Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just to say, a visit to Poundland land and I discovered that Smith's flavoured crisps have been returned to the market. Available in Cheese and Onion, Salt and Vinegar, and Ready Salted. ?1 for a multipack of 7, and they still have the old authentic flavour I remember. Very impressed.


Louisa.

I once bought a whole box of Walkers Cheese and Onion, in Glasgow


Then proceeded to drive non-stop to London and ate all 44 bags on the way.


I couldn't eat (blue packet or not) crisps for years after that.



I do like this rant on another forum

https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/1211975/why-have-walkers-crisps-got-away-with-scamming-everyone-for-years

dc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The Smiths brand has been owned by PepsiCo since

> the 1990s. They also own Walkers.



This is true, and in some countries they brand themselves as Leys. However, Smiths is regarded as a heritage brand, and has in recent years been used to brand their 'value range', Chipsticks, Snaps and Frazzles come under this. They also still have the Scampi fries branding too. This new range, is a return of the Smiths Crisp brand name to flavoured crisps, not seen that in at least 25 years. Made by Walkers, but cheaper.


Louisa.

I recently noticed these in our office vending machine:




I've never had them before. Are they reasonably edible? It is the cheapest item in there (by quite some margin), but nevertheless, I do not want to waste fifty hard-earned pence on something revolting.

They are very good. Very salty and vinegary.



Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I recently noticed these in our office vending

> machine:

>

>

>

> I've never had them before. Are they reasonably

> edible? It is the cheapest item in there (by quite

> some margin), but nevertheless, I do not want to

> waste fifty hard-earned pence on something

> revolting.

We await your taste test feedback with baited breath Jeremy.


I like them. Slightly more powdery than Cheddars, but boom, the vinegar does hit you straight in the kisser.


Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks. Food for thought!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I edited my post because I couldn't be sure we were talking about politicians and I couldn't be bothered to read it all back. But it was off the back of a thread discussing labour councillors, so it went without saying really and I should have left it.  What I said was 'There's something very aggressive about language like that - it's not big and it's not clever. Some of the angry energy that comes from the far left is pretty self-defeating.' (In relation to a labour councillor rather immaturely, in my view, wearing a jumper that read 'fuck the Tories').  But I don't recall saying that "violent rhetoric" is exclusively the domain of the left wing. So I do think you're taking a bit of a bit of leap here. 
    • You literally just edited your earlier reply to remove the point you made about it being “politicians”.  Then you call me pathetic.    I’m  not trying to say you approve any of the ugly right wing nonsense.  But I AM Saying your earlier post suggesting  violent rhetoric being “left wing” was one-sided and incorrect 
    • I never said that. Saying I don’t like some of the rhetoric coming from the left doesn’t mean I approve of Farage et al saying that Afghans being brought here to protect their lives and thank them for their service means there is an incalculable threat to women.    Anything to score a cheap point. It’s pretty pathetic. 
    • To be fair we are as hosed as the majority of other countries post-Covid. The problem is Labour promised way too much and leant in on the we need change and we will deliver it and it was clear to anyone with a modicum of sense that no change was going to happen quickly and actually taking the reigns may have been a massive poison- chalice. As Labour are finding to their cost - there are no easy answers.  A wealth tax seems straightforward but look how Labour have U-turned on elements of non-dom - why? Because the super rich started leaving the country in their droves and whilst we all may want them to pay more tax they already pay a big chunk already and the government saw there was a problem.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...