Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Tour Operator Fiasco

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
David Goldsmith wrote:
Bode Swiller wrote:
If I'm the judge the first thing I'd say is "what are we doing here?"


Your Honour, the Old Bailey was double-booked. We have therefore transferred you to Ilford County Court.
I hope you don't waste your 15,000th post in the same way
snow report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Quote:
Regulation 13, para 3 - Assuming you accept drkpower's interpretation as to whether that actually applies in this instance.


Give it up Alex, you're wrong, it's over, deal with it...

Quote:

drkpower, is any limit on compensation enforceable at law, whereby it has not be set in legislation or does not have some statutory history?


As a general rule, two adults can agree anything they want to in a contract - so a TO could say that no compensation is payable ever - unless there is a SPECIFIC legislative requirement that compensation cannot be limited - you can never limit compensation for Personal Injury though

Quote:

rayscoops, I'm sure, if he and the other 10 wanted to, he could make a career out of complaining to Neilson / Fast Track and even pulling together a legal case, but a proper lawyer would tell him to go and get a life. He booked an extremely cheap holiday, it went wrong (not his fault), he was offered an alternative (and, let's face it, Les Arcs is actually a good place for a mixed group and not that different to Courchevel), he didn't refuse it he simply decided to "no show" and cost the TO 11 aircraft seats and accommodation costs, he accepted a full refund and, while all this was going on, decided to tell not quite the full story to the general public, labelling the TO's efforts "a fiasco". If I'm the judge the first thing I'd say is "what are we doing here?"


I booked a cheap trip for 8 people (SC, 2*, 4 bed apt) to Pas de la C (€400 including LP), got bumped to 5 seperate apartments in a 3*, B&B apartment 100m down the road on the basis of an overbooking - threatened them with action - 2 letters later, €150pp each (half cash, half vouchers) - There is no way a judge would have given us that much (or anything possibly) but the dynamic you have to appreciate is that it costs TO's a poo-poo load to go to court in these scenarios so you have a bargaining advantage over them so use it - and it helps if you are a stubborn b'stard and it helps when they make the mistake of overbooking a party of 8 lawyers - no sympathy for them
snow conditions
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Paddy Power are giving 6:1 odds that this thread will be longer than Dawn Chorus by this time tomorrow.
snow conditions
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
rayscoops wrote:
Bode Swiller, are [you] involved in the travel industry in some way or another? Laughing


I can answer that. He pretends to be, but actually he runs a Chinese takeaway.
ski holidays
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
drkpower, If 8 lawyers only book 2* SC in Pas De La Casa, you're clearly not winning many cases Laughing
latest report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
[quote] OK you "legal eagles" let's turn the table and get a little hypothetical shall we? (Everyone other than rayscoops, alex_heney, drkpower can now turn to page 46)... What if I was about to book 400 people on a business conference to one of Neilson's summer sporty resorts but, on the strength of the OP's very public comments, decided to withdraw and go book with someone else thereby losing Neilson £250k. If the OP had in fact gone OTT and deliberately and unfairly put Neilson in a bad light (ie damaged their reputation), would Neilson have a justifiable case against the OP to seek damages?

Hey, I said it was hypothetical but I await your manuscripts... [quote]

Yes........ or maybe.......!! tricky one, internet forum advice and reliance on same is an immature area with no real substantive judgments thereon as yet - the issue of how reasobaly foreseeable it was for OP that someone viewing a forum would act to cancel a £25oK contract would be a tricky one to overcome!! but, in theory, OP would be liable
snow report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Quote:

drkpower, If 8 lawyers only book 2* SC in Pas De La Casa, you're clearly not winning many cases


I know.......i'm on here all the time doing pro bono work....
snow report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Bode Swiller, Could we incorporate ski helmets into the scenario, as I notice Mr Goldsmith has attempted to start a thread that in page terms may give this one some competition wink
snow conditions
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
drkpower, so then, in theory, TO could counter-claim against OP if OP sued them for compensation? Or is it two seperate cases?... provided all parties are wearing helmets
snow conditions
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:

drkpower, so then, in theory, TO could counter-claim against OP if OP sued them for compensation? Or is it two seperate cases?


Lets just make it clear that this is Mr Hypothetical OP and not Mr Ed OP (......is he a horse?).

