'I spent £3 on Greggs Too Good To Go Bag and was floored by what was in it'
Many people like buying themselves a lunch or a treat now and again from one of the many high street food outlets. However, with the ongoing cost of living crisis continuing in the UK, many are doing all they can to save cash where possible.
The Too Good To Go app is perfect for those trying to do this as it connects users with local stores, cafes, and restaurants that have surplus unsold food and sells it to them for a cheaper price. This means that as well as saving money, it is also helping cut food waste. A lot of people often share their Too Good To Go hauls online now on sites such as Facebook to spread the word about outlets who provide good value 'surprise bags' and ones to avoid.
One woman named Charlotte decided to do exactly that recently as she posted about her Greggs bag. Charlotte told people she'd paid £2.99 for the bag and was left shocked when she saw what was inside of it.
The post read: "Finally got a Greggs and well worth the wait! Awesome bag. Chicken baguette, Ham and egg roll, Steak bake, cheese and onion bake, two gingerbread men and two big yum-yums! £2.99!"
She included a photo of all the goodies she got as her post racked up more than 80 likes. People agreed that she'd definitely got a good haul, as one person wrote: "Crikey best one I have seen yet."
Charlotte isn't the only Too Good To Go user who has been impressed by her Greggs bag recently either.
Mum-of-two Alice Nash also shared her incredible surprise bag only, where she got £33 worth of Greggs food items for just £3.15.
Alice, from Wiltshire, said she received a bag crammed full of sweet treats and savoury snacks – with 14 items in total.
This included three custard slices, a Margherita pizza slice, a box of two Yum Yums, a Chelsea bun, a Southern fried chicken baguette, a cheese and ham toastie, a tuna cucumber sandwich, a cheese Ploughman's roll, a steak bake, a veggie bake, a cheese, beans and sausage bake and a BLT sandwich.
Speaking to What's the Jam, Alice said: "It's definitely the best bag we've received out of all the places we've purchased from, as there was such a variety.
"I have been told this is a lot more than anyone normally gets since I posted my TikTok, so I know we got very lucky. My partner Kyle picked it up and immediately rang me and said he couldn't believe how much food there was.
'It was our first time getting a Greggs bag, and we didn't know what to expect. We thought we'd get maybe a sandwich and a bake – not a whole feast."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
5 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Our hidden corner of UK used to be thriving – now it's on its KNEES with nowhere to shop & overflowing bins everywhere
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) RESIDENTS have kicked back after their once thriving town has been brought to its knees in a major dispute with its council. One resident has claimed that the council's plans haven't 'worked so far', as businesses continue to close along the high street. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 5 Shopowners in Monmouth say that they are struggling to stay open Credit: media Wales 5 Sherren McCabe-Finlayson says that the council needs to listen to their constituents Credit: media Wales 5 Eirwen Rogers' business, the Blessed Be Emporium, is one of the many struggling shops Credit: media Wales Monmouth, Wales, is a quiet town known for its eclectic shops. The town is home to a gothic souvenir shop and the oldest theatre site in Wales, but residents say that local businesses are struggling to stay afloat. Sherren McCab-Finlayson, Chair of the Monmouth Chamber of Commerce, has slammed the local council. She says that the council has enabled roadworks and building works to drag on, after expanding the town's pavements in 2020. Sherren claims this is preventing shoppers from parking and is driving down the town's footfall. Now, the once-thriving town is beset with empty shopfronts and dwindling numbers of shoppers. Sherren says: 'It all started in 2020. Monmouth was completely different before Covid. 'The council then widened the pavements for social distancing and said it would only be temporary. 'And yet years later we're stuck with these huge pavements because the council now doesn't have the money to dig them up.' Meanwhile, the council is pushing ahead with plans to install 'rain gardens' to create more spaces for residents to eat outside. Britain's retail apocalypse: why your favourite stores KEEP closing down Sherren claims that this idea 'hasn't worked so far' though. She added: 'The plan for rain gardens isn't popular. 'The extended pavements immediately reduced parking - leading to the town losing at least 20 parking spaces. Something which was always one of Monmouth's USPs was that shoppers were able to pull up for half an hour and do a quick bit of shopping. "There remains that need but it isn't possible in the town now. Shoppers often don't want to pay for an hour or two hours - they'll just go elsewhere if they have to do that." She claimed that water companies were doing work in the town for a year, leaving the town 'girdlocked', while scaffolding obscured shop fronts. Eirwen Rogers owns the Blessed Be Emporium but said that the chaos has made it impossible for people to find her business. Now she has been forced to transform the downstairs of the shop into a gaming and workshop space, out of 'sheer desperation to survive. She added: 'I have no opening hours at all now. I post them on Facebook every morning, because there are so few people in this part of town that sometimes it's not worth coming in. I am desperate for a massive reduction in my business rates. "I'm paying more than £700 a month business rates alone and they don't even empty my bins. It's impossible.' The Sun has approached Monmouthshire Council for comment. 5 Feature on Monmouth town centre as some buisnesses are concern about the drop in footfall Sherren McCabe-Finlayson pic by Rob Browne Credit: media Wales
The Independent
8 hours ago
