Choosing business VoIP instead of regular telephone services can be a good decision for new businesses. The number of businesses switching to VoIP is greatly increasing, but instead of switching at a later date it is wise for start-ups to choose this newer technology immediately. It is easier to use VoIP from the outset rather than going through the hassle of replacing a telephone system further down the road. Set up costs are relatively low for business VoIP, something that is a major advantage for businesses that don’t yet have any incomings. And once it is ready to use calls are cheaper, especially international calls. Depending on the business this can mean huge cost savings.
Whereas traditional telephones work over a phone line, VoIP utilises the broadband connection. This means there is no need to have a phone line installed in the office, something that is of particular benefit if an internet connection is necessary anyway, as it is for almost all businesses these days.
The quality of VoIP has improved significantly over the last few years, something that is due to both an improvement in broadband connections and the technologies used for VoIP. The lack of quality once meant that VoIP was a poor alternative to telephones. Yes it was cheap, but it was nowhere near the quality required for business use. This is no longer the case. With the top VoIP providers the call quality is comparable with that of telephones. Quality is no longer an issue.
Business VoIP has many advantages for small businesses. Integrated phone systems are available, with several handsets throughout an office. This means that one handset for each person in the office is possible. Call forwarding, caller ID and answer phones are also now possible with VoIP. These are all areas where VoIP has caught up with telephone services. All the things you might need for voice communication within a business are now possible, whether between colleague’s or with customers.
Small businesses often have a tough time financially to begin with. Therefore any savings they can make are extremely beneficial, and VoIP is one potential saving that can be made. If business make a large number of calls, especially if they have partners and customers abroad, then the savings can be particularly advantageous.
As well as regular calls, web conferencing and video calls are amongst other things that can be achieved over a VoIP connection. These are relatively cheap and can therefore further increase efficiency. These can be alternatives to having to travel to meetings, meaning much time and money can be saved.
Business VoIP is something more and more businesses are considering and the numbers switching from telephone services are increasing every year. There has always been the cost savings but previously the quality was not sufficient for business use. This is no longer the case. With the prices still being cheaper than telephone services and the improvements in quality, VoIP is now a serious consideration for businesses of all shapes and sizes. Savings can be particularly helpful to new businesses just starting out.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
The Difference in Living Costs between Kuwait and the UK
Wherever in the world you go the costs vary. In Kuwait some things are more expensive than in the UK, while some a cheaper. Overall, though, the cost of living to an average standard is around the same. The advantage of living in Kuwait is that with tax free earnings, most who travel there to work have the potential for greater earnings.
Non-Kuwaiti’s are not allowed to buy Kuwait Real Estate so must rent. Rent In Kuwait is a little more expensive than in the UK, around 10 – 20% higher. However, as most are earning more (due to the lack of income tax) this is not a worry. The standard of accommodation, especially modern accommodation such as flats in apartment blocks, is generally of a good standard.
Food is also more expensive than the UK. Price can vary, though, significantly from one shop to the next so it is a good idea to look around especially if staying in Kuwait long-term. Prices can fluctuate and suddenly drop or rise in a particular shop. Some items are much more expensive than in the UK (e.g. vegetables) with others much cheaper (e.g. coffee beans). As with anywhere the price of eating out in a restaurant varies a lot, you can eat anywhere from MacDonald’s to the restaurant at the top of the world famous Kuwait Towers. The cost can be the equivalent of anywhere between £3 and £50. A good guide is £20 per person at a medium priced restaurant, so around the same as the UK.
Utilities are cheaper, largely due to government subsidies. The government runs electricity, gas and water supplies and subsidises them. Heating is less of a necessity due to the heat (although the winters can be a little cool) which saves money, although electricity to run air conditioning is a consideration.
Leisure costs completely depend on what you want to do. Going to the cinema and sport are among the more popular leisure activities in Kuwait. If you base a leisure budget roughly as the same as you would in the UK should shouldn’t go too far wrong.
Public transport is reasonably priced and a little less than that of the UK. Driving though, is significantly less. There is no road tax and there isn’t the high amount of duty on petrol as there is in the UK.