With that out of the way.......again in theory, he could counterclaim, but in reality, H. OP's claim for a few quid in compo would be before the UK equivalent of what in Ireland is the Small Claims Court - H. TO's £250,000 counterclaim would be a little outside their jurisdiction....... - so in reality, TO would take a seperate case i would imagine.

Is it just me, or does the image of a poor OP who claims for £100 being hit with a £250,000 counterclaim, make them weep with tears (of laughter) ........... yes?
ski holidays
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Bode Swiller, Not wearing helmets against the SCGB advice, therefore self inflicted injury and contributory negligence, no case to answer mulud!
snow conditions
 And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
drkpower, OK, maybe a £250k counter-claim would be a bit OTT Cool . But let's say that H.OP sues for £2,000, can H.TO counterclaim for damages because of goings on on a forum? (I guess they'd need to prove actual financial damages, lawyers fees, executive time etc). This is new territory really. In a letter of complaint you can get away with saying virtually anything because nobody else sees it but expressing your displeasure via a forum must open some up to potential legal issues. Consumers can't have it all 100% one way in my view.

Another question... Direct Ski are agents based in Ireland. I could book a Neilson holiday via them. I live in the UK. Does that mean I'm protected by the Irish legislation?
snow report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Boredsurfing wrote:
Bode Swiller, Not wearing helmets against the SCGB advice, therefore self inflicted injury and contributory negligence, no case to answer mulud!
I'm more likely to wear one in court than on the piste that's for sure.
ski holidays
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Bode Swiller, Laughing Laughing
ski holidays
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Quote:

But let's say that H.OP sues for £2,000, can H.TO counterclaim for damages because of goings on on a forum? This is new territory really.


It certainly is and a full reply will bring us to over 20 pages..... So i will be ultra-brief

The theoretical answer is that publishing something on a forum has the exact same rules as publishing in a newspaper or TV - therefore if an OP libels someone or intentionally provide incorrect information resulting in financial losses, the OP and the Forum would be liable. But the two major stumbling blocks are (1) foreseeability and (2) the public policy consequences:
1) is it reasonably foreseeable that a random viewer (RV) of this forum would cancel a trip based on OP's advice - the RV has no idea who OP is, why would it be reasonable for RV to act in this way......a (poor-ish) analogy is "graffiti on the wall" - is it reasonable for someone to act on the basis of something written there....... hardly
2) the effect of a decision to impose liability on Forums would be massive (all reputable Forums would pretty much close immediately) - it would be hugely detrimental to the internet and, personally, i think a judge would not go there.
snow conditions
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Quote:

Direct Ski are agents based in Ireland. I could book a Neilson holiday via them. I live in the UK. Does that mean I'm protected by the Irish legislation?


Dont see why not but I presume their Irish T&C's only apply on packages emanating from here (ie. you would have to fly from Ireland)
Im sure they have separate T&C's for packages emanating from UK
ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
drkpower, and finally, could all tour operators club together and take out a class action against all their punters for being collectively colossaly stupid whether all wearing helmets or not?
snow report
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Bode Swiller, No - because it can be conclusively shown that for many many years they have been aware that all punters are idiots and already adapted to treat them accordingly...
snow conditions
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
[quote="drkpower"][quote] OK you "legal eagles" let's turn the table and get a little hypothetical shall we? (Everyone other than rayscoops, alex_heney, drkpower can now turn to page 46)... What if I was about to book 400 people on a business conference to one of Neilson's summer sporty resorts but, on the strength of the OP's very public comments, decided to withdraw and go book with someone else thereby losing Neilson £250k. If the OP had in fact gone OTT and deliberately and unfairly put Neilson in a bad light (ie damaged their reputation), would Neilson have a justifiable case against the OP to seek damages?

Hey, I said it was hypothetical but I await your manuscripts...
Quote:


Yes........ or maybe.......!! tricky one, internet forum advice and reliance on same is an immature area with no real substantive judgments thereon as yet - the issue of how reasobaly foreseeable it was for OP that someone viewing a forum would act to cancel a £25oK contract would be a tricky one to overcome!! but, in theory, OP would be liable


maybe in USA, not in UK.
snow conditions
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
rayscoops, Think you're wrong but I'll need to leave it to my learned friends to explain... I have to go and see a Bulgarian gap-year student (on less than the statutory minimum wage) and make him genuflex out of respect before me while delivering a perfect pint.
snow conditions
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Quote:

maybe in USA, not in UK.


