 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi t1gg3er,
| Quote: | | Oh, and by the way - I'm female & don't appreciate people making assumptions about who or what I am without taking the time to ask the questions directly first. I find that quite arrogant and rude. |
Don't let RHPS and his 'attitude' bother you. I get the impression Mother Theresa could upset him some days.
Arrogant and rude is what he does best but he's a pussycat really. 
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You don't like people making assumptions, but...
| Quote: | | but was very conscious that I didn't like the guy on a personal basis |
We all do it, t1gg3r - but I'd say simply assuming someone is male/female when they are vice versa is somewhat lower down the scale than disliking someone personally in a situation such as the one you were in, and the likely fallout that such an assumption can result in  Personally, I don't like other people accusing me of stuff they clearly do themselves, but I get over it very quickly.
But enough of that.
Did you get any of this stuff in writing? I just wish someone would, then we could be done with these various accusations once and for all.
I had a pupil a year or so ago who had failed a driving test before I took him on. He said he had been failed for not looking behind him when he did a turn in the road - but he was adamant he had. After a few lessons he said "I know what it was now. I WAS looking behind, but only in the mirrors".
And a couple of months ago a pupil told me a friend had failed for not stopping at a STOP line, when he HAD stopped. A few weeks ago, this same pupil came to a STOP line and definitely didn't stop - he just slowed right down... almost to a stop, but not quite. I pulled him over and identified that he hadn't stopped, and he was totally and utterly convinced he had.
I'm sure you see my point.
But on the other side of the coin, we have Saint Dave here, who will believe ANY negative comment about Red, no matter how relevant it is to the main topic, or how true or provable it is. He joins the dots blindfolded, and simply assumes that if a Red salesman has (allegedly) said something which is not correct, this therefore means that Red's training is substandard, that Red's franchise is a rip off, that any foolishness in signing up for a loan is Red's fault, and so on. He assumes that any negative detail proves every other negative perception.
The thing to remember t1gg3r is that a lot of people DO qualify with Red, so your decision to not stir things up whilst in the presentation is sound.
If Red is telling lies then this should be identified once and for all and dealt with. But the vast majority of people who are whinging wilfully signed up and are only now saying bad things because they failed or don't like it and want to back out. They have no intention of becoming ADIs any more. Dave conveniently forgets this each time a new negative appears on the horizon.
Incidentally, tax & NI is best dealt with by putting away 20% of your taxable income, but that is just to make sure you are covered. 14 hours would equate to around £320, and £320 is 20% of £1,600 - and no way does anyone pull in that as taxable income doing this job (you'd be doing around 100 hours a week!)
However, if you turned over £1,000 and removed £150 fuel and £230 franchise (and I'm sure someone told me it was £280+), you're left with £620 - and 20% of that is £124.
But what I'm getting at is the £150 and £230 never actually belongs to you and is never part of the equation - only the £620 is yours.
I'm still pretty sure that someone is missing something, seeing as the alleged amount is almost the franchise fee alone!!!! Fair enough, I'll accept that one possibility is that the rep was a zillion miles out and was almost claiming your overall outgoings would come to less than the franchise fee alone - but I very much doubt it. Such allegations would definitely require proof.
More importantly, I'm sure you are far more interested in qualifying as an ADI than you are in dissing Red moving forward.
Leave it to Dave to fly off at a new tangent each time someone says something bad |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS,
| Quote: | We all do it, t1gg3r - but I'd say simply assuming someone is male/female when they are vice versa is somewhat lower down the scale than disliking someone personally in a situation such as the one you were in, and the likely fallout that such an assumption can result in
|
I think assuming someone is a plant without asking the question first is probably also an issue. For me it is what their argument is rather than who it is from.
| Quote: | | Did you get any of this stuff in writing? I just wish someone would, then we could be done with these various accusations once and for all. |
If you were running the presentation, would YOU put that sort of thing in writing?
You aren't going to get proof because it's obvious that no-one is going to make firm promises about workload or earnings. In this game they just couldn't do that. If I'm honest I don't rely on anything that anyone says because this is JUST a forum, a chance to talk crap for a few minutes at the end of the day. When you demand evidence and proof I sometimes wonder what planet you are on but then I think that you demand evidence and proof because you know that no DIT company worth it's salt will let any slip out if at all possible and you probably feel that this strengthens your argument.
What actually happens is that people make up their own minds by looking at all the posts, thinking about human nature and deciding that DIT companies WILL take liberties and push the legalities of making a sale to the limit to turn a profit. t1gg3er looks legit to me and that was what I thought when I saw the original post. It rang true. You obviously thought otherwise.
So let's see;
You say that I am prepared to accept any and all negative comments about Red without any real evidence.
You say that a post which appears to criticize Red is written by a 'plant' without any real evidence.