Electronic goods are cheaper in the UK, again due to a lack of tax. There is an import duty but this is lower than in Europe, thus bringing down the prices of products such as televisions, computers and hi-fis.
The two main things you think about, rent and food are generally a little more in Kuwait, but this is made up for in the lower prices of utilities and transport, which can be significantly less. The lack of tax is the main financial advantage of living and working in Kuwait. This applies to both the lack of income tax and the lack of high taxes on things like imports and petrol. Overall living costs are therefore around the same as in the UK but for many it has potentially higher earnings.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Non-Kuwaiti’s are not allowed to buy Kuwait Real Estate so must rent. Rent In Kuwait is a little more expensive than in the UK, around 10 – 20% higher. However, as most are earning more (due to the lack of income tax) this is not a worry. The standard of accommodation, especially modern accommodation such as flats in apartment blocks, is generally of a good standard.
Food is also more expensive than the UK. Price can vary, though, significantly from one shop to the next so it is a good idea to look around especially if staying in Kuwait long-term. Prices can fluctuate and suddenly drop or rise in a particular shop. Some items are much more expensive than in the UK (e.g. vegetables) with others much cheaper (e.g. coffee beans). As with anywhere the price of eating out in a restaurant varies a lot, you can eat anywhere from MacDonald’s to the restaurant at the top of the world famous Kuwait Towers. The cost can be the equivalent of anywhere between £3 and £50. A good guide is £20 per person at a medium priced restaurant, so around the same as the UK.
Utilities are cheaper, largely due to government subsidies. The government runs electricity, gas and water supplies and subsidises them. Heating is less of a necessity due to the heat (although the winters can be a little cool) which saves money, although electricity to run air conditioning is a consideration.
Leisure costs completely depend on what you want to do. Going to the cinema and sport are among the more popular leisure activities in Kuwait. If you base a leisure budget roughly as the same as you would in the UK should shouldn’t go too far wrong.
Public transport is reasonably priced and a little less than that of the UK. Driving though, is significantly less. There is no road tax and there isn’t the high amount of duty on petrol as there is in the UK.
Electronic goods are cheaper in the UK, again due to a lack of tax. There is an import duty but this is lower than in Europe, thus bringing down the prices of products such as televisions, computers and hi-fis.
The two main things you think about, rent and food are generally a little more in Kuwait, but this is made up for in the lower prices of utilities and transport, which can be significantly less. The lack of tax is the main financial advantage of living and working in Kuwait. This applies to both the lack of income tax and the lack of high taxes on things like imports and petrol. Overall living costs are therefore around the same as in the UK but for many it has potentially higher earnings.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Friday, October 15, 2010
An Introduction to Penetration Testing
Penetration Testing is the process of evaluating information security measures, such as computer systems and networks. These tests evaluate the security systems and the likelihood of attacks from hackers. The aim is to find potential risks to security, buy discovering ways in which others may be able to gain access and cause problems. Penetration testing effectively looks for hardware and software weaknesses. Software, internet connections and password protected areas of websites and databases are examples of the areas that are tested.
Penetration testing companies will look at the likelihood of attacks taking place and how these attacks may be attempted. They will then attempt to break through the security barriers to expose any weaknesses, as this will show any security risks. This can be done either manually or by using specialist software and the testers will act as a hacker might.
After a test has been completed anything that could results in illegal access to sensitive information would have been found, therefore making it known to the organisation in question who can then resolve these issues. Anything that can lead to financial gain by hackers with then be able to be prevented. It is important to establish potential risks to a business or organisation. Discovering areas that others could benefit from via illegal methods and any areas of vulnerability mean that extra steps can be made to ensure a high level of security.
There are a number of reasons why penetration testing can be important, or put another way, many problems that can occur if it has not been done. Insufficient security systems can result in possible financial loss either to the organisation itself or to their users or customers. Sensitive information could be broadcast to those it shouldn’t be. Both these can lead to a damaged reputation and a lack of trust or, in the worst case scenarios, legal disputes.