In what respect, Rayscoops?
ski holidays
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
drkpower wrote:
Quote:

But let's say that H.OP sues for £2,000, can H.TO counterclaim for damages because of goings on on a forum? This is new territory really.


It certainly is and a full reply will bring us to over 20 pages..... So i will be ultra-brief

The theoretical answer is that publishing something on a forum has the exact same rules as publishing in a newspaper or TV - therefore if an OP libels someone or intentionally provide incorrect information resulting in financial losses, the OP and the Forum would be liable. But the two major stumbling blocks are (1) foreseeability and (2) the public policy consequences:
1) is it reasonably foreseeable that a random viewer (RV) of this forum would cancel a trip based on OP's advice - the RV has no idea who OP is, why would it be reasonable for RV to act in this way......a (poor-ish) analogy is "graffiti on the wall" - is it reasonable for someone to act on the basis of something written there....... hardly
2) the effect of a decision to impose liability on Forums would be massive (all reputable Forums would pretty much close immediately) - it would be hugely detrimental to the internet and, personally, i think a judge would not go there.


in which case the Daily Mash and Not The Nine O'Clock News is in trouble Very Happy and every satirical publication for that matter, but no one believes them so they, in the main, get away with most things

I think you are wrong ..... but an interesting twist would be ......

the main point is that no one reading a forum could ever take something like this on face value, or if they did they would be acting in an unrealistic manner, because a forum is just an unedited load of tosh, in the main, and the words of one person in such circumstances should not hold any importance ........ but if Admin had cause to edit the odd post or two or perhaps 'steer' a discussion then I would not be so sure because it then suggests some form of 'formal publication with edit/ratification and review' which is likely to have more influence on the general public and in which case the forum might become a bit culpable Shocked
latest report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
drkpower wrote:
Quote:

maybe in USA, not in UK.


In what respect, Rayscoops?


they could sue on some general basis that their standing as a TO has been tarnished and maybe receive some form of damages, but they would never be able to prove a malicious and direct link between the defamer's comments and the specific actions of a third party, it would just be the word of some one changing their mind and booking another holiday which is just too weak under the UK legal system. The USA seems to be a bit more fanciful in such matters
ski holidays
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Quote:

no one reading a forum could ever take something like this on face value, or if they did they would be acting in an unrealistic manner


In fairness, that is pretty much my point.

On the wider point, defamation simply requires "publication" and does not specify in what form that publication must take so THEORETICALLY a forum could be liable especially as they have the CAPABILITY to review/edit/delete every post and their failure to do so may be no Defence - it may be unedited tosh but if some idiot writes a note saying that the local priest is a paedophile and drops a copy in every letter box on his road, it is certainly unedited tosh but still gives rise to a libel. And if a local paper publishes it and doesnt bother to edit it (even though the paper could if it wanted), they would be liable for publishing that libel.
snow report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:

drkpower wrote:
Quote:

maybe in USA, not in UK.

In what respect, Rayscoops?

they could sue on some general basis that their standing as a TO has been tarnished and maybe receive some form of damages, but they would never be able to prove a malicious and direct link between the defamer's comments and the specific actions of a third party, it would just be the word of some one changing their mind and booking another holiday which is just too weak under the UK legal system. The USA seems to be a bit more fanciful in such matters


Absolutely, i agree with that analysis - it would require a fairly unusual set of circumstances to show the link that you identified.
snow conditions
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
drkpower wrote:
Quote:

no one reading a forum could ever take something like this on face value, or if they did they would be acting in an unrealistic manner


In fairness, that is pretty much my point.

