Jump to content

Recommended Posts

bigbadwolf Wrote:


Good choice BBW!


Probably my "5" as well...


*Bob*....Esoterically funny.


Ted Max...Banker Choice as he has "cross-appeal" humour thats consistently witty...


HonaloochieB...A very vivid, fertile imagination and a strong contender...


Dulwichmum...Experienced campaigner, deserving of the nomination..


TLS....A fair last inclusion as this lad has improved considerably after a frankly uninspiring, ominous introduction...


So, in essence, the same quintet for me with Max just edging out Hon-"The Looch" by a Short-Head.

>

> Over to you.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191374
Share on other sites

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> Or possibly Putney.

> Or failing that Fulham.


Do they have Omni-Buses in Putney or Fulham Looch?


btw; You can only vote for yourself once (new rules) and you must make 5 choices, cough, cough..

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191390
Share on other sites

Fair enough then.

Ted Max, the funniest, he's an eloquent parodist, barbed and incisive when the situation warrants and a punster when needs be.

Brendan, has the ability to produce intelligent off the wall humour in a single line.

Moos, an elegant, seemingly effortless style, she can be warm, satirical and scathingly funny. Sometimes in the same post.

TLS, no punophobic he, self-deprecating and witty. The fact that he's a straight man that fancies me has in no way influenced this nomination.

Mockney Piers, manages to combine John Humphreysness with Stephen Fryness to great effect.

According to the rules we can only nominate five, so that's what I've confined myself to.


Bur honourable mentions to SeanM, Giggi, JL, Keef, BBW and all of the others.

Holy Christ, could I be more patronising?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191408
Share on other sites

Snorky In my book the king of sarcasm.

*Bob* Is a funny ferka.

HB Always gets me searching for my Dictionary he speaks a different language to the one I know I dont know how he does it?.

Ted Max Can turn a mundane coffee break in to an epic chapter.

BBW Hes a leary fecker but funny as feck.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191469
Share on other sites

Cripes HB, two of my heroes combined in one, far too much but thanks anyway *blushes*


We have done this before and there are so many people I admire on this forum, I won't repeat the (doubtless vastly elongated) list now, but given recent events I will point out 3 quality comedians.


Snorky, Quids and Louisa, who show that spikiness and distemper can be done with wit, charm, class* and sophistication. Trolls, study and learn.


*upper in the case of snorky and soooo middle for the other two ;-)

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191476
Share on other sites

HonaloochieB Wrote:

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

> Fair enough then.

> Ted Max, the funniest, he's an eloquent parodist,

> barbed and incisive when the situation warrants

> and a punster when needs be.

> Brendan, has the ability to produce intelligent

> off the wall humour in a single line.

> Moos, an elegant, seemingly effortless style, she

> can be warm, satirical and scathingly funny.

> Sometimes in the same post.

> TLS, no punophobic he, self-deprecating and witty.

> The fact that he's a straight man that fancies me

> has in no way influenced this nomination.

> Mockney Piers, manages to combine John

> Humphreysness with Stephen Fryness to great

> effect.

> According to the rules we can only nominate five,

> so that's what I've confined myself to.

>

> But honourable mentions to SeanM, Giggi, JL, Keef,

> BBW and all of the others.

> Holy Christ, could I be more patronising?


Oh, and Quids, DM, RosieH, PGC, PR and LP, who make me titter immoderately.

God and his angels and saints, could I be more condescending?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191491
Share on other sites

mockney piers Wrote:

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

> Cripes HB, two of my heroes combined in one, far

> too much but thanks anyway *blushes*

>

> We have done this before and there are so many

> people I admire on this forum, I won't repeat the

> (doubtless vastly elongated) list now, but given

> recent events I will point out 3 quality

> comedians.

>

> Snorky, Quids and Louisa, who show that spikiness

> and distemper can be done with wit, charm, class*

> and sophistication. Trolls, study and learn.

>

> *upper in the case of snorky and soooo middle for

> the other two ;-)


It's like you're talking to Alan Davis there MP, it really is.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-191543
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Deserves an update.