Most large organisations will use penetration testing companies as they are experienced in the field and organisations can therefore be confident that they will find any vulnerabilities. They have the necessary experience and software to expose problems that could potentially occur. It is very difficult to know of every possible attack so penetration testing can be crucial in establishing these, including those which may not be obvious to the organisation itself.
Penetration testing is important for anyone who stores sensitive information on information systems, with government organisations being a good example. Anyone who deals with personal information needs to be aware of security dangers. Banks and other financial institutions, or anyone else who deals with large amounts of money, are others who will usually consider penetration testing. The only way anyone can be sure there are no security risks is if they have had their entire security system assessed and then made adjustments as necessary.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Penetration testing companies will look at the likelihood of attacks taking place and how these attacks may be attempted. They will then attempt to break through the security barriers to expose any weaknesses, as this will show any security risks. This can be done either manually or by using specialist software and the testers will act as a hacker might.
After a test has been completed anything that could results in illegal access to sensitive information would have been found, therefore making it known to the organisation in question who can then resolve these issues. Anything that can lead to financial gain by hackers with then be able to be prevented. It is important to establish potential risks to a business or organisation. Discovering areas that others could benefit from via illegal methods and any areas of vulnerability mean that extra steps can be made to ensure a high level of security.
There are a number of reasons why penetration testing can be important, or put another way, many problems that can occur if it has not been done. Insufficient security systems can result in possible financial loss either to the organisation itself or to their users or customers. Sensitive information could be broadcast to those it shouldn’t be. Both these can lead to a damaged reputation and a lack of trust or, in the worst case scenarios, legal disputes.
Most large organisations will use penetration testing companies as they are experienced in the field and organisations can therefore be confident that they will find any vulnerabilities. They have the necessary experience and software to expose problems that could potentially occur. It is very difficult to know of every possible attack so penetration testing can be crucial in establishing these, including those which may not be obvious to the organisation itself.
Penetration testing is important for anyone who stores sensitive information on information systems, with government organisations being a good example. Anyone who deals with personal information needs to be aware of security dangers. Banks and other financial institutions, or anyone else who deals with large amounts of money, are others who will usually consider penetration testing. The only way anyone can be sure there are no security risks is if they have had their entire security system assessed and then made adjustments as necessary.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Why Do Couples With Daughters Divorce More Than Couples With Sons?
Recently published statistics have shown that more couple’s divorce if they have girls than if they have boys. Parents with one girl are 5% more likely to divorce than parents with one boy, while parents with three girls are 10% more likely to divorce than parents with three boys. Less divorced women remarry if they have girls and if they do they are more likely to divorce for a second time. There are also statistics to suggest that unmarried couples expecting a boy are more likely to get married than those expecting a girl. It is possible that these are just coincidences with only a 5% difference (with one child), but let’s explore some of the possible reasons that have been suggested for this.
REASON: Boys need a male role model more than girls do.
It is possible that parents may take this into consideration and fight for their marriage. Father’s may be less reluctant to leave if they feel this would have a negative impact on their son’s, while Mother’s might believe that a male role model remaining in the home is more crucial. Everyone needs role models and it could be argued that boys are more likely to look up to men and therefore use them as an example. A male role model within the home is only a good thing though, if it is a positive role model.
REASON: Men prefer to have sons.
Do men prefer to have sons over daughters? They are more likely to have certain things in common with boys, while women are more likely to have things in common with girls. For example Fathers may have dreams of playing sport will their sons. This could make men more likely to stay in their marriage, while women might be less reluctant to fight for a struggling marriage if they have more common interests with their daughter than with their husband.
REASON: A negative male influence can be bad for girls.
Some have suggested that if a Father is a negative influence then Mothers are more likely to worry about their daughters witnessing this. The most extreme cases with be those of abuse, either towards a man’s wife or children. Where this is the case she may want to remove her daughter from this environment for her own safety. Women may also be keen to be a positive influence on their daughters by showing that women shouldn’t have to stand for this kind of behaviour.
REASON: Women have a better understanding of girls.
Having experienced growing up as a girl themselves, women are more likely to understand what girls go through than men. This could mean they don’t think the Father figure is as important as a Mother figure, and therefore she doesn’t need a man to help her bring up her daughter.