On the wider point, defamation simply requires "publication" and does not specify in what form that publication must take so THEORETICALLY a forum could be liable especially as they have the CAPABILITY to review/edit/delete every post and their failure to do so may be no Defence - it may be unedited tosh but if some idiot writes a note saying that the local priest is a paedophile and drops a copy in every letter box on his road, it is certainly unedited tosh but still gives rise to a libel. And if a local paper publishes it and doesnt bother to edit it (even though the paper could if it wanted), they would be liable for publishing that libel.


drkpower, I think the crucial point is that forums are unedited even if there is a capability, and newpapers in comparison are edited and set them selves up as news sources and are therefore more believeable. If a forum is subject to some 'editing' then posts become less 'the words of individuals' (and therefore have little importance) and more the words of an 'entity' which is likely to be something that one would believe. I have been thinking about setting up a forum and I would never edit or comment on issues as the administrator of it for fear of attracting a 'corporate' liability for the views of the individuals
ski holidays
 And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
I'm absolutely delighted that Bode Swiller is still banging on about that hypothetical Balkan barkeep.
latest report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Quote:

I think the crucial point is that forums are unedited even if there is a capability, and newpapers in comparison are edited and set them selves up as news sources and are therefore more believeable


Not sure if the first part of that sentence holds up - a Forum is CAPABLE of editing its content just as much as a newspaper is. I know that it is certainly far more impractical for a fourm to do so, but i wouldnt be so sure if that would stand up as a Defence if someone was genuinely defamed.

I agree wholehartedly with the latter point that they hold themselves out as being a "news source" whereas forum dont (at least to the same extent) but would that point alone protect a forum? i'm not so sure it would.

Imagine athread was posted where an OP deliberately and falsely accused a public figure of being a paedophile, persisted in the accusation, identified various instances of the accusation and posted forged photos of the figure engaging in paedophilia..... and imagine the Forum did nothing..... do you think that the public figure would have a case??? I cant see why he wouldnt to be honest. Sure, the bar would be higher than if a newspaper did it, but i still think the forum may be liable. But i'm open to convincing......
ski holidays
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Just want to see if my 100th post will open a new page.....................
snow conditions
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
balls
ski holidays
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
My understanding as a scribe is that drkpower is correct and rayscoops has a misunderstanding on this.

The law, as I understand it, sees an internet forum as a publication like any other publication. That said, a court would probably recognise the need for some time interval for moderators to delete/edit a defamatory comment from a thread.

That's my understanding of UK law, anyway. I believe there are now some US states where the law recognises the poster as solely responsible for defamatory comment and indemnifies the website, in the interests of responsible free speech and reasonable protection of the publisher.

UK libel law has always been a matter of contention. Back in 1836 (a year I'm interested in, because there was an avalanche in Sussex at the end of it!), newspapers combined forces to demand changes to libel laws which they argued protected the rich and powerful too greatly. And so they formed the Provincial Newspaper Society (which is, to this day, the Newspaper Society).

In more relevant/topical terms, I'm not aware of a single case of a UK ski website being successfully sued for libel (and there must be a ten-year history of them now).
snow report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
obviously i agree with David Golsmith!
snow conditions
 Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
drkpower wrote:
obviously i agree with David Golsmith!
newbies always learn the hard way
latest report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
HI Guys,

I am here....

jeez don't any of you have any work to do? Smile

Sorry I was away at the w/end and have a web-site to get finished for someone, so have been just a teeny bit busy since.

I also said in my last post that I would post again when/if I had any news.....and well to be honest....there wasn't any so it didn't seem much point.

But I came back to snowheads today as we received an answer to an email from Neilsons this morning. This is the first that we have heard from them since PipT's post (not that that was for us). Of course, they only said they had received our email and that we would hear next from Fast Track....heh ho.

Now....so many points to answer and I can't really do all of them and I think I should answer some of bodeswillers points. but first the others.

I am sure most would be better answered by a PM....but I don't seem to be able to work out how to do it on this forum.

So in no particular order:

[Bode Swiller]

Quote:
Anyway, I'm losing the will to live here. It went wrong, nobody died and they have their money back. Move on.

Know what you mean mate! I often had to remind myself that when I had the wife in tears and the teenagers in a fury (again). It wasn't like we were in Gaza, or one of our teenagers had just died of a fit....but still, it was more than a teeny mite aggravating.


[drkpower] thanks for all the legal stuff, some of your posts were looking awfully like the letter I wrote to Neilsons. I was going to offer you a pint in Dublin, when I was next over (have a client there)....but then you spoilt it by wondering if I was a horse...so wen't off the idea.

