Blog | Viewsbank


user picture
No sex please – you're in your 60s

6 years ago by James_Admin

No sex please – you're in your 60s

A quarter under 30 believe people should stop having sex by their 60s
But nearly half of over-65s are still active and average five times a month
More than one in four (26%) of under-30s believe people should stop having sex by their 60s despite evidence to the contrary from the over-60s themselves, a new survey1 from independent research firm Viewsbank shows.
The study found 48%2 of the over-65s have not given up and have sex on average five times a month – although they admit that they have sex less now than when they were younger with 45% saying they have less sex now than in their 50s.
The Viewsbank research asked the views of more than 1,000 under 30s and 1,000 over-50s on sex and the ages at which you should stop.
Nearly six out of 10 (59%) of under-30s do not believe people should stop having sex but many are embarrassed about the thought of their grandparents or parents in the bedroom. Around 55% of under-30s do not like the idea of their grandparents having sex while 53% are unhappy at the thought of their parents having sex.
Up to 54% of under-30s don’t find it embarrassing for relatives to be having sex at any age while 54% say they don’t intend to stop having sex.

1 Online survey of 1,151 adults aged 18 to 30 conducted by Viewsbank in May 2014

Online survey of 1,043 adults aged 50+ conducted by Viewsbank in May 2014


Do you let your children under the age of 18 drink alcohol?

How about these poll results: 40% of parents allow their children under 18 to consume alcohol while 60% do not. I guess the good news is those number aren't reversed, but what do these numbers really mean? Everyday, all day it seems, we hear about the growing drug epidemic with teens whether it be from illegal narcotics, or prescribed pain killers. But, what about drinking? Shouldn't we be just as concerned about our kids becoming alcoholics as we are about them becoming drug addicts?

If you look at it globally, alcohol is so much easier for kids to get. So, if their parents are willingly introducing kids under 18 to it, doesn't it stand to reason they could be creating a horrible situation? In other words, are the parents at fault for what could be a deadly alcoholic problem? The questions are mind boggling and certainly there will be a plethora of studies done with mixed results.
Or, maybe the idea of our kids becoming some kind of drunken rogues based on early introduction to alcohol is all bunk. Perhaps, the parents feel that if it is them who introduce their children to alcohol and not their friends or someone on the street, then they can better control how their kids react to alcohol or use it. I don't know, I really don't, but it certainly is an interesting question.
40% is a pretty high number so it’s definitely worth looking at all levels. I'm still a believer that there are responsible parents out there who really are dedicated to the well-being of their children and don't believe the world is full of apathetic boozers who are just like "ah, what the hell, take a drink, lad, get pissed, join the rest of us". I still think parents do know what is best for their children, so maybe its ok to give the kid a glass of wine or a pint of beer as long as it doesn't turn into a real problem. But, like I said, I don't know.
How about you? Would you consider giving your under 18 year old children a sip here and there? Do you do it already, and if so, what have the results been? Please let us know by leaving a comment below . . .

Do you think that events such as The Royal Ascot are 'Elitist'?

Ascot Racecourse was founded by Queen Anne in 1711. Since then, a further eleven monarchs have leant their patronage to the Royal Meeting, held annually in the third week in June.

According to the,The Royal Ascot is ‘steeped in tradition and pageantry and is interwoven into the very fabric of British culture’. Or British high culture, as 36% of Viewsbankers that voted in our recent poll, somewhat agree.

Earlier this week we asked 1000 people tillw47’s question; Do you think that events such as The Royal Ascot are 'Elitist'? She won £20 and you told us the following:

28% of voters think the Royal Ascot is Definitely elitist.

“The five-day meeting commences on a Tuesday and each day begins with the Royal Procession - the arrival of The Queen and the Royal party in horse-drawn landaus, which parade along the track in front of the race-goers.” (

The event starts in the week. Most of us will be working then! And to be in the presence of the Queen brings an air of salubrity to the event but then 36% of Viewsbank members that voted thought it was only Somewhat Elitist.

13% of votes cast were neutral while 12% of opinions Somewhat Disagreed. This intrigued us as we thought maybe this percentage may have attended or known someone who has being as it's an open event for those that can afford to go.

11% of voters Completely Disagreed and think that the Royal Ascot is something for people in all walks of life. However, the official website, states ‘Ladies are kindly reminded that formal daywear is a requirement in the Royal Enclosure, defined as follows: Dresses and skirts should be of modest length defined as falling just above the knee or longer. Dresses and tops should have straps of one inch or greater.’ ( And Men should wear black or grey morning dress, which must include a waistcoat, tie (no cravats) and a black or grey top hat.