REASON: Girls are easier to bring up.
There are arguments for both girls and boys being easier to being up (see boys below). If a Mother feels that it is easier to bring up girls she might be less willing to fight for her marriage, while if she thinks it would be harder to bring up a boy she might be more willing to attempt to keep the marriage going if she has a son.
REASON: Boys are easier to bring up.
Some who believe that boys are easier to bring up may think that a marriage is more likely to last if a couple has a boy. Is it possible that girls can put more strain on a relationship?
REASON: Girls offer Mothers more emotional support.
Some Mothers have a strong emotional relationship with their daughters. They may therefore believe they no longer need a man for emotional support. They might come to the opinion that even if they divorce they will always have the support of their daughters.
Many of these are generalisation, and things will be different in every family situation. Something that is true for some families may have no influence on others. It could be argued that both boys and girls are better off in the perfect world if they have positive male and female role models; that one will show them how they should behave while the other will mean they respect the opposite gender. If there is a reason for more divorce amongst couples who have girls it seems likely that it is a combination of reasons depending on the particular family, as there seems to be no single reason that is likely to have such an impact in a significant number of cases.
Beatrice Sareen (c)
Beatrice Sareen Divorce
REASON: Boys need a male role model more than girls do.
It is possible that parents may take this into consideration and fight for their marriage. Father’s may be less reluctant to leave if they feel this would have a negative impact on their son’s, while Mother’s might believe that a male role model remaining in the home is more crucial. Everyone needs role models and it could be argued that boys are more likely to look up to men and therefore use them as an example. A male role model within the home is only a good thing though, if it is a positive role model.
REASON: Men prefer to have sons.
Do men prefer to have sons over daughters? They are more likely to have certain things in common with boys, while women are more likely to have things in common with girls. For example Fathers may have dreams of playing sport will their sons. This could make men more likely to stay in their marriage, while women might be less reluctant to fight for a struggling marriage if they have more common interests with their daughter than with their husband.
REASON: A negative male influence can be bad for girls.
Some have suggested that if a Father is a negative influence then Mothers are more likely to worry about their daughters witnessing this. The most extreme cases with be those of abuse, either towards a man’s wife or children. Where this is the case she may want to remove her daughter from this environment for her own safety. Women may also be keen to be a positive influence on their daughters by showing that women shouldn’t have to stand for this kind of behaviour.
REASON: Women have a better understanding of girls.
Having experienced growing up as a girl themselves, women are more likely to understand what girls go through than men. This could mean they don’t think the Father figure is as important as a Mother figure, and therefore she doesn’t need a man to help her bring up her daughter.
REASON: Girls are easier to bring up.
There are arguments for both girls and boys being easier to being up (see boys below). If a Mother feels that it is easier to bring up girls she might be less willing to fight for her marriage, while if she thinks it would be harder to bring up a boy she might be more willing to attempt to keep the marriage going if she has a son.
REASON: Boys are easier to bring up.
Some who believe that boys are easier to bring up may think that a marriage is more likely to last if a couple has a boy. Is it possible that girls can put more strain on a relationship?
REASON: Girls offer Mothers more emotional support.
Some Mothers have a strong emotional relationship with their daughters. They may therefore believe they no longer need a man for emotional support. They might come to the opinion that even if they divorce they will always have the support of their daughters.
Many of these are generalisation, and things will be different in every family situation. Something that is true for some families may have no influence on others. It could be argued that both boys and girls are better off in the perfect world if they have positive male and female role models; that one will show them how they should behave while the other will mean they respect the opposite gender. If there is a reason for more divorce amongst couples who have girls it seems likely that it is a combination of reasons depending on the particular family, as there seems to be no single reason that is likely to have such an impact in a significant number of cases.
Beatrice Sareen (c)
Beatrice Sareen Divorce
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
The Advantages of Dedicated Hosting
Dedicated Hosting is a type of hosting whereby websites are hosted on their own individual server. It is the opposite of shared hosting, where many websites are hosted on the same server. There are many advantages to this.
