Re: have you seen this?

**Chris** Thu 10 May - 8:21

tigger wrote:So is there no way of checking out websites? Not that a bear or tigger of little brain will be able to work that out!

E.g. Cuddlecat.co.uk is still registered to TM - after five years! Is it still possible that they think of using it as another marketing ploy?
I've come across it on a site registered to a friend of the McCanns ethicaltoys. etc. Cuddlecat is linked to that site. It is supposes to even sell a Cuddlecat.

It is easy enough to check domain (website) names and ownership (if it hasn't been redacted for privacy) using "Whois". Cuddlecat.co.uk is not a currently registered domain. Cuddlecat.com is registered to a German registrant.

Wayback is somewhat different as it is only looking at websites which have a "presence" on the web. It was more use years ago when many sites had semi-static content but less so now when many websites change content daily.

**Chris** Thu 10 May - 8:34

tigger wrote:So is there no way of checking out websites? Not that a bear or tigger of little brain will be able to work that out!

E.g. Cuddlecat.co.uk is still registered to TM - after five years! Is it still possible that they think of using it as another marketing ploy?
I've come across it on a site registered to a friend of the McCanns ethicaltoys. etc. Cuddlecat is linked to that site. It is supposes to even sell a Cuddlecat.

I've just checked the site - they've had a complete make-over in style etc. The cuddlecat has disappeared but under charities is listed: Madeleine Mccann (Reg. Charity No. 6248215)??????

http://www.ethicalkidz.co.uk/

It looks like they have made a mistake. There is no charity registered with that number. It is the Funds company registration number at Companies House.

tigger Thu 10 May - 8:47

Chris wrote:
tigger wrote:So is there no way of checking out websites? Not that a bear or tigger of little brain will be able to work that out!

E.g. Cuddlecat.co.uk is still registered to TM - after five years! Is it still possible that they think of using it as another marketing ploy?
I've come across it on a site registered to a friend of the McCanns ethicaltoys. etc. Cuddlecat is linked to that site. It is supposes to even sell a Cuddlecat.

I've just checked the site - they've had a complete make-over in style etc. The cuddlecat has disappeared but under charities is listed: Madeleine Mccann (Reg. Charity No. 6248215)??????

http://www.ethicalkidz.co.uk/

It looks like they have made a mistake. There is no charity registered with that number. It is the Funds company registration number at Companies House.

I'm inclined to think it's on purpose.
Kate routinely gives people the impression that the Fund is a charity by saying - they are helping other charities.

Most people I know also think it's a charity. Especially as the media aren't exactly open about this either - instead we see them on Charity runs, Charity events.

Thanks for the info, I was just going to look it up, having drawn zero from the Charities commission.

mossman Thu 10 May - 8:59

tigger wrote:
Chris wrote:
tigger wrote:So is there no way of checking out websites? Not that a bear or tigger of little brain will be able to work that out!

E.g. Cuddlecat.co.uk is still registered to TM - after five years! Is it still possible that they think of using it as another marketing ploy?
I've come across it on a site registered to a friend of the McCanns ethicaltoys. etc. Cuddlecat is linked to that site. It is supposes to even sell a Cuddlecat.

I've just checked the site - they've had a complete make-over in style etc. The cuddlecat has disappeared but under charities is listed: Madeleine Mccann (Reg. Charity No. 6248215)??????

http://www.ethicalkidz.co.uk/

It looks like they have made a mistake. There is no charity registered with that number. It is the Funds company registration number at Companies House.

Where I live, our Charities Commmission take a very dim view of anybody printing a number "purporting" to be a charity. Indeed I have seen them print large notices in the national press advising people that such and such has printed such a number as a charity, please note it is not a charity.

I'm inclined to think it's on purpose.
Kate routinely gives people the impression that the Fund is a charity by saying - they are helping other charities.

Most people I know also think it's a charity. Especially as the media aren't exactly open about this either - instead we see them on Charity runs, Charity events.

Thanks for the info, I was just going to look it up, having drawn zero from the Charities commission.

Sponsored content