You see the dichotomy?
| Quote: | But on the other side of the coin, we have Saint Dave here, who will believe ANY negative comment about Red, no matter how relevant it is to the main topic, or how true or provable it is. He joins the dots blindfolded, and simply assumes that if a Red salesman has (allegedly) said something which is not correct, this therefore means that Red's training is substandard, that Red's franchise is a rip off, that any foolishness in signing up for a loan is Red's fault, and so on. He assumes that any negative detail proves every other negative perception.
|
I am actually not prepared to accept any and all negative comments about Red but they are opinions freely given and as a body they tend to suggest that there is an ongoing and quite large problem with this sort of business so I post them. What other people make of them is their affair.
Some of these comments however are believable because of what I hear myself. People routinely say that they were told they would make good instructors because they can talk and drive at the same time and they routinely say that they were told they would qualify quickly and could pay the loan back out of their first years earnings. These are people who do not know each other and who in many cases have never heard of these forums/websites.
Is every single one of them making it all up and simultaneously and independently making up the same phraseology too?
I don't think so and neither do you, your problem is that you refuse to admit it. When you refuse to accept the obvious it makes you appear biased, prejudiced and unreliable.
Surely that can't be true?
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
t1gg3er
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 4
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I didn't get anything in writing - only the fugures quoted in their brochure. Different from what was written on the flip chart but still seem too good to be true to me (altho I do tend to be cynical by nature):
Franchise based on RED Drving School, Vaux Corsa package as at Aug 09
Weekly Income
40 lessons @ £25 - £1000
Expenditure
Franchise Fee - £185
Fuel - £100
Phone - £5
Acc & Sick Insurance £5
ADI Licence Renewal - £1.50
Tot Expenditure - £296.50
Income
Before Tax & NI £703.50 per week
That's £36,582 per year (assuming you never take a holiday or suffer any illness)!
I've managed to speak to another ADI who reckons that for every hour's tuition she gives she works an additional 30min between book-keeping, diary management & travel between lessons. Granted, she's independant & presumably with a franchise the diary-management is done for you? Still makes it a heck of a long week tho & that's assuming you can find that many clients in the current economic climate.
The only other thing I would say is that everyone who intends to pay any organisation for a service has the same opportunity to do a bit of digging around for information before deciding to hand over their money.
As long as there are people prepared to take things at face value, get caught up the the excitement & hand over their money, there are always going to be others more than happy to relieve them of it & whilst not what I would call ethical, I'm not sure it's legally wrong?
Based on various sources of information, I've decided not to go through RED (had you already guessed?). I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who've had good experiences with them, possibly even the majority, but £3728 is a lot of money to me & I'm not about to take a chance on being one of the ones it all goes wrong for.
One more quick question, then I'll stop prattling (promise). Within a 7 mile radius, we have a huge university & 3 colleges - do you tend to find they're a good source for clients or are students generally too broke to pay for driving lessons?
Thanks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wide Dave wrote: | | If you were running the presentation, would YOU put that sort of thing in writing? |
It would depend entirely on whether I believed it and was simply making a mistake, or -as is your automatic stance on this - deliberately lying  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
T1gg3r, I might be missing something but those figures are NOT what you said previously.
On the income of £700 (I said £620 in my earlier quick calculations) you would put away 20% of it - that's £140. Add it to the £300 expenditure and it is £440 overall off your gross turnover.
You said that they told you tax and NI was included in the expenditure, but it clearly wasn't. That's exactly what I said!
The only questionable figure in all that is the number of hours you work in a week. No one can guarantee 40 hours because work goes up and down like a yo-yo, but the point is that if you average 40 hours then that's what you will pull in.
Some people DO, I ca assure you - but not fresh-faced independents who are cutting their own throats as they undercut each other to try and fill their empty diaries.
Those figures DO stand up to scrutiny as long as it is recognised that if you DON'T do 40 hours you WON'T make £700 a week.
I hope Saint Dave will now admit he jumped in AGAIN with both feet without even trying to ascertain the facts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Prattle as much as you want as long as it is helping you to learn. Open minds are better than closed ones.
What matters is your turnover and your expenses. Instructors who start trying to cost travelling time and time off are on a hiding to nothing. They are the ones who really don't have a clue.
To succeed - especially in the early days - you need to work long hours and long weeks. Start playing the 9-5, no school run, no weekends game and you may as well forget it as a significant source of income. Pocket money, maybe, but not the main income.
Colleges and Universities CAN be a good source of pupils, but it isn't a tap that is available to everyone. Some indies spend hours sitting outside and handing out flyers and never get a sniff. But the larger franchises often do a little better. There again, some indies swear by them.
Uni students (especially if it is a proper Uni and not Clown Uni) are often better off than you think - particularly in their first year
College students are often local and funded by mum and dad.
Yes, there are some paupers, but leave those to the undercutters selling 10 lessons for £99. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
t1gg3er
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
Posts: 4
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RotHeissPfefferStreber wrote: | T1gg3r, I might be missing something but those figures are NOT what you said previously.
