Yeah I get that, and that’ll be because of the long term financial benefits of enticing the companies there. But still…€13bn is a mad figure.

It sounds so bizarre that Ireland has been fighting in court to avoid having to receive €13bn from Apple.

My comment was satirical

This job sounds like it could be replaced by AI

Remember when a chocolate orange didn’t have fucking hollowed-out concave segments? I do Terry, you greedy prick.

If you replace a word with its synonym, will it still have the same meaning

This is likely to be an unpopular suggestion because of who it is and it being a paid service, but Apple News+ has actually got me back into reading magazines for the first time in at least a decade.

I’m already locked in to Apple because of all the family’s devices, so I pay for Apple One which covers all the family’s music and storage subscriptions etc, but one of the elements I get more use of than I ever expected are the magazines available as part of News+.

There’s a ton of them available such as National Geographic, Time, Empire, New Scientist etc, which I regularly read. Probably better experienced on an iPad rather than a phone due to the format, but it’s been great to have access to all of them without having to buy a physical magazine, although that may actually be what you’re after.

There’s a list of the publications here, some of which are crap, but a lot of which are things I would read if they were to hand on a coffee table.

Apple News Publications

Anyway, the reason for the recommendation is, there’s a lot of choice, and since it’s essentially a paid subscription to all of them, you can easily sample some and see which publications appeal.

Wait, there are 20,000 ISPs!?

Completely agree, this is garbage, and I’ve bitched about it in the past. Annoyingly, both the Gmail and Outlook widgets are far better, but I don’t want either of those on my phone.

I never even realised they were owned by Sony. I’m sure I remember them saying they left Microsoft to have greater control internally. Seems mad to go for more of the same.

Man pronounced the “h” in whistle like nobody else.

Did they try redeeming it up to 15 times?

This is exactly why, and as simple as it is, it’s brilliant passive marketing. It stealthily implants an association to Apple Intelligence into every product and article that mentions AI, and might even require the author to distinguish their meaning when they use the acronym. They’ve Sherlock’d AI.

Make that 10.

Which led to some amazing protests.

Weirdly, watching facesitting porn in the UK is perfectly fine, as long as it wasn’t filmed in the UK.

I can just imagine trying to defend that in court. “Your honour, it’s clear to me that the muffled moans of the face-sittee are those of a Frenchman”

No they’re not, no they don’t.

Perfect joke

Yes I’m aware of this, I’m just saying that arbitrarily speculating on the potential original price for 1 item does nothing to change the current actual situation. If the cost was £10 for 1, I wouldn’t have bothered taking a photo.

Alternatively you could take the viewpoint that Next has already worked out that the price of 1 shirt is a minimum of £8, hence the costings for multiple units. Any price they put over £8 for 1 unit is additional profit, while the expected revenue per unit is £8+n where n is substantially close to zero. Latterly reducing the cost of 1 item does nothing except imply a perceived saving.

Additionally, the 2x and 3x offerings are not, and were never, discounted. The sticker reduces the price of 1 shirt, but if you were in the market for two, there’s no saving based on when you buy them. There might have been a saving originally, we assume, against the cost of buying 1 twice, but that’s irrelevant if you want two shirts at any point. Obviously the pricing would have been to incentivise the purchase of two when you would potentially only have bought one, so that is the driver for the sale, at which point the price per shirt is £8, and remains £8 per shirt for any multiple purchase, both before and after the sticker price amendment.

Yes - we don’t know what the original price was for 1x. You’re assuming it was more than £8. It could have been £5 - we’ll never know.

Either way, it doesn’t change the current value proposition for the customer, which is that a bulk purchase is meaningless.