On current form I've recently enjoyed Honaloochie's occassiona; contributions and I'm warming to the puns and self-deprecation of TLS.


"Bob" continues to impress while Snorky has had his moments recently.


Ted Max will always be good value but has been a tad subdued lately and BBW seems to be restricted to his Den lately.


Quidsy is good for a laugh and Dulwichmum is one of the wittiest Women since Dorothy Parker.


Time for another piece de resistance from Moos and a Magnum Opus from Brendan is only just around the corner, I'm fairly certain.


Keep up the good work Guys....:-$

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-196756
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Monthly Update.


There's been a few subtle changes this Month and I would, currently, nominate the "New Improved etc" Snorky to be the current recipient of The Forum Yellow Jersey.


Just a bicycle's clip length behind comes Honaloochie though, always good value. The Man is a veritable hoot.....


3rd ? Brendan, probably. A solid All-Rounder.


4th Ted Max, more on his well-deserved reputation rather than his more infrequent current contributions, one must say.


A positive plethora of others who are just "bubbling under"..namely the likes of BBW/Quidsy/Moos/"bob" etc....


Disappointments? Dulwichmum seems to have been distracted lately, it seems and TLS is contributing less and less and appears to be making less effort to even try to amuse The EDF Massif...


Apologies to all those deserving Forumites who haven't received a weel-deserved mention.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-205687
Share on other sites

Hmmmmmm......well thanks for refreshing this Tony, very good and proper.


Lets have a look at things shall we.


I'd like to put *Bob* at the top of the list but he's been suspiciously absent of late hasn't he. Ted Max is getting ever more distant yet his random yet delightful interjections always deliver promise. Snorky has been good I'll admit. HonaloochieB is a very versatile and witty forumite in his own right but therein lies the problem, sometimes some of us youngsters struggle to figure out what on earth he's on about but the silver lining in that cloud is that when we do figure out what he's talking about it becomes all the more funny beecause we can award ourselves a great big pat on the back for working it out. He is also a regular forumite.


So for me the list goes


1. HonaloochieB


2. Snorky


3. Brendan. Now it's true that Brendan has been absent of late but I'm awarding him the bronze medal because of his post in

housemates from hell today. The majority was pretty mild but as soon as I hit 'Humphrey the houseplant' I nearly fell

off my chair laughing.


Another I'd like to mention is Mikecg. Now I know I often pick on his spelling but of late he's been biteing back with tenacity and he's also started to really 'put the work in' regarding the humour content of his posts. I'm not saying he should be in the top three but you know.......credit where credits due an all that.


Now on to the more painful subject of Dulwichmum.


I fear the blame of Dulwichmums prolonged absence lies solely at my door. You see, Dulwichmum truly yet quite wrongly doesn't like smut. During my ban a great deal of smutty inuendo has been building up in my admittedly filthy mind and as soon as my ban was lifted I started heamoraging vile and senseless posts that fell on the deaf ears of our most priviliged forumite who made her disdain quite public after which I sat in the darkest corner of my den, drew my knees up against my chin and cried for 40 day and 40 nights, sort off. Now I for one will quite openly say I wont censor myself for censorship sake but I fear if I carry on at my normal pace we'll loose one of our greatest assets and I for one would be very upset.


So I must take an oath to try and steer things back in the right direction.


"I bigbadwolf, boss of the wild wood and leader of the pack do hereby formally promise that I shall never use a swear word again on the east dulwich forum".


I will however still be rude and ocassionally smutty of course but if that's what it takes to keep her on board then I'm happy to make the sacrifice.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-205722
Share on other sites

I'll nominate "woofmarkthedog" and "????" who I don't think have been mentioned.

Oh and Annasfield - she made me laugh the most by referring to me as "not at all patronising" ... and it was only my second ever post (although she does not generally try to be funny - I think?).


I agree most of the other nominations - I find Dulwich Mum very entartaining rather than laugh out loud. BBW makes me laugh/gasp in equal amounts. HB of course is often very funny and the great thing about the forum is that almost everyone else is funny on occaision. Yes even MikeCG.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/5963-comedy-awards/#findComment-205733
Share on other sites

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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