded so that I could skip the ads.
Until recently a few great programmes a year were enough to keep me going, because of all the other bits and pieces I used to watch on TV too... like news, sport and documentaries.
But I don't watch TV news any more. There's a whole blog post there in itself. But in summary, I don't watch it because it is rubbish and gives you a distorted view of the world. Rolling news? Jeez.
Sport? There's hardly any on free-to-air TV now. And what there is is on at dumb times. I switched on my TV at 3pm for the FA Cup final last Saturday because I wasn't doing anything else. And found that the kick off is now at 5.30pm. When did that happen? It has always been at 3pm. Anyway, I was going out for dinner so there was no point in watching the beginning.
I like snooker, but when it is on the BBC they show a frame or two live and then switch to the red button or online... usually in the middle of a frame. So you might as well watch the whole thing online.
Documentaries? There are so many online that the few decent ones on TV really are no loss to miss.
So you get to a point where you think "I'm not watching much TV now, so why pay £150 a year for it?"
Which should be frightening for the traditional broadcasters, because if 45 year old male telly addicts like me are abandoning them then they are going to be in trouble sooner than they think. I know young people aren't getting into TV but I bet the current BBC and ITV execs think they are set for at least their lifetimes and might be in for a shock.
How has this happened? The internet.
I can watch lots of great TV shows (without ad breaks) on Netflix. When I want, not when some scheduler thinks I should watch it. If I want to watch 3 episodes in a night then I can... I don't have to watch one a week over a month or so!
I can watch films (without ad breaks) on many platforms. I can rent blu-ray disks on Cinema Paradiso to get great quality if I want it.
I can watch documentaries on YouTube on just about any subject. There are TED talks. There are recordings of lectures and seminars from universities all over the world.
Broadcast TV is now a tiny window on a much, much bigger world. It just isn't relevant to me any more. I don't need a TV. I have an internet.
Saturday, 7 May 2016
Royal Mail stuck in 20th century
Like many people in the 21st century, I shop online a lot. But I groan when I see an online retailer is going to send me my items by Royal Mail. Because of all the delivery companies they are by far the worst at actually getting a parcel into my hands.
Firstly there is delivery time. Most days I am out in the morning. Royal Mail do not care about this because they always deliver parcels to my house at about 11am. Every time. The last 5 parcels delivered by Royal Mail have all arrived at between 11am and 11:10am. I can't remember a parcel ever arriving before 11am or after 1pm.
In fact the only time I ever get a parcel first time from Royal Mail is on the odd occasion when they deliver on a Saturday.
So, redelivery maybe. Well why would I ask them to try to redeliver it when I know they are probably just going to come at 11am again when I am out? Duh.
So, collection it is then.
I live quite close to the Post Office in Guildford, so this should be easy. But this is Royal Mail not the Post Office (as I was told rather curtly by a Royal Mail employee once). And the Royal Mail collection office is right out on the other edge of town... well away from public transport.
Most people drive there, on a Saturday morning. There are about 6 customer car parking spaces. But these are usually occupied by Royal Mail staff. I know this because once I walked there (I don't have a car) and all the spaces were full despite me being the only customer there... I asked the man at the desk why the customer parking was full when I was the only customer there... and he muttered something about it not really being customer parking any more.
Usually I go in the afternoon when it is quiet. But if you do have to go on a Saturday morning then I pity you, because there is often a long queue.
So you hand over your red card and if you remembered to bring ID then they go off to find your parcel. Sometimes this takes them a while... so you have time to look around. There are big notices up that say "NO MOBILE PHONES TO BE USED IN THIS AREA PLEASE!!!!!". Yes, that is 5 exclamation marks.
What happens if someone uses a mobile phone in that area? Does the whole postal system crash? I don't understand why they are so worried about this. Not so much that they have to SHOUT IT AT YOU while you wait.
There are also signs asking you to respect the employees. Which I guess means they have a lot of people in who are cross and take it out on the employees. I'm not going to condone bad behaviour... but I can certainly understand why some people rocking up there, not being able to park, then waiting a long time for a parcel that they would rather have received at their home (as they paid for), might not be feeling at their best by the time they get served.
Once I had to wait more than 10 minutes for them to find my parcel. You would think they had a decent system for this by now...
What would help?
This is the 21st century. Many households are empty during the day. Delivering everything 9-5 is stupid. Delivering everything at the same time to a household when no-one is in is even more stupid.
Why can't I specify a preferred time? Why can't you even try delivering in the afternoon? That doesn't seem so hard.
Why do you return parcels to an out-of-town delivery office, when I live near the Post Office? Why can't I specify a preferred collection point?
At some point I am going to stop shopping with online companies that use Royal Mail and only use the ones that use other couriers. Because I have given you every chance to get into the 21st century... and you have failed!
Firstly there is delivery time. Most days I am out in the morning. Royal Mail do not care about this because they always deliver parcels to my house at about 11am. Every time. The last 5 parcels delivered by Royal Mail have all arrived at between 11am and 11:10am. I can't remember a parcel ever arriving before 11am or after 1pm.
In fact the only time I ever get a parcel first time from Royal Mail is on the odd occasion when they deliver on a Saturday.
So, redelivery maybe. Well why would I ask them to try to redeliver it when I know they are probably just going to come at 11am again when I am out? Duh.
So, collection it is then.
I live quite close to the Post Office in Guildford, so this should be easy. But this is Royal Mail not the Post Office (as I was told rather curtly by a Royal Mail employee once). And the Royal Mail collection office is right out on the other edge of town... well away from public transport.
Most people drive there, on a Saturday morning. There are about 6 customer car parking spaces. But these are usually occupied by Royal Mail staff. I know this because once I walked there (I don't have a car) and all the spaces were full despite me being the only customer there... I asked the man at the desk why the customer parking was full when I was the only customer there... and he muttered something about it not really being customer parking any more.
Usually I go in the afternoon when it is quiet. But if you do have to go on a Saturday morning then I pity you, because there is often a long queue.
So you hand over your red card and if you remembered to bring ID then they go off to find your parcel. Sometimes this takes them a while... so you have time to look around. There are big notices up that say "NO MOBILE PHONES TO BE USED IN THIS AREA PLEASE!!!!!". Yes, that is 5 exclamation marks.
What happens if someone uses a mobile phone in that area? Does the whole postal system crash? I don't understand why they are so worried about this. Not so much that they have to SHOUT IT AT YOU while you wait.
There are also signs asking you to respect the employees. Which I guess means they have a lot of people in who are cross and take it out on the employees. I'm not going to condone bad behaviour... but I can certainly understand why some people rocking up there, not being able to park, then waiting a long time for a parcel that they would rather have received at their home (as they paid for), might not be feeling at their best by the time they get served.
Once I had to wait more than 10 minutes for them to find my parcel. You would think they had a decent system for this by now...
What would help?
This is the 21st century. Many households are empty during the day. Delivering everything 9-5 is stupid. Delivering everything at the same time to a household when no-one is in is even more stupid.
Why can't I specify a preferred time? Why can't you even try delivering in the afternoon? That doesn't seem so hard.
Why do you return parcels to an out-of-town delivery office, when I live near the Post Office? Why can't I specify a preferred collection point?
At some point I am going to stop shopping with online companies that use Royal Mail and only use the ones that use other couriers. Because I have given you every chance to get into the 21st century... and you have failed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)