Have you been? Do you think you’ll go one day? I’m not much of a gambling man but it I’d like to go for the experience alone!

Let me know what YOU think.

Rob Tyler

Glastonbury 2014 - I think I’m missing the best one in years

It’s that time of year again, where 120,000 people setup camp in a field in Pilton bringing with them the biggest array of tents I have ever seen, for a weekend if music, art, comedy and possibly mud!

Are we mad or not? I don’t really know.


I have attended the Glastonbury festival for as long as I can remember, through monsoons and baking heat and everyone has a unique and special feeling that keeps people coming back for more.

A few years ago when I was up to my ankles in Mud, stuck in a queue for something I can’t even remember, I vowed this would be the last one, but the next morning the sun came out and all was right with the world again as the proclaimers where paying in a tent I walked into.

I think that is the main thing about Glasto, it’s about the highs and lows, if it all gets a bit much down by the main stages, a 20 minute walk up to the stone circle, healing fields or Glastonbury sign takes you into a whole new world of calm, where the horrors of the toilets can be forgotten while sipping cider with a bird’s eye view of the festival site.




The bad news is that for the 2014 festival I will be consigned to watching it on the TV, as for the first time I did not manage to get tickets and by looking at the line-up from Dolly Parton to The Black Keys, I think I’m missing the best one in years.

People always talk about the cost and the mud, but they are missing the whole point, it’s about getting 120,000 people into the one place in the world that amazing things can happen at any time.

So what do you think, are you Glastonbury virgin or a mud hardened regular? Are you going, watching it on TV or doing something else completely? Let me know below.

Ross, Viewsbank Team Member

Would you consider being micro chipped at birth?

Would you consider being micro chipped at birth?
We asked 1000 of you and you gave us some unexpected results!

Firstly, it does sound like something out of a science fiction novel or movie but it recent buzz suggests it is on the cards for UK citizens and American citizens could start being ‘chipped’ as soon as 2017.

The microchips - which are implanted under the skin or deeper – can allow the wearer's movements to be tracked and store personal information about them. This would make checking in on flights a lot easier and faster. And if you’re ever asked for identification or proof you can drive, a simple scan will determine who you are and any other relevant details.
But at the same time, they could be used by your employer who may want to keep tabs on your movements or by Governments who want a consistent way of identifying their citizens - and storing their location information about them.
And if it fell into the wrong hands, the people’s identities could be stolen and people could be tracked and stalked against their will.

6% of you that voted thought that being micro chipped at birth in replacement of just a passport would be beneficial. While only 1% would agree to be micro chipped for a driver’s licences.

A staggering 37% of you said yes to both. This would mean that you could go anywhere and just be scanned and your details could then appear on a screen. You’d never lose your information or documents!

And finally, 56% of you that voted in the poll said no to being micro chipped in replacement for both a passport and driver’s licence.

Why? Implantable GPS devices could conceivably allow authorities to locate missing persons. Or contain your medical records in case of an emergency.
Or is it the security aspect? There is a potential flaw in that that someone could steal the information on a chip and clone the signal, enabling that person to impersonate a chipped individual.

If you didn’t vote in the poll, let us know what your thoughts are and if you did, what will you do if it becomes compulsory in the UK?

Rob Tyler

user picture
Poll of the Week: Would you go?

6 years ago by James_Admin

Poll of the Week: Would you go?

Poll of the Week: Would You Go?

The World Cup has now kicked off and earlier this week we asked 1000 members of Viewsbank Bevhicks86’s question:

If money were no object, what would be your MAIN reason you would or wouldn't travel to Brazil during the World Cup?”

With so much controversy surrounding FIFA and the host country, Brazil it’s hard to avoid the image of disconnection and divide between politicians/officials and the people. Many people are still dying from hunger while others are spending millions on the games.

But Brazil is a fantastic looking country full of culture and history many of us are not used to and probably even fewer would witness first hand. And with the biggest sporting event ever taking place, people travelling from all over the world to watch games surely now would be the opportune time to visit!

But according to members of Viewsbank, it isn’t.

22% of voters in our poll said that they would travel to Brazil for the football. The football alone. While 3% said they would go to protest or wouldn’t go as a protest.

32% of voters said they’d go to experience the atmosphere and culture of the cities and games but probably wouldn’t watch any football. We understand, it’s not for everyone!

But 37% of voters said they wouldn’t go to Brazil due to not being interested in going there at all! Even if money was no object! Too hot? Too long a flight? What doesn’t intrigue you about Brazil?

6% of voters said ‘Other’ and gave text reasons.
These largely included concerns over safety, although that’s not specified as to whether it’s from recent civil unrest or from existing issues before the build up to the games. A voters said they wouldn’t go because they wanted to avoid anything football related which could be extreme - It’s the world’s most popular and most publicised sport!