You said that they told you tax and NI was included in the expenditure, but it clearly wasn't. That's exactly what I said!
|
I know the figures aren't what I aid previously - my post did say that the figures in the brochure are different to the ones written on the flip chart.
The ones from the flip-chart stated the equivalent of 8 hours earnings to cover the car/franchise, then another 6 hours between fuel, phone, Tax & NI totaling the equivalent of 14hrs per week. They were also based on giving 42hrs tuition (not 40 as per the brochure) @ £24 (not £25 as per the brochure) per week.
I understand that as with most things in life you'll only get out what you put in & if you want to earn mega-bucks then long hours at the beck & call of your clients will be needed. I'm fine with that & have no problem with hard work altho I'd be happy with half to two thirds of the income mentioned above. But as a complete newbie with no experience it will take time to build a reputation & start getting recommendations so a full diary is unlikely for a good long while.
Would I be about right in thinking around 1-2 years to get to a point where your diary is more from your own recommendations than from the franchise (assuming that I'll have what it takes & actually manage to qualify!). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS, t1gg3er,
| Quote: | | I hope Saint Dave will now admit he jumped in AGAIN with both feet without even trying to ascertain the facts. |
| Quote: | | Does it not also strike you as odd that someone with one post can jump in as if they are a regular (even though the thread scares a lot of people away), have an already well-developed chip on their shoulder about Red, and make a bunch of accusations in the typical Krazy Red Leader manner? |
I have other examples.
Yes RHPS, I'm prepared to admit that in some instances I do that but then so do you as I've illustrated above. If you are talking about all the earnings figures then you have to understand that I don't even look at them. If you make financial and career choices based on the financial uncertainties of teaching learner drivers then you deserve everything you get. At BSM we were encouraged to book pupils in on the first lesson every week at the same time for as many weeks in advance as possible. Guess what? People were ill, went on holiday, had exams to do and even had the nerve to spend money on Christmas presents for their relatives rather than book lessons. In fact they generally did everything they could to cock up my nice, neat diary pad.
t1gg3er, that's something that you learn to manage over time but all you have to do to be successful as an instructor is keep working as many hours as you can for as long as you can and ideally have a low turnover of pupils (apart from test passes). Pupil retention is important on a franchise or as an independent because if you are losing pupils for any reason other than passing a test you won't see their friends and relatives will you? Recommendations are the way to go and come about by doing the job properly. Your problem is not building up the hours but keeping your diary consistently full. Your best source of pupils once established is the one you have sitting in the seat next to you and the best way to get them selling for you is to be incredibly nice to them and get them a driving licence. Although I've mentioned a low turnover of pupils don't be tempted to 'drag out' the number of lessons someone takes. I get pupils from other instructors all the time because of that. I also get all their friends and relatives as recommendations.
That's all you have to do. It's easy.
So why can so many new ADI's not do it? Because as RHPS said somewhere on this thread, they are crap at business. Business is about your customer. Turn up on time in a clean car that doesn't stink of cigarettes or fast food, always give the full time that your pupil has paid for and give good quality instruction without shouting and screaming at them. Make sure that they are ready for their test and do everything in your power to see that they enjoy the experience. GET THEM LAUGHING! You will thrive and other instructors will have to go back to working for a living.
Do you go with a big name franchise like the AA or BSM after you qualify or do you go with someone smaller and cheaper? Ask yourself, If you wanted lessons for your son who would you call? That will give you a very rough indication of whether they can keep you busy but nothing is guaranteed. Personally if I was franchising I would go for the AA because they are a big name and their fees appear reasonable compared to BSM plus the car is better. I have heard that they swamp areas with instructors but at least the franchise is proven.
One small item in the list of expenses you (I'm going to call you tigger from now on if you don't mind) have given us is 'phone'. Do not under any circumstances use the 'phone that a driving school give you to keep in contact with your pupils. Use your own 'phone because if you get established and decide to leave the franchise you will have to go around all your pupils and make sure they have your number rather than the one for the 'phone you have had to give back. They are YOUR pupils and you should make sure that they only deal with you direct.
Students could form the core of your business and some instructors in University towns don't do much else. I know of an instructor who bought a Mini purely because he only really wanted to teach 17 year olds. Don't worry too much about the market in your area. A city the size of Manchester is about as good as it gets so it's all about getting those pupils and keeping them.
RHPS is right about students not all being skint and about not everyone getting a sniff at Uni's and colleges. I've just finished teaching a pupil whose Dad you will have heard of so they aren't all skint. If one student loves you then the work won't stop but if one thinks you were bad news you won't see any more. You will also find that as a female instructor you will often have a diary full of female pupils. One female instructor I know asked me a while back 'what's it like to teach a lad'? because it was so long since she had.
