| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Missing Christmas tree from Tesco | |
| Posted by: | Gerald Cabb | |
| Date/Time: | 06/01/10 15:32:00 |
| Can we lay off the racial bit please? Some of you seem to delight in building elaborate "well of course they don't want to offend the immigrants" conspiracy theories out of nothing. The last reply above seems to be just another example of this - of course the only reason "they" don't spend hundreds of pounds on a large tree is due to secretive politicial correctness pressures, all of which (if I read the heavy ha nded sarcasm about pigmentation) can be somehow traced back to immigration. Yeah, right. This is just sad delusion - it's easy to talk yourself into resenting immigrants if you keep inventing completely fictitious reasons for doing so. Let's get real. Tesco is a commercial company, with responsibilities to its shareholders, not to you. Its main HQ is now well out of town, so the Hoover Building is not even its flagship any more. My brother-in-law works at their HQ so I can tell you (a) there is a Xmas tree in the lobby, so there isn't some Tesco-wide fatwa on the things. (b) it is pretty small, and has (I think) the office staff presents under it. It's purely there for internal staff morale purposes. In other words if that's what they do in their current HQ, there's no logical reason for them to spend far more on a much more expensive large external tree in their old building which is now only a store. If I was a Tesco's shareholder I'd be annoyed if they did so. This supposed 'deal' to maintain a large tree on the A40 is of no relevance to anyone, probably long-forgotten, and there's simply no real reason for them to spend any money at all on it. It's a straightforward commercial decision and all these intimations of "oh, of course they wouldn't tell us the reason" and "non-pigmented, nudge nudge wink wink" are nothing more than loony-right self-indulgence. Not everyone in the world thinks in the deranged way you want to believe. |