They’re not the results we expected which says a lot about our members but the news of some Brazilians switching their support to other teams as a mark of protest is interesting. But for those that do care about their countries’ result, don’t forget to jeer at the entire competition with the knowledge that your home country’s team will inevitably suffer ignominy anyway!

What are your thoughts on Brazil/The World Cup/FIFA?

Rob Tyler

user picture
Pub prices in the UK

6 years ago by James_Admin

Pub prices in the UK





Half of us visit pubs one day a month or less

But almost two-thirds (62%) of adults still consider themselves as having a local

The average cost of a trip to the pub is £18.45 but for 50% of adults it’s a once a month visit or even less, a new survey1 from independent research firm Viewsbank shows. Its research shows 23% of pub-goers spend less than £10 a time with just 11% spending £30 or more per visit.

For many people a visit to the pub is a rarity – 37% of people say they occasionally or never visit pubs with 13% limiting themselves to once a month.

Despite that, two-thirds of people consider themselves as having a local near home or work – the average distance to their local is 1.25 miles, according to the research.

Figures from CAMRA/CGA2 show pubs in t

he UK are closing at the rate of 28 a week – more than 1,450 a year – with the rate of closure speeding up and the Viewsbank research highlights reasons why. Its study found 46% of women usually drink soft drinks in pubs and going to eat is the second most popular reason for visiting pubs. Around 12% of people admit to having gone to pubs and taken their own alcohol with them. That rises to 22% among the 18 to 24-year-old age group. Just 11% of people say there have been no pub closures in their local area in the past five years.


And yet the importance of pubs is highlighted by the fact that 32% of people say they have worked in a pub at some stage of their life and 31% have started a romantic relationship at least once in a pub. However, less pleasantly, 8% have had a fight in a pub.

David Black of Viewsbank said: “Pubs are an important part of the British way of life but the rate of closures show that it’s hard for pub owners to make money, let alone to stay in business.

“The pressures on pubs are immense with rents and alcohol duty not to mention wider social issues such as the smoking ban, worries about binge drinking and health issues - plus price competition from supermarkets.

“It is striking, however, that despite all the gloom and closures 62% of people still believe they have a local even though many of them don’t go that regularly.”

The research found that 63% of adults drank alcohol in a pub before they were 18 with 42% having a drink in a pub when they were 16 or under.

Women find pubs less welcoming than men – at least on their own. The research found just 31% of women are comfortable going into most pubs on their own compared with 70% of men.



1 Online survey of 1,654 adults aged 18+ conducted by Consumer Intelligence between 27th and 28th March 2014





‘Unexpected item in bagging area’ is the biggest complaint

And only half would always tell staff if undercharged


They’re meant to save time and make shopping more efficient – but nearly one in two supermarket shoppers say they regularly need help when using self-service checkouts, a new survey1 from independent research firm Viewsbank shows.

Around 45% of shoppers say they almost always or quite often need staff assistance – only a lucky 2% claim they never need help.

Unsurprisingly the biggest gripe about self-service checkouts is the message ‘unexpected item in bagging area’ – 83% of shoppers using checkouts find it annoying.

If a scanned item came up with an incorrect price that was priced too high, 90% would alert a supermarket employee. However, only 1 in 2 shoppers (49%) would do the same if they knew that the scan had undercharged for an item.

The technology may help save shops time and money, but the research shows that given the choice shoppers prefer the human touch – 55% say if they only had a small number of items and there was a choice between checkout staff and a self-service machine they’d go for the manned checkout.

In reality, the vast majority of shoppers use self-service – just 10% claim to never use the machines. Around 71% of shoppers say they are handy when buying a few items while 61% use them because they are quicker. 5% of shoppers use self-service checkouts to avoid being embarrassed about buying personal items.

David Black of Viewsbank said: “My personal experience is that something almost always goes wrong at the self-service checkout so it is reassuring to find out that it isn’t unusual.

“Of course self-service checkouts do have their advantages, speed for the shopper and lower staffing costs for the shop - and they generally make shopping faster. However, staff are still vital given the number of people needing assistance. And yes, the ‘unexpected item in bagging area’ message does annoy many of us.”

The table below shows the league table of complaints:



‘Unexpected item in bagging area’


Staff being slow to respond


Other issues requiring staff


Bar codes not scanning


Wrong prices


Person in front not knowing what to do


Problems with bags


Checkouts out of order


Problems with payment methods



Older shoppers are more likely to want to use a manned checkout than younger generations – 82% of those aged 65+ would choose one if offered a choice, compared with 42% of 18 to 24 year olds.