I think you've made a good decision to go by the self help route. Your financial exposure is limited that way until you decide whether to go through Part 3. That is when it starts to cost real money but by then you will have some idea of whether or not it is for you.
Best of luck.
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi tigger,
| Quote: | | As long as there are people prepared to take things at face value, get caught up the the excitement & hand over their money, there are always going to be others more than happy to relieve them of it & whilst not what I would call ethical, I'm not sure it's legally wrong? |
The 'Misleading commercial practices and unfair trading regulations 2008' say it is illegal if potential customers are misled either by act or omission. i.e; If a company fails to give them information which might cause an average consumer to decline to sign the contract then that is illegal. That's probably one of the reasons why Red has recently changed the info on it's website.
http://www.england-legislation.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2008/draft/ukdsi_9780110811574_en_2#pt2-l1g6
| Quote: | | Based on various sources of information, I've decided not to go through RED (had you already guessed?). I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who've had good experiences with them, possibly even the majority, but £3728 is a lot of money to me & I'm not about to take a chance on being one of the ones it all goes wrong for. |
The problem for me in Red's approach is that they ask for the full fee up front KNOWING that qualification rates are so low and that their potential customers probably DON'T KNOW how hard it is to qualify. If they offered pay as you go or modular payments in addition to their full fee up front approach I would be happy with that EVEN IF every single customer paid in full up front. As long as they had the option that would be fine with me. As it stands all the people who fail are doing is paying for the TV ads.
Did the presenter at your meeting tell you how low the pass rates were for parts 1, 2 and 3?
What did he tell you about Red's pass rates?
Did he tell you that once you had signed the contract you would get nothing back even if you didn't get past part 1, workbook 1?
Did he mention that Red's course is very expensive compared to other courses?
Did he mention that you could work through the examinations on your own, at your leisure and for much less expense?
Did he attempt to give you the impression that he was an ADI himself, thereby adding weight to his little script?
I'm not trying to scare you off in fact you seem quite switched on and enthusiastic and would hope that you go for it on that basis. I'm asking these questions to establish what Red are telling people who go along to their meetings since we very rarely get someone on here who is literate and can remember what was said.
RHPS scares them off.
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS,
Take a look at the Passmasters site.
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry,
Take a look at the Passmasters THREAD. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
But the fact remains that you accepted something at face value (AGAIN), forged ahead with your prejudices on the strength of it IN SPITE OF WARNINGS BY ME, and effectively refuse to admit you were wrong (and I was right) and that you should take a few steps back with those now-strengthened prejudices
Instead, your attitude going forward is based on the premise that the claims made (and your blind-but-subsequently-clearly-misplaced faith in them) were correct
Don't get embroiled in trying to dismiss those basic calculations, Dave.
If you average 40 hours a week and charge £25 an hour, then they are correct. The only 'contradiction' if you are being predantic - and I know you like that - is that Red claims on its website "up to £600" and yet at this presentation has apparently given figures of £700.
But the fact remains the figures are as sound as they could be for a theoretical comparison and they are NOT misleading as was originally claimed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Goes to show, doesn't it?
A satisfied Passmasters trainee who wouldn't have revealed himself if it hadn't have been for this situation! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS,
| Quote: | But the fact remains that you accepted something at face value (AGAIN), forged ahead with your prejudices on the strength of it IN SPITE OF WARNINGS BY ME, and effectively refuse to admit you were wrong (and I was right) and that you should take a few steps back with those now-strengthened prejudices
Instead, your attitude going forward is based on the premise that the claims made (and your blind-but-subsequently-clearly-misplaced faith in them) were correct |
Sorry mate but I haven't got a clue what you are talking about. If we are talking about prejudice then your view that anyone who ever said anything negative about Red must be a whinger even if those people were misled into signing a contract is a clear case. Your bias and prejudice is taken for granted now and I don't think you even realise how ridiculous it makes you look.
Now you've also started to ramble again. It's sad to see.
Most people would look at the 'Passmasters going bust' situation and see it as an example of why you shouldn't pay for a full course up front. You see the poor chap as a satisfied customer.
You have a strange view of the world and it's getting stranger. Either that or you're on the beer.
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wouldn't play the dumb card too often, Dave - we know the pack you use has 52 of them!
You know full well what I am saying - but let me explain for you
Tigg3r came on here and made an accusation that turned out to be false.
YOU ACCEPTED THIS FALSE CLAIM TOTALLY AND WITHOUT ANY COMPUNCTION - AS YOU HAVE DONE WITH EVERY SINGLE OTHER NEGATIVE COMMENT ANYONE HAS MADE. YOU THEN FORGED AHEAD, BEHAVING AS IF THIS CLAIM HAD GIVEN YOU NEW GROUNDS TO DO SO.