With a dedicated server website owners have complete control, something that is lacking with shared hosting. This is because with shared hosting the hosting company has to keep all their customers on the server happy, meaning a lack of flexibility. Dedicated hosting customers usually run their server themselves which means much more flexibility.
Unlike shared hosting those opting for dedicated hosting are not sharing hardware and software with other sites situated on the server, because there are no other sites on the server. They are not sharing resources and there is therefore more reliability as there are not as many variables that can affect things. It is possible to install software and make updates whenever necessary. This means that load times won’t be slowed down by higher traffic to sites that are nothing to do with them.
With a whole server for one website it means that there is more disk space and bandwidth available for that one website. Due to this sudden traffic or a large number of downloads is less likely to cause a problem. Overall the performance of the hosting is much better.
Security is yet another advantage of dedicated hosting. When a website is sharing a server with others it makes it easier for other people to gain access. If a business site deals with online payments this could be essential in preventing credit card fraud. In fact, any site that has databases dealing with sensitive information can benefit from this extra security. There is also more control of backups.
Dedicated hosting does require relevant knowledge, but for those without this there is another option – Managed Dedicated Hosting. Here the hosting company takes care of the management while still providing many of the benefits of dedicated hosting. It is really dedicated hosting with technical support. There are different levels of managed dedicated hosting so customers can choose based on how much control they want and what they want done for them by the managed hosting company. It is the solution for those with no technical knowledge but who have the requirements for a dedicated server. There is of course a price for this but many consider it a price worth paying due to the extra service that is provided.
There are many types of websites that can benefit from dedicated hosting. Those who regularly make changes to their site or hosting have the advantage of increased flexibility. Those with a large amount of traffic may not find shared hosting adequate. Large corporate websites usually find that a dedicated server is essential.
Dedicated hosting has many advantages. Dedicated hosting is more expensive than shared hosting, but there is a reason for that, and if the positives of it are important to a sites success then it is cost affective.
Andrew Marshall (c)
With a dedicated server website owners have complete control, something that is lacking with shared hosting. This is because with shared hosting the hosting company has to keep all their customers on the server happy, meaning a lack of flexibility. Dedicated hosting customers usually run their server themselves which means much more flexibility.
Unlike shared hosting those opting for dedicated hosting are not sharing hardware and software with other sites situated on the server, because there are no other sites on the server. They are not sharing resources and there is therefore more reliability as there are not as many variables that can affect things. It is possible to install software and make updates whenever necessary. This means that load times won’t be slowed down by higher traffic to sites that are nothing to do with them.
With a whole server for one website it means that there is more disk space and bandwidth available for that one website. Due to this sudden traffic or a large number of downloads is less likely to cause a problem. Overall the performance of the hosting is much better.
Security is yet another advantage of dedicated hosting. When a website is sharing a server with others it makes it easier for other people to gain access. If a business site deals with online payments this could be essential in preventing credit card fraud. In fact, any site that has databases dealing with sensitive information can benefit from this extra security. There is also more control of backups.
Dedicated hosting does require relevant knowledge, but for those without this there is another option – Managed Dedicated Hosting. Here the hosting company takes care of the management while still providing many of the benefits of dedicated hosting. It is really dedicated hosting with technical support. There are different levels of managed dedicated hosting so customers can choose based on how much control they want and what they want done for them by the managed hosting company. It is the solution for those with no technical knowledge but who have the requirements for a dedicated server. There is of course a price for this but many consider it a price worth paying due to the extra service that is provided.
There are many types of websites that can benefit from dedicated hosting. Those who regularly make changes to their site or hosting have the advantage of increased flexibility. Those with a large amount of traffic may not find shared hosting adequate. Large corporate websites usually find that a dedicated server is essential.
Dedicated hosting has many advantages. Dedicated hosting is more expensive than shared hosting, but there is a reason for that, and if the positives of it are important to a sites success then it is cost affective.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Arguments for and against Child Benefit changes
The British government has announced that from 2013 those earning above £43, 875 a year will no longer receive child benefit. Currently anyone with children receives £20.13 a week for their first child plus £13.40 a week for any other children they have. As part of their cost cutting plans they have now decided that those in the 40% tax band should forego this benefit. There has been much debate since these plans were announced, with many for and many against the changes.