[Agentere] You wondered who was the 'Principal'? So do we. We asked this solidly through the negotiations. We could only talk to Fast Track and they would only say 'It is up to Neilsons', but if we asked to talk to them, they would say 'No, we have to talk to Fast Track'. If we asked Fast Track who was responsible, they would say Neilsons, but our contract was with them.

[Boredsurfing] You asked whether we had now received compensation and how. - I think I last posted to the effect that we had received compensation in the form of a separate cheque for £275 - £25 per person from Fast Track. I believe it has now been banked....we presume it won't bounce!! Twisted Evil

[Paulio] You said we were offered a 'significant upgrade'. That was their words....not mine. Maybe it was....certainly nominally according to the brochures it was.....but two points. The first is that if I book a holiday to go skiing with my 5 year old, then I don't consider somewhere that makes this 'harder' an upgrade. They could of put me in a 5 star hotel will all expenses paid in St Moritz with Keira Knightley as a chamber made, but if I could not take my 5 year old skiing safely and easily....then for me - it is no upgrade. Secondly, if it was a 'significant upgrade' why was (is) the accommodation at the Les Arcs apartment being sold so much cheaper than the accommodation we originally booked in Courchevel. If the resorts were 'equivalent' as they say and the accommodation a 'significant upgrade', wouldn't you expect it to be more expensive, rather than less?

[rayscoops]

Quote:
Bode Swiller, in which case I would recommend checking how much the same holiday costs later this season and provide the refunded sum as payment for the holiday, or expect the difference in price by way of compensation so he will be able to book something equitable with someone else


We have tried this argument with Fast Track and it has always been an offered alternative and I await their thoughts.

[bodeswiller]

Quote:
rayscoops, I'm sure, if he and the other 10 wanted to, he could make a career out of complaining to Neilson / Fast Track and even pulling together a legal case, but a proper lawyer would tell him to go and get a life. He booked an extremely cheap holiday, it went wrong (not his fault), he was offered an alternative (and, let's face it, Les Arcs is actually a good place for a mixed group and not that different to Courchevel), he didn't refuse it he simply decided to "no show" and cost the TO 11 aircraft seats and accommodation costs, he accepted a full refund and, while all this was going on, decided to tell not quite the full story to the general public, labelling the TO's efforts "a fiasco". If I'm the judge the first thing I'd say is "what are we doing here?"


Beginning to think you have got it in for me Crying or Very sad

A few points here:

For sure, I have better things to do with my life than spend it with lawyers. I had hoped to be resting after a knackering week of skiing and for that matter, I also have better things to do than spending too long writing on forums....and god knows how much time we all spend doing that!

You say we booked an 'extremely cheap holiday'....how do you know that? It is a bit presumptuous....but I agree true. But is this really relevant. We didn't hold a gun to anyone's head. We just went online and found the best deal we could at the current market prices. I don't see how this makes any difference. We still made a deal, they were quite happy to accept the money in November, when we had no idea of what conditions might turn up in Jan. And yes the first week in Jan is most probably the cheapest of the season, but that is market forces....not Ed trying to get one over on the poor TO. I don't see why I have to feel bad about this, I skiied for 20 years when I only had to pay for myself, so I spent many weeks in the mountains in a season (record was 9)....but skiing with a family is inclined to make you just a bit more careful about costs - so January it is.

As I said above, I think Courchevel is different to Les Arcs and the apartment offered also.

We didn't simply 'no show'. We negotiated from 8.30am till 5.30pm (or later) at which time all the party refused the alternative arrangement and we cancelled. We had been already told Fast Track would not close until 10.00pm. We confirmed our cancellation by email to Fast Track and also rang Thomsons-air to confirm that we would not be on the flight. Of course this would be too late for them to do anything about the flights, but when we get told of the change with only one working day to go before departure, I don't feel too sorry for them.

Yes, we accepted the refund. Despite all of this, we would still like to go skiing this year. Without the refund, we simply could not do it. It is looking likely that even with the refund, the rise of prices as the season goes on will make it impossible.....but to have any chance, we need the refund. We had been advised that taking the money should not prejudice our claim in any way.

