Is English dying

This could be a little controversial and is certainly a discussion point.

I was thinking about how childhoods have changed over the years. In my day I built plastic kits (Airfix), did some wargaming with them, went out on my bike and played a lot - read quite a bit, was lucky enough to spend a lot of time on the sea sailing a dinghy, canoeing, swimming, diving, fishing, radio and TV (3 channels) with communication happening by conversation (person to person and over the telephone) and by letter. Now, the options for conversation are much more diverse, instant messaging, networking channels like MySpace, mobile phones, text messaging, email and options for entertainment far far wider, computers, the internet, computer and /or console games, TV (hundreds of channels), video, DVD, then all of the traditional games etc. Then you see reports in the media about how this is or isn't affecting everybody that I began to think about language (and I'm sure that I'm not the first)



Is English (as opposed to American English) dying? It's just a thought - no evidence to prove either way, just that our kids are so immersed in American culture in ways never dreamed of in the past (through TV, the internet, computer games and music) that it's possible that within 2 or 3 generations, English (as known by the English - with all of its quirky spellings and pronunciations) could well be past its sell by date.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing, does it really matter? I'm not sure that it does really. People may say that it gives us our heritage but surely that is defined by our glorious (and less than glorious) past.

So long as we all get along and can understand one another, is it really an issue?

The Tesco Supermarket Shuffle

The story referred to in this link relates to "price cuts" introduced by Tesco as part of a price war. However, before the prices were "cut" they were increased, so the cuts, in reality, may well have been false.

Now, I spent quite a while working in retail and know that underhanded activities such as this are not uncommon. How about buying in "special" products prior to a holiday - selling them at inflated prices and ripping of any early purchasers and then, at the time of the holiday promotion - hacking the price and marketing at 1/2 price. Not new, not smart and pretty well known about.

Now, I feel that supermarkets may have developed a more sinister way of jacking up the bottom line. My wife and I experimented with online grocery shopping last week. It was the first time that the convenience really suited us (OK, a 22:30 delivery may not have appeared convenient to some, but diary issues meant that this was the best way to shop during that particular week.

Tesco was the default destination - they were the only one to be able to deliver on the required day. So, we placed our order and spent around £70.00

When the products arrived, there were a number of substitutions (replacements for items out of stock). However the substitutions were less than logical. The cheapest dishwasher tablets substituted for the most expensive. Not even the same brand, so it's not that they were trying to consider brand loyalty and there was a difference in price of 300%. Kitchen roll, again the selected product substituted for one 250% more expensive. A couple of other substitutions were less extreme in their variances but looking at them, the scope for extreme switching is much less - loose broccoli for substituted for pre-packed for example.

OK, first off - where an item is out of stock, I feel that it should be replaced by the next best match - i.e the next one up in the range, not a move to the extreme end of the range. I bet that if you ordered the most expensive item in a range of products and it was out of stock, they would not substitute the cheapest product on the shelf?Also, where a product is offered as "available" and it becomes non-available, either it should not be shipped or the difference in cost should be carried by the retailer.

This is inertia delivery at it's very worst. The difference in price between the original order and the revised order with replacements was over 10%, if Icould generate an extra 10% from my orders, I'd be a happy man with a very happy boss.

Many people may not check price differential, so instant turnover and profit uplift. Some will really need the product and have no option but to accept - with the same result, and some may return the replacement items (As I chose to do). However, I then learned that it takes between 3 and 5 days for the credit to be actioned. I discovered this after calling Tesco to query why there appeared to be a delay in receiving a credit for the returned items.

So, Tesco win either way - either an increase in turnover and profit as replaced items are not returned or an accumulation of interest on the sum due to be refunded whilst they take their own sweet time to action the credit to the account. If all internet shoppers have their bill increased by 10%, well that's a nice little earner. If some return the goods and have to wait for credit, I bet that's a nice little earner as well - all goingstraightt to the bottom line.

I think I may call this the Supermarket Shuffle - they shuffle OUR money to their benefit (just like the banks). Now, I don't begrudge Tesco a profit (£2Bn profit last year) but I do think that this latest little wheeze is more than a little unfair on their customers. As a consequence, I certainly will not be internet shopping with Tesco again.