Fair enough, T1gg3r apparently made a genuine mistake - she claimed that she had been told that the expenses figure she was given by Red INCLUDED tax & NI. Now she has been pushed to explain what was actually said, it is clear that this was NOT the case - and in fact it was exactly what I had said (both recently and several times in throughout this thread). In other words: REAL AND RELIABLE THEORETICAL FIGURES.
And your response? Was it to be embarrassed keep quiet? No. Was it to admit your mistake? No.
Your response was a half-hearted attempt to try and continue as if the accusations were true - and when challenged further, to try this highly transparent DUMB card
For anyone following this, YOU BELIEVED A FALSE ACCUSATION YET AGAIN, YOU DEFENDED IT, YOU TRIED TO CONTINUE RUNNING WITH IT WHEN IT WAS SHOWN TO BE FALSE, AND YOU REFUSE TO ADMIT THE MISTAKE EVEN NOW.
Oh, and while we are on the subject - now that YOU know the claim was false, aren't you KNOWINGLY using FALSE information to push your prejudice against Red? Doesn't that mean you are acting in a libellous way... using YOUR definition, you understand?
LYING, PREJUDICED HYPOCRITE
Would you like me to ramble some more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russet Guzzler
Joined: 22 Feb 2009
Posts: 1565
Location: Near Stokey Fire Station
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wide Dave wrote: |
| Quote: | Russet Guzzler
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:06 pm Post subject:
There's a lot more than one Facebook site that's anti RED, Red, but there's no reports of any RED litigation against its detractors...unless you know different, of course |
What are you trying to say, RG? |
RHPS = RED Hot Pepper Spinner/Driver/Careerist (you choose) - seems a strange login to employ to demonstrate independence from the organisation it's defending, especially when Chilli came in as back up
Nevertheless, it's probably safer than going after your critics for defamation when you don't have a legal backup the size of Tesco's, which was my point...
And even if RHPS isn't connected, I can't think RED would be too pleased with Red's heavy handed approach at being its advocate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I've said before, I don't care what Red thinks - or anyone else.
Incidentally, is your only input on this going to remain at the banal level you have chosen, or do you have enough - indeed, any - knowledge on this subject to be able to contribute in any positive way?
That's what we call a rheorical question, by the way. We know the answer already |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 11:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS, RG, tigger,
RHPS, I still haven't got a clue what you are talking about. If it's got something to do with Red's claimed earnings figures then so what? I didn't even look at them never mind sit down with a calculator and pick them to bits. The reason I didn't even look at them and can't be bothered to now is that they are completely irrelevant as far as new instructors are concerned. No doubt Red and other DIT companies would have us believe that every instructor works 40 or so hours every week consistently throughout the year but you and I know that isn't true don't we? As I said;
| Quote: | | If you are talking about all the earnings figures then you have to understand that I don't even look at them. If you make financial and career choices based on the financial uncertainties of teaching learner drivers then you deserve everything you get. At BSM we were encouraged to book pupils in on the first lesson every week at the same time for as many weeks in advance as possible. Guess what? People were ill, went on holiday, had exams to do and even had the nerve to spend money on Christmas presents for their relatives rather than book lessons. In fact they generally did everything they could to cock up my nice, neat diary pad. |
But there you go anyway trying to make some sort of issue out of it like the pedant that you are. tigger has put some information up and you have decided, because she didn't sign up with Red and shock, horror, didn't like being lied to by their salesman that you have to go for the throat. You can't stand it can you? You haven't won a single significant argument or made a useful, valid point for ages now so you are trying to say that because a 't' wasn't crossed or an 'i' wasn't dotted then everything else must be suspect. You have no sense of proportion whatsoever, have you?
Let's put it in simple terms. IF Red sell 10,000 courses then that is 10,000 multiplied by £3,800.00p which equals £38 MILLION!
I don't know the true figures but if they train 1 in 10 of those people to ADI standard then that will cost them £3.8million. Where does the other £34.2million go? It can't cost all that money to send out some workbooks or run their training centres can it? I should imagine the biggest part of it goes to the TV companies but even so there must be a damn good profit to be had. All those £3,800 fees are from people for whom that is a lot of money. It costs them a relative fortune to climb onto the Big Red rollercoaster and what do they get from it? In most cases nothing but debt and embarrassment at being so trusting and gullible that they fell for the spiel.
10,000 people apply. 1,000 pass. 9,000 fail. All pay £3,800 or at least they should pay £3,800. Some of them won't qualify and so can't pay back the £3,800 'out of their first years earnings'. They then owe around £7,000 as the loan period expires.
You think that's fine. That says everything we will ever need to know about you and your pedantic little 'points'.
RG,
| Quote: | | And even if RHPS isn't connected, I can't think RED would be too pleased with Red's heavy handed approach at being its advocate |
I can remember saying ages ago that he can't possibly be connected to Red for that same reason. Red's PR company must wince at the thought of RHPS being their representative here on Earth. I opined also that it was more likely he was working for Gumtree than Red and still think that could be a goer! It might be worth Red slipping him a few quid to go away because if I were Red's PR people I would want this thread to disappear fast. I don't really care though because although I genuinely feel for those people screwed over by all the 'training' schemes/companies in this country it's the argument I enjoy and I don't really care where it comes from.