Arguments For The Changes
The reason for the cuts is to help reduce the public deficit, so this itself is one of the benefits. It is debatable whether or not those who earn over £43, 875 a year really need this benefit, something the government has obviously decided they do not. Many, even most people, believe that this amount should easily be enough to bring up children with, it being almost £20,000 above the average salary. People on much less are able to bring their children up on what they earn so those in this salary bracket shouldn’t require child benefit to do so. There is also the debate as to whether the less well off should be paying taxes for part of those taxes to go to those who are better off. Should those on these good incomes be the priority when it comes to benefits, or should it be exclusively for those who need it most? Another argument for these changes is that it could help prevent tax rises being necessary in the long run.
Arguments Against The Changes
Some have argued that this could have a negative impact on the economy; that those on middle to higher incomes are those who spend more money and therefore contribute most to the economy. This child benefit change will mean that some will have less disposable income than previously. Others say that those on good salaries are being punished for being successful, that they have worked hard to achieve this salary and should be penalised for it. Of course, there are also those who work hard but aren’t paid so well. The main issue that has been bought up since the announcement was made is that it is individual based rather than family based so some are not losing the benefit despite having a higher household income than those who are. An individual salary is all that will be considered when calculating whether or not someone receives child benefit, so if one parent in the household earns more than £43, 875 a year they will not receive it, while if neither parent earns this they will. So in an extreme example, a family where both parents earn £40,000 will still receive child benefit despite earning £80,000 between them, while a family where one parent earns £44,000 and the other doesn’t work won’t receive it although their family income is almost half that of the other example.
How Will It Affect Families?
Although those affected by the child benefit changes will all be on good salaries, some families will have to make cutbacks. They will be losing just over £1,000 a year for their first child plus nearly a further £700 for all other children they have. So a family with three children will not be getting £2,449.20 a year that they currently do receive. For some this may mean having to downsize on where they live, although this is an extreme example. In reality it may just mean going without some non essential things. Could it affect the children themselves? Many put their child benefit towards savings for children, in an attempt to save for their children’s future. This may be something some will not be able to afford, but then it could be argued that parents on lower incomes are not able to afford this either.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Arguments For The Changes
The reason for the cuts is to help reduce the public deficit, so this itself is one of the benefits. It is debatable whether or not those who earn over £43, 875 a year really need this benefit, something the government has obviously decided they do not. Many, even most people, believe that this amount should easily be enough to bring up children with, it being almost £20,000 above the average salary. People on much less are able to bring their children up on what they earn so those in this salary bracket shouldn’t require child benefit to do so. There is also the debate as to whether the less well off should be paying taxes for part of those taxes to go to those who are better off. Should those on these good incomes be the priority when it comes to benefits, or should it be exclusively for those who need it most? Another argument for these changes is that it could help prevent tax rises being necessary in the long run.
Arguments Against The Changes
Some have argued that this could have a negative impact on the economy; that those on middle to higher incomes are those who spend more money and therefore contribute most to the economy. This child benefit change will mean that some will have less disposable income than previously. Others say that those on good salaries are being punished for being successful, that they have worked hard to achieve this salary and should be penalised for it. Of course, there are also those who work hard but aren’t paid so well. The main issue that has been bought up since the announcement was made is that it is individual based rather than family based so some are not losing the benefit despite having a higher household income than those who are. An individual salary is all that will be considered when calculating whether or not someone receives child benefit, so if one parent in the household earns more than £43, 875 a year they will not receive it, while if neither parent earns this they will. So in an extreme example, a family where both parents earn £40,000 will still receive child benefit despite earning £80,000 between them, while a family where one parent earns £44,000 and the other doesn’t work won’t receive it although their family income is almost half that of the other example.
How Will It Affect Families?