You say I
Quote:
decided to tell not quite the full story to the general public
. How is this? What have I not told the forum? If I have missed anything, I apologise, but I have endeavoured to be both honest and open with my posts to the forum.
It is true that I have not given either the exact cost of our holiday (although I am happy to agree with you that it was cheap) nor the exact details of the accommodation. Strangely enough, I was both ready and happy to do so before PipT posted suggesting that these matters should be kept private. As we had not yet received our refund at that time, it seemed prudent to follow his wishes and others in my group asked me not to because they felt it might prevent a speedy refund. Subsequently we have been advised not to.

I originally labelled the post 'A Fiasco' a long time before this blew up....at the time I simply hoped for some advice in solving what seemed to me a simple and quite fixable problem from a knowledgeable set of people.

To be honest, your post comes awfully close to trolling, except I am the newbee on this forum and you the 'super snow-head'. Reading back my posts and yours, I would respectfully suggest that I have approached this with the more open-mind. I am still learning, but it appears you have already made your mind up that I am somehow the villain.

Finally:

[bodeswiller]

Quote:
I sent him a PM and suggested he entered the Montalbert-Villaroger Paradiski Challenge and that you were handling all lodging and transfer requirements. Hope that was OK.


I never got that PM (can someone tell me how to send and/or answer PMs on this forum?)

I keep seeing that 'sig' and would love to know more. I used to really dig doing the full run from Le Fournier to Les Brevs in the Killy Espace. But the full length of Paradiski would be something else....and anything that ends up with that killer run down to Villaroger would be a right giggle. God, my legs ache just thinking about it.

Thanks again to all and everyone who has posted.

The email we got from Neilsons suggested we might hear back from them soonish.....

so will post as soon as I hear anything.

Please don't get cross if I don't post immediately, I will be watching, but I really try to not visit forums when I am working or otherwise, the whole day goes by and I get nothing done at all.

cheers

eib
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
ed.bremner, if you look under the logo at the top you should see a Send/Read Messages button, click on that and you will be able to send and read any PM's
ski holidays
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Most reasonable well thought out post on this topic.
Best of luck with it!
snow report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
ed.bremner, think I'll start with "Evening Ed and a warm welcome back". Some of us were worried that you'd been nobbled. Anyway, I didn't send you a PM, it was a joke... I'm afraid you have to remember to ignore most of what I say and consider the rest as non-serious. With my incredible insight into industry workings though, I kinda worked out that you hadn't paid much for the holiday. To me it is an important factor in determining to what extent you should be miffed and to what degree compensated (others disagree). I fully understand that the free market economy determined the price but when you can buy a week in Courchevel 1850 for less than a decent pair of ski pants, you perhaps shouldn't be totally surprised when the goalposts get moved a bit. I think you've been on the receiving end of the perfect storm... Fast Track getting in the way, French supplier allegedly stuffing up, Neilson hopelessly stymied by Fast Track "owning the customer" but, nonetheless, for the money, you were offered a good alternative. That's my opinion. I would have cheerfully accepted the deal and gone for a slide. I can't live at home for the kind of money I suspect you were going away for. How much was it by the way?
ski holidays
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Bode Swiller

Are ski-pants a reasonable parameter for comparative costs?

If so, I can tell you that the ski holiday cost me the equivalent of 24 pairs and a single leg of the last pair of SOS pants I bought.

OK.....I admit I bought them on ebay, but it did include a nice jacket as well.

cheers

eib
snow report
 You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
ed.bremner, Yes, if the holiday on offer doesn't pass the ski pant test it's probably too good to be true. You obviously don't have to answer but we are 11 pages in and, for some reason, that little fact hasn't come out yet.
snow conditions
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
ed.bremner, Bode 'troll pants' Swiller measures most things by the cost of trousers and sock puppets, so your thinking is spot-on.

ed.bremner wrote:
To be honest, your post comes awfully close to trolling, except I am the newbee on this forum and you the 'super snow-head'.


Not being a troll didn't make Swiller a super-snowHead. He squeezed into a lycra flying suit and couriered the cash to
head(sic)Quarters.

snowHeads wrote:
A one off donation of £30 or a subscription of £25/yr will acquire a 'super-snowHead' tag for 12 months.


My money-saving tip is to pay the £25, since that stipulation seems to be exactly the same as paying the £30 (unless the £25/yr subscription is an irrevocable multiple-year contract). But I think you deserve to be a super-snowHead anyway, for the entertainment value of this thread.
ski holidays



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy