You are not logged in.
#1 2010-01-20 11:13:38
- matthew farnes
- New member
- Posts: 4
Matthew Farnes
Thanks for your emails and comments on my website. I hope you're all enjoying it.
I shall be starting to post some videos on my site in the near future. Please advise me should you think of anything of interest you would wish to view.
Thanks,
Matthew
www.thesavilerowartisan.com
#2 2010-01-20 11:30:09
- 4F Hepcat
- THE Cat
- Posts: 14333
Re: Matthew Farnes
You use too many I's in your copy young man. Hemmingway's advice on writing was to describe something then take the "I" out of it. All this "I this" and "I that" comes across as egotistical, gushing and effete. It's blatant advertising, posing as subtle advertising and it doesn't work.
Sorry for being a hoho.
Vibe-Rations in Spectra-Sonic-Sound
#4 2010-01-22 13:48:00
- 4F Hepcat
- THE Cat
- Posts: 14333
Re: Matthew Farnes
^What perplexes me, is that our mucca thanks us for all the emails and comments on his website, but try as I might, there's only one comment on there. Is there something wrong with my browser?
Vibe-Rations in Spectra-Sonic-Sound
#5 2010-08-09 00:09:06
- Maximilien de Robespierre
- Member
- Posts: 1153
Re: Matthew Farnes
There's no such thing a bad publicity, or so they say:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704723604575378994073791142.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_lifeStyle
#6 2010-08-10 16:28:24
- Jeeves
- The Gentleman's Gentleman
- Posts: 420
Re: Matthew Farnes
Well if the complaint is that he did a bit of private work and left with a copy of the client list they are going to have to fire most of Savile Row. This has always been a problem for the bigger firms because the cutter rather than the company owns the client relationship and since most cutters want to start their own companies...
I particularly like the outrage about the royal family, nice touch that, and not without precedent - John Kent took Prince Phillip (and the Royal Warrant) with him went he left Huntsman. I wonder at the wisdom of E&R dragging the royal family into this, they are not going to be at all happy about that.
#7 2010-08-11 06:20:17
- NJS
- Member
- Posts: 2358
Re: Matthew Farnes
Now that there are no longer prize fights, I think that it is excellent that active disputes still rage. Without taking sides, one can appreciate the fray and even make bets on the outcome. The Sartoriani fiasco seems to suggest that the adjudicators desperately need a kick up the arse but then, in common with many such people, they probably comprise thrusting kids from a sink estate making their way in the world and anything with an Iti name is probably the absolute tops to them. Not entirely sure that Her Maj and The Firm could give a rat's arse about any of this. Maybe learned Counsel for one side or the other could work that into his opening to M'Lud.
Jeeves - active solicitation of a former employer's customers may be subject to mild restraint but has to be subject to limitation or it will fall foul of the principle that restraint of trade is contrary to the public interest and also increasingly regulated by statutory provision.
So far as big-mouthed advertising is concerned - it works only if the name is Beckham or Rooney or Blair or some tit like them. Apart from that, it is just painful. I know because I have the tee-shirt. Meanwhile, don't forget my blog:
http://thenakedapegetsdressed.blogspot.com/
Jeff Archer.
Last edited by NJS (2010-08-11 06:39:19)