Although those affected by the child benefit changes will all be on good salaries, some families will have to make cutbacks. They will be losing just over £1,000 a year for their first child plus nearly a further £700 for all other children they have. So a family with three children will not be getting £2,449.20 a year that they currently do receive. For some this may mean having to downsize on where they live, although this is an extreme example. In reality it may just mean going without some non essential things. Could it affect the children themselves? Many put their child benefit towards savings for children, in an attempt to save for their children’s future. This may be something some will not be able to afford, but then it could be argued that parents on lower incomes are not able to afford this either.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Savile Row Dispute: What is a Bespoke Suit?
Savile Row is a street in London known for bespoke men’s tailoring. Suits made on Savile Row are world famous and have a reputation for being hand-made specifically for each customer. People associate Savile Row with this in much the same ways as they associate Harley Street with medical practices. When someone thinks of a Savile Row suit they expect a high quality hand-made bespoke suit and they generally cost at least £3,000 each.
The word “bespoke” is now used for all sorts of custom made items but its origin comes from Savile Row suits. It first came about when a suit was described to be “spoken” for, in other words it was made specifically for that customer. This term meant it was made to their measurements and choice of materials and patterns. It is very different than mass produced suits on the high street. When purchasing a bespoke suit a customer will have their measurements taken and choose all the specifics of their suit, which will then be made to their requirements.
There has been much controversy on Savile Row as there have been examples of suits being described as bespoke that are not truly bespoke according to the traditions of Savile Row. These are made-to-measure suits with some alterations and choices available. This has infuriated the established Savile Row Bespoke Tailors on the grounds that they are mass producing a cheaper product and selling them as bespoke Savile Row suits despite them not being the same quality as a tradition bespoke Savile Row product. To an extent this type of situation has been seen as watering down “bespoke” and “Savile Row”. Some believe that these terms should only be used for suits made in Savile Rows traditions. However, others say that Savile Row is simply a location and if a suit is made on that street then it is a Savile Row suit. So it is up for debate whether Savile Row is simply a location or effectively a brand or description of a product. There is a similar debate around the term bespoke. The definition of bespoke can be difficult to quantify. Does it mean everything has to be specific to the customer’s requirements or just a product where there are a number of different options available? For example, is a car where the customer has a choice of colour, interior and other option a bespoke car, or must they choose every detail for this to be the case? Savile Row generally believes the latter, but other are claiming this is not the case. Savile Row tailors think that customers expect the highest quality when they order a bespoke Savile Row suit and that those who are offering a made-to-measure suits under this tag are giving customers the false impression that they are getting a similar product for less.
Andrew Marshall (c)
The word “bespoke” is now used for all sorts of custom made items but its origin comes from Savile Row suits. It first came about when a suit was described to be “spoken” for, in other words it was made specifically for that customer. This term meant it was made to their measurements and choice of materials and patterns. It is very different than mass produced suits on the high street. When purchasing a bespoke suit a customer will have their measurements taken and choose all the specifics of their suit, which will then be made to their requirements.
There has been much controversy on Savile Row as there have been examples of suits being described as bespoke that are not truly bespoke according to the traditions of Savile Row. These are made-to-measure suits with some alterations and choices available. This has infuriated the established Savile Row Bespoke Tailors on the grounds that they are mass producing a cheaper product and selling them as bespoke Savile Row suits despite them not being the same quality as a tradition bespoke Savile Row product. To an extent this type of situation has been seen as watering down “bespoke” and “Savile Row”. Some believe that these terms should only be used for suits made in Savile Rows traditions. However, others say that Savile Row is simply a location and if a suit is made on that street then it is a Savile Row suit. So it is up for debate whether Savile Row is simply a location or effectively a brand or description of a product. There is a similar debate around the term bespoke. The definition of bespoke can be difficult to quantify. Does it mean everything has to be specific to the customer’s requirements or just a product where there are a number of different options available? For example, is a car where the customer has a choice of colour, interior and other option a bespoke car, or must they choose every detail for this to be the case? Savile Row generally believes the latter, but other are claiming this is not the case. Savile Row tailors think that customers expect the highest quality when they order a bespoke Savile Row suit and that those who are offering a made-to-measure suits under this tag are giving customers the false impression that they are getting a similar product for less.
Andrew Marshall (c)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)