Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3
1405 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 370


  Reply # 1564054 2-Jun-2016 10:37
Send private message
13091 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1564061 2-Jun-2016 10:39
One person supports this post
Send private message

can't expect much when TVNZ is required to return nearly all profits to the Crown ( thanks Labour), they have very little left for reinvestment into quality.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


518 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 121


  Reply # 1564094 2-Jun-2016 11:13
Send private message

Having personally put the "myth" of egg strength to the test, you can supposedly not crush an egg in your hand due to the shape/design.

 

It takes some effort, but you can in fact, crush an egg in your hand.  I do recommend testing this outside, or somewhere you can fully wipe down.  The resulting mess goes a very long way.

 

But, given the right application, you could support a bowling ball on an egg quite happily.  And possibly with the egg end on, could maybe handle an impact.  Much like those egg throwing/catching contests where the two people get further apart.  If you get lucky enough and the egg hits your hand end on, it'll take far more impact than side on.





1390 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 583


  Reply # 1564097 2-Jun-2016 11:15
Send private message

Dairyxox:

 

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

 

 

Caveat emptor

 

Cave canem...


2553 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1205


  Reply # 1564186 2-Jun-2016 12:33
Send private message

And why shouldn't the taxpayer expect a return on capital?

 

Personally, I think that a major blunder was not selling TVNZ in the 90s, before alternatives really started to bite into its market and when it was probably worth 4-5 times what it is now.

 

Its not clear why the taxpayer should have direct investments in commercial broadcasting at all but, if we are going to, we should at least expect a return on the investment.


2451 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1201

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1564197 2-Jun-2016 12:56
Send private message

JimmyH:

 

And why shouldn't the taxpayer expect a return on capital?

 

 

Because the actual value of a TV channel is the viewers. And, in the end, it is the taxpayer who is paying for every penny collected to provide that the "return on capital". Advertisers pay the broadcaster for access to people's living rooms.

 

 


13091 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1564248 2-Jun-2016 13:25
Send private message

JimmyH:

And why shouldn't the taxpayer expect a return on capital?


Personally, I think that a major blunder was not selling TVNZ in the 90s, before alternatives really started to bite into its market and when it was probably worth 4-5 times what it is now.


Its not clear why the taxpayer should have direct investments in commercial broadcasting at all but, if we are going to, we should at least expect a return on the investment.



A reasonable dividend yes but not at a level that it cripples growth




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 




13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1564253 2-Jun-2016 13:32
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

Surely the program editor would not run the story if it did not actually work?

 

I can understand how the concept got into the planning and so on, but if they do it and find that in essence the ad is not misleading, why put the piece to air at all?

 

 

Yep, had they tested by replicating the ad they would have found it worked, but the egg was on a hard surface not a flat cushion, major fail




13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1564258 2-Jun-2016 13:35
Send private message

geoffwnz:

 

Having personally put the "myth" of egg strength to the test, you can supposedly not crush an egg in your hand due to the shape/design.

 

It takes some effort, but you can in fact, crush an egg in your hand.  I do recommend testing this outside, or somewhere you can fully wipe down.  The resulting mess goes a very long way.

 

But, given the right application, you could support a bowling ball on an egg quite happily.  And possibly with the egg end on, could maybe handle an impact.  Much like those egg throwing/catching contests where the two people get further apart.  If you get lucky enough and the egg hits your hand end on, it'll take far more impact than side on.

 

 

An egg can support 3.45kg in the normal upright position. Its an amazing piece of natures technology, we use that concept to build arch bridges. The load is spread so awesomely!


7873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 789

Subscriber

  Reply # 1564260 2-Jun-2016 13:36
Send private message

wasabi2k:

 

Fair Go used to be really entertaining and interesting.

 

Several years ago it went off a cliff. These days it is usually the show people winge to about something absolutely pathetic to get on TV and get a resolution in their favour.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am really getting tired of their constant anti sugar rant each week..





Regards,

Old3eyes




13429 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1564261 2-Jun-2016 13:36
Send private message

geek4me:

 

I don't understand how the egg not breaking when the bowling ball hits makes it a better pillow to sleep on in the first place.

 

 

To me, as I know how eggs are so strong as they spread the load, the cushion also helps spreading the load. For a cushion that helps support your heavy head evenly. But was that complimented on Fair Go? No, as they still don't get it


13 posts

Geek


  Reply # 1564262 2-Jun-2016 13:40
Send private message

I can't be the only person who thought the egg used by the guys from the advertising company might have been cast from cement using a mould then painted accurately to look just like the surface texture of an egg. If it was done in two halves with an empty core, or maybe paper mache' with a mesh supportive structure then the weight could have been similar to a raw egg. In the progam segment last night the fair go crews egg was inspected for cracks, but I don't recall the fairgo crew checking the advertising crews egg. Also there was no accuracy regarding the height it was dropped from and they just used "about suzzannes height" as they put it. It was far from a scientifically repeatable test by any means.

 

Consumer Magazine would have done it much better.


14346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1864


  Reply # 1564266 2-Jun-2016 13:48
2 people support this post
Send private message

What they didn't do was test a normal latex pillow with the padded base, to see if that also didn't break the egg. Also their initial tests were in a hard surface, which was obviously going to break the egg, becuase the ad was obviously using a padded base, such as a bed. I was suspicious of that story, as it almost seemed like an advertorial. And why didn't the company want to speak, especially after they were proven right. All very odd....

14346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1864


  Reply # 1564274 2-Jun-2016 13:51
Send private message

dc2daylight:

I can't be the only person who thought the egg used by the guys from the advertising company might have been cast from cement using a mould then painted accurately to look just like the surface texture of an egg. If it was done in two halves with an empty core, or maybe paper mache' with a mesh supportive structure then the weight could have been similar to a raw egg. In the progam segment last night the fair go crews egg was inspected for cracks, but I don't recall the fairgo crew checking the advertising crews egg. Also there was no accuracy regarding the height it was dropped from and they just used "about suzzannes height" as they put it. It was far from a scientifically repeatable test by any means.



They always smash the egg at the end to prove it is a normal one. Apparently the egg that did the tests with was larger than the one in the ad, which they weren't happy about, becuase I suspect a smaller egg is stronger. But the larger egg didn't break either.

758 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 224


  Reply # 1564312 2-Jun-2016 14:45
Send private message

Fair Go used to be relevant as a last resort for consumers to get their side of the story across to a wide audience.  No longer as relevant in the Facebook/Twitter age, where you can reach many people with very little effort.


1 | 2 | 3
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.