Is that sad or what?
tigger, Don't take any of this personally. He has a pop at everyone who disagrees with him and the more he's worried the worse he gets. Your posts have that ring of truth about them and so he is looking for a reason to discredit you. That's why he spent hours poring over the figures you posted and probably screamed out in delight when he saw a discrepancy, if there ever was one.
Another question; Do you think a reasonable person would consider themselves to have been misled if they were to sign up for Red's training course given what you have found out since your visit to their offices?
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wide Dave wrote: | | tigger has put some information up and you have decided, because she didn't sign up with Red and shock, horror, didn't like being lied to by their salesman |
No, Dave, you aren't going to squirm out of it that easily
Tigger posted what turned out to be a false accusation.
YOU leapt on it as further proof that your prejudices are justified - as is your wont.
Now that the original claim has been shown to be in error, and in fact the presentation stated facts in almost exactly the same way you or I would present them, you are not going to get away with sweeping it under the carpet. So you can't pretend it doesn't matter. Your position and arguments are based on the existence of fallacious claims such as the one tigger made. A normal person would accept that without proof they cannot make progress.
In your case, you simply INVENT the proof, and then move forward
Every single one of the stories you have latched on to has been of a similar unfounded nature, and yet you use each one to fuel your bias and hypocrisy. Tigger was adamant she was correct, and you supported that simply because that's your position on all this. And yet the claim was wrong - which means you were also wrong. Again.
Red (and other companies) simply point out that IF you work 40 hours then you will earn X. Your claims are just lies built on the back of previous false claims (SUCH AS THE ONE TIGGER POSTED). So save your usual prattling about figures, which you clearly don't understand
Red is a company. A successful company.
You, on the other hand, are a complete berk who keeps imagining up figures about how many trainees it has and trying to calculate what its turnover is. You can find that out quite easily if you look in the right places: it publishes its accounts, for God's sake
Dave, can you PLEASE explain why - in your tiny mind - this information (especially as it is made up) is in any way relevant? Is it a further development of the indistinct issues you have with Red? You know, how you want to like them, but have a major problem with every single aspect of what they do?
I thought you'd like what RG had to say. It's just mindless shit-stirring - but hey, it fits in with your prejudices so it MUST be right, eh? Just like Tigger's story
Tigger's figures didn't need poring over for more than 10 seconds, Dave. Why are you interested in them? You said you hadn't bothered with them!
The claim she made was crystal clear. The defence of that claim when I questioned it was also crystal clear.
And when she posted what was actually said, it was crystal clear that the original claim was incorrect.
I don't think it matters what tigger's answer to your blatantly leading question is, Dave. Tigger declared that she was turned against Red AS A RESULT OF HER BELIEF IN THE CLAIM SHE MADE AGAINST THEM ABOUT THEIR FIGURES. She is not going with Red as a direct result of her erroneous assumptions and misunderstanding of that presentation.
Seeing as the claim she made was wrong, any further propaganda spawned by you as a direct result of that is pointless, isn't it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS,
I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure that you have finally lost it.
Who cares what figures Red give?
Who cares what figures tigger gives?
Who cares if you wear your abacus out and strain your eyes totting up every little penny of those figures deep into the night?
It doesn't matter.
It never has mattered.
The point is that Red and other companies are offering a training course with incredibly low pass rates. They are taking full payment up front for that course in the full knowledge that the vast majority of people who apply will not get anywhere near the qualification they are hoping for. They are taking full payment up front because they know the drop out rate is massive and they want to keep all the money regardless so that they can pay the TV advertising bill.
They are also taking on anyone with a pulse and so setting people up for failure at a vast profit. 'If you can 'talk and drive at the same time' you are in and they allegedly won't let you go even after you have had a heart attack.
The reason I didn't bother to look up their accounts is because I couldn't be bothered to look up their accounts. You would, but then your life is less interesting than most peoples and you actually think all this is important enough to merit looking up accounts. I do this for a laugh. For you it seems to be your raison d'etre.
| Quote: | | I don't think it matters what tigger's answer to your blatantly leading question is, Dave. Tigger declared that she was turned against Red AS A RESULT OF HER BELIEF IN THE CLAIM SHE MADE AGAINST THEM ABOUT THEIR FIGURES. She is not going with Red as a direct result of her erroneous assumptions and misunderstanding of that presentation. |
| Quote: | | I know the figures aren't what I aid previously - my post did say that the figures in the brochure are different to the ones written on the flip chart. |
Do you see? I'll put it in big letters for you shall I?
I know the figures aren't what I aid previously - my post did say that the figures in the brochure are different to the ones written on the flip chart.
