catsilversword wrote:Would love to sign, but don't see why there's an insistence on completing your home address!
But the black helicopters still know where you live...

Thanks
Darren
Darren
catsilversword wrote:Would love to sign, but don't see why there's an insistence on completing your home address!
Darren Wheeler wrote:catsilversword wrote:Would love to sign, but don't see why there's an insistence on completing your home address!
But the black helicopters still know where you live...
pjh wrote:Darren Wheeler wrote:catsilversword wrote:Would love to sign, but don't see why there's an insistence on completing your home address!
But the black helicopters still know where you live...
There's a black helicopter that hovers overhead hereabouts sometimes. It says "Cambs Police" on the side, but we know what it really is....
slinky09 wrote:Hev60 wrote:Its a shame 'Penny' hasn't also added to her list, the unfair level of fuel surcharge piled onto the UC fare. I very rarely travel UC, but for those passengers who do I feel loading an increase in the fuel surcharge is terrible. No way can they justify it, a seat is a seat and it costs no more to occupy that seat in terms of fuel whatever class you travel v( Anyway UC passengers have already paid a higher enough price for their extra luggage and the suite etc.. It should only be a standard charge for 'all'.
I'm not in agreement with that, because:
- Your seat and everything required to service you in flight is heavier.
- You take up proportionally more floor space of the aircraft - not just the seat, but the bar, the wardrobes, the galleys - and if you allocate weight to the square footage occupied it's a lot more - weight = more fuel.
Now whether it's the same calculation used by VS is another thing ): .
Users browsing this forum: LREDI and 158 guests