People aged between 35 and 44 are evenly split while majorities in favour of manned checkouts start at aged 45+.



1 Online survey of 1,017 adults aged 18+ conducted by Consumer Intelligence between 13th and 14th March 2014

Two out three rate local roads poor or dangerous

Nearly two out of three motorists rate the state of their local roads as poor or dangerous
  • Nearly half of motorists have suffered pothole damage
  • Drivers claim there are four potholes on average in their road

Nearly two out of three motorists rate the state of their local roads as poor or dangerous as recent heavy rain and road maintenance cutbacks combine to halt repairs, a new survey1 from independent research firm Viewsbank shows.

The shock figures show 65% of drivers rate roads as in poor conditions, while 14% saying the roads they use are dangerous.

The state of roads is costing motorists - 49% of drivers say they have suffered damage to their car from potholes with the average bill for repairs costing £165. On average drivers estimate there are four potholes in the road they live on.

Although damage due to road surfaces is rife, drivers are not claiming for the damage caused – just 19% have put in claims to local councils and only 8% have tried to get compensation from their insurer.

Government pledges to earmark £28 billion for spending on roads including a £6 billion pothole fund appear to have had little impact – 78% of motorists say potholes appear to be left unrepaired for months. Just 20% say potholes are repaired in a month and only 4% say they are filled in within a week.

David Black of Viewsbank said: “It is shocking that nearly two out of three motorists are unhappy about the state of their local roads and even more worrying that 6% of people have had an accident because of potholes.

“The Government has recognised the need to spend on road repairs and has committed to increase spending but potholes are clearly still a major issue despite the £6 billion fund and motorists believe little is being done to solve the problem.

“The research shows the majority of motorists are not claiming for damage to vehicles from potholes and are absorbing the costs themselves, so clearly anything that can be done in terms of repairs will help.”

Motorists in the South East of England are most at risk – 20% of drivers there say their local roads are dangerous while 51% rate local roads as poor. Drivers in London are – relatively - the happiest with their roads although only 14% regard roads as in good shape.




East Midlands









North East



North West






South East



South West






West Midlands



Yorkshire & Humberside




The research found that tyres were most likely to be damaged by potholes – 25% of motorists say they have suffered damage to tyres followed by 19% who have suffered damage to suspension.

When it comes to claiming for damage half of those who tried to get compensation from councils failed while only a quarter who tried to claim from insurers were unsuccessful.

1 Online survey of 2,004 drivers aged 18+ conducted by Consumer Intelligence between 13th and 19th February 2014

Nearly two out of every five owners sleep with their pets

  • Nearly two out of every five owners sleep with their pets
  • Nearly a third take pets on holiday
  • And half consider taking them to work

The UK’s reputation as a nation of animal lovers is underlined by a new survey1 from independent research firm Viewsbank showing the lengths owners will go to ensuring their pets are well looked after and comfortable at all times.

Whether it is bed time, office hours or during a holiday, substantial numbers of owners like to keep their faithful friends nearby, the nationwide study among pet owners found.

Nearly two out of every five (39%) owners sleep in the same room as their pets with around 2% - equivalent to 340,000 – even sleeping in the same bed. A slightly less devoted 20% allow pets to sleep on top of their beds, while 17% allow pets to sleep in the same room.

When they go on holiday 27% of owners take their pets with them – although it is mainly only in the UK. Just 2% of owners will take pets on holiday overseas and in the UK.

And if given the chance more than half would take their pets to work – around 9% of owners believe pets should definitely be allowed at work with 28% saying the decision would depend on the pet and 14% saying they should be allowed only if all work colleagues agree.

Data from the PFMA Pet Population report shows around 13 million UK households – equivalent to 45% of all homes – own pets with a total pet population of 71 million in the country. There are 8.5 million dogs and 8.5 million cats in the UK. A large majority of the UK pet population is made up of fish.

David Black of Viewsbank said: “The UK is known as a nation of animal lovers and the research bears that out. Some dog owners might even be surprised how few people sleep in the same bed with their pets, whereas others will be horrified that there are any do.

“Total ownership of pets is on the decline with the rise of single households but the devotion shown to those pets does not seem to be diminishing at all.”

Just 3% of those questioned said their pet usually sleeps outside the house. After the bedroom the sitting room is the most popular place chosen by 21% marginally ahead of the kitchen which is used by 19% of pets.

Pets did well at Christmas – around 66% of owners bought them presents while another 2% would have done if their pets had behaved well throughout the year.

The study also found 56% of pet owners believe the care of animals should be included in the National Curriculum and taught in schools.

1 Online survey of 2,023 dog or cat owners conducted by Consumer Intelligence between 4th and 10th October 2013