Didn't you read that bit?
Why not?
If you had read it you wouldn't be looking quite so stupid right now. People wouldn't be reading your posts and thinking you were a sad little man with a crap username and a grim life. I used to think it was really funny when AntiRed wound you up and got you to flip, which she did quite regularly.
Now I know that anyone can do it.
So it appears that Red are saying one thing in the presentations and putting different stuff in the brochure. Either that or they don't really know WHAT they are doing. So what? It doesn't matter what the figures are because so few people will ever be in a position to get near them.
I'm not going to speak for tigger, she seems perfectly able to speak up for herself, but I suspect the reason she didn't 'Go Red' is because she smelt a rat. Exactly the same rat I smelt all those years ago when I visited Passmasters. You are trying to tell us that Red are selling a training course. Complete and utter bollocks! When they gather people together in their little 'group think' sessions they are trying to sell a £30,000 a year career and an easy life. What percentage of their customers will ever attain that?
Well go on then Mr accountant, WHAT PERCENTAGE?
Could it be less than 10%
Regards,
Dave. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Russet Guzzler
Joined: 22 Feb 2009
Posts: 1565
Location: Near Stokey Fire Station
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RotHeissPfefferStreber wrote: | As I've said before, I don't care what Red thinks - or anyone else.
Incidentally, is your only input on this going to remain at the banal level you have chosen, or do you have enough - indeed, any - knowledge on this subject to be able to contribute in any positive way?
That's what we call a rheorical question, by the way. We know the answer already |
What's banal and negative about pointing out that anyone preparing to shell out over £3K - possibly from redundancy money - in the hopes of getting a well paid job, should take very great care over what they're signing, who they're paying and what they're really getting?
From the numbers of people who appear to be shafted by a very few organisations, I'd say the warning to take care can't be made often enough |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RotHeissPfefferStreber
Joined: 03 Feb 2009
Posts: 619
Location: Bavarian Forest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wide Dave wrote: | | Who cares what figures Red give? |
You certainly do, seeing as you keep inventing them to get wound up over
| Quote: | | Who cares what figures tigger gives? |
I do, when they are incorrect and give the likes of you a new drum to bang
| Quote: | It doesn't matter.
It never has mattered. |
It obviously does to you.
It obviously always has, to you, given the number of times you've brought it up to try and prove a point. You just don't like it when the point is proved to be invalid
| Quote: | | They are taking full payment up front for that course in the full knowledge that the vast majority of people who apply will not get anywhere near the qualification they are hoping for. |
Only by default. Not by design. That latter claim is solely YOUR story - and it is based on not just a tissue, but a thick raft of lies such as the one Tigger posted.
| Quote: | | They are also taking on anyone with a pulse and so setting people up for failure at a vast profit. |
Yes, the first part is true. And the same applies to anyone in this business AS A BUSINESS! Including you. Don't pretend you have ever turned anyone away because the only thing they had going for them was a pulse
| Quote: | | The reason I didn't bother to look up their accounts is because I couldn't be bothered to look up their accounts. |
So you repeatedly make up figures instead REPEATEDLY, Dave
You know damned well you accepted Tigger's allegations at face value and didn't question them for a second. You have done the same with everyone else who has said anything negative (including RG, who has offered little more than a turd by way of input), and conveniently ignored anyone who has had a positive. The only person you deigned to address was Lady D - and that was just to have a dig at what she said (and she was naive enough to miss what you were up to)
| Quote: | | Do you see? I'll put it in big letters for you shall I? |
And use a wax crayon - it fits you better
| Quote: | | Didn't you read that bit? |
THE ALLEGATION WAS WRONG. THEREFORE THERE WAS NO ISSUE!
See the above, Dave. The higher primates tend not to use false material as fact, so there is no point moving forward as if it were in any way relevant
| Quote: | | you wouldn't be looking quite so stupid right now. |
Coming from someone who believes every demonstrably false claim, and who makes up figures but isn't interested in the real ones (your own words again), who "wants to like Red" but is looking for any made-up negative story he can find, who repeatedly contradicts himself and changes his opinion even to the extent of lying about his motives to try and shoehorn his propaganda in... I could go on... that statement is as laughable as the rest of your bilge
| Quote: | | when AntiRed wound you up and got you to flip, which she did quite regularly. |
You're making things up again
| Quote: | | So it appears that Red are saying one thing in the presentations and putting different stuff in the brochure. |
Only if you believe the incorrect report from Tigger. It doesn't matter if the brochure says "up to £600 a week" or the flip chart shows around £700 - the calculations are sound and the assumptions made approximately correct. You or I could come up with different figures because some of the expenses cannot be predicted - only estimated. Different estimations give different end results, but they are all approximations - and so approximately correct
| Quote: | | Either that or they don't really know WHAT they are doing. |
Or rather, YOU don't understand the concept of an approximation
| Quote: | | So what? It doesn't matter what the figures are because so few people will ever be in a position to get near them. |
But those figures are possible, and that is what counts. They are not going to say you will only earn peanuts - because that would be untrue. IF you work 40 hours on average, you WILL earn around £600-700. That is a fact.
And knowing you will do that some weeks is rather significant - it isn't as black and white as you are trying to claim
| Quote: | | I suspect the reason she didn't 'Go Red' is because she smelt a rat. |
And it turned out to be a rolled up sweater, for God's sake! It wasn't a rat. Only you continues to believe that in spite of it being shown that it was certainly not. And your attitude is in total contradiction to the crap you have posted in the same reply!!! You said you hadn't read it and weren't interetsed, and now you are arguing using it as evidence HYPOCRITE, Dave. It's exactly what I accused you of, and here you are proving it yet again
| Quote: | | Exactly the same rat I smelt all those years ago |
Yes. As I say, you are prejudiced.
| Quote: | | You are trying to tell us that Red are selling a training course. Complete and utter bollocks! |
Words fail me on that one. What ARE Red selling then? Faberge eggs? Knock off Levis? Go on, Dave. Tell us what Red - and I'd draw your attention to Lady D and Eddlad, who passed with them - are selling if it isn't a training course. Are you drunk?! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wide Dave
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 367
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi RHPS,
Here is the complete quote which sort of answers the question.
| Quote: | | You are trying to tell us that Red are selling a training course. Complete and utter bollocks! When they gather people together in their little 'group think' sessions they are trying to sell a £30,000 a year career and an easy life. What percentage of their customers will ever attain that? |
The figures are irrelevant because hardly anyone qualifies.
Come on then Mr accountant, what percentage of people actually qualify with Red? It is significant that I am saying 'with Red' because their course is much more expensive than most so you might expect it to be better. Why then are you on record as saying that the pass rates are the same whoever you train with? Fine, I'll accept that. But if that's true then why go with Red? They are more expensive than most DIT companies, they take ALL your money up front and you STILL probably won't qualify which means they will KEEP al your money even if you don't complete the course. Pay as you go and you get to keep the unused portion of the course cost.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | They are taking full payment up front for that course in the full knowledge that the vast majority of people who apply will not get anywhere near the qualification they are hoping for. |
Only by default. Not by design. That latter claim is solely YOUR story - and it is based on not just a tissue, but a thick raft of lies such as the one Tigger posted. |
What a pile of crap! Are you trying to tell me that when Red's directors set the business up they DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE OVERALL DSA PASS RATES WERE?
Rubbish! They knew precisely what the pass rates for instructor courses were and did the maths. They concluded that hardly anyone would pass and therefore the best policy for their business was to take ALL the course fee up front so that they could keep it ALL even if the customer didn't get past Part 1. Imagine their surprise (I don't think!) when the business started up and the pass rates were as low as they always have been. Now you try to say that it isn't their fault that vast numbers of people are being sold the dream of an easy life and a big payday and getting what?, a pile of books and maybe a few driving lessons. BIG DEAL!
I have 2 questions that even you can answer;
1) Are Red taking full payment up front for the course?
2) Are Red aware of the low pass rates for Part 1, 2 and 3?
So read the sentence;
| Quote: | | They are taking full payment up front for that course in the full knowledge that the vast majority of people who apply will not get anywhere near the qualification they are hoping for. |
And then explain how you can write;
| Quote: | | Only by default. Not by design. That latter claim is solely YOUR story - and it is based on not just a tissue, but a thick raft of lies such as the one Tigger posted. |
THEY DESIGNED THE BUSINESS THAT WAY!
IF THE VAST MAJORITY OF CUSTOMERS QUALIFIED THAT WOULD MEAN THAT RED WOULD HAVE TO SPEND THE MAJORITY OF THEIR COURSE FEES ON TRAINING THEM ALL THE WAY TO QUALIFICATION AND WOULD PROBABLY GO BROKE OR AT LEAST NOT HAVE THE CASH TO ADVERTISE!
AS IT STANDS, THE MAJORITY GIVE UP/FAIL AND SO RED GET TO KEEP THE REST OF THE FEE, OR AT LEAST HAND IT OVER TO THE TV COMPANIES IN ADVERTISING FEES.
And by the way, tigger didn't post any lies. She posted what Red told her. It's hardly her fault that they haven't got a clue what they are doing. I believe what she wrote and I believe it because I think it sounds honest, not because it fits any view I might hold. Red showed her 2 sets of figures, 1 set on a flip chart and 1 set in the brochure. Because the figures didn't match perfectly you start to accuse people of lying. Again, it says everything we need to know about you and your immature little mind.
I am now convinced of your idiocy, immaturity and limited grasp of logic.
Regards,
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Gumtree
Search
Register
Log in
Profile
Memberlist
FAQ