- The Independent
Australia bans YouTube accounts for children under 16 in reversal of previous stance
The Australian government announced YouTube will be among the social media platforms that must ensure account holders are at least 16-years-old from December, reversing a position taken months ago on the popular video-sharing service. YouTube was listed as an exemption in November last year when the Parliament passed world-first laws that will ban Australian children younger than 16 from platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok and X. Communications Minister Anika Wells released rules Wednesday that decide which online services are defined as 'age-restricted social media platforms' and which avoid the age limit. The age restrictions take effect Dec. 10 and platforms will face fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for 'failing to take responsible steps' to exclude underage account holders, a government statement said. The steps are not defined. Wells defended applying the restrictions to YouTube and said the government would not be intimidated by threats of legal action from the platform's U.S. owner, Alphabet Inc. 'The evidence cannot be ignored that four out of 10 Australian kids report that their most recent harm was on YouTube,' Wells told reporters, referring to government research. 'We will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids.' Children will be able to access YouTube but will not be allowed to have their own YouTube accounts. YouTube said the government's decision 'reverses a clear, public commitment to exclude YouTube from this ban.' 'We share the government's goal of addressing and reducing online harms. Our position remains clear: YouTube is a video sharing platform with a library of free, high-quality content, increasingly viewed on TV screens. It's not social media,' a YouTube statement said, noting it will consider next steps and engage with the government. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said Australia would campaign at a United Nations forum in New York in September for international support for banning children from social media. 'I know from the discussions I've had with other leaders that they are looking at this and they are considering what impact social media is having on young people in their respective nations,' Albanese said. 'It is a common experience. This is not an Australian experience." Last year, the government commissioned an evaluation of age assurance technologies that was to report last month on how young children could be excluded from social media. The government had yet to receive that evaluation's final recommendations, Wells said. But she added the platform users won't have to upload documents such as passports and driver's licenses to prove their age. 'Platforms have to provide an alternative to providing your own personal identification documents to satisfy themselves of age,' Wells said. 'These platforms know with deadly accuracy who we are, what we do and when we do it. And they know that you've had a Facebook account since 2009, so they know that you are over 16." Exempt services include online gaming, messaging, education and health apps. They are excluded because they are considered less harmful to children. The minimum age is intended to address harmful impacts on children including addictive behaviors caused by persuasive or manipulative platform design features, social isolation, sleep interference, poor mental and physical health, low life-satisfaction and exposure to inappropriate and harmful content, government documents say.
The Guardian
9 hours ago
- The Guardian
Albanese says banning children from social media ‘not going to be easy' as key questions unanswered
Anthony Albanese admits banning children from social media 'is not going to be simple', with questions still unanswered over how tech platforms will check the ages of all Australian users – and which platforms will be included – when the government imposes its under 16s social media ban this year. The communications minister, Anika Wells, said on Wednesday the onus will be on platforms to design simple solutions, claiming there are 'lots of ways' tech companies could check the ages of their users. The government is still waiting on results from a trial of age assurance technology, but is pressing on with plans for the ban to come into force on 10 December. 'We will not be intimidated by legal threats, when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids,' Wells said on Wednesday. Sign up: AU Breaking News email The government announced on Wednesday it would backflip on an earlier stance and include YouTube in the under 16s social media ban after all. The Google-owned video platform had earlier been promised an exemption, but it will now join Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, X and TikTok on the list of platforms to be banned for those under 16. While the government named select platforms in its announcement, the rules do not specify platforms covered by the ban, but instead list factors that could see platforms excluded from the ban. Smaller services – such as Discord, Twitch, Trump's Truth Social or X rival Bluesky – may be required to comply. The rules would seemingly exclude LinkedIn, which had argued to the government during the development of the legislation it was not something that was of interest to children. From December, platforms which do not take 'reasonable steps' to stop children from holding accounts on those platforms will be liable for fines up to $49.5m. Wells said such platforms will have to deactivate existing accounts of children, ensure no new ones are established and stop any efforts to skirt those rules. But some major tech platforms have privately raised concerns about a lack of information about what they must to do to meet the 'reasonable steps' test, including what new barriers or verification methods they must add to their services. The government is expected to share more information and guidance about such steps in coming months. Wells pushed back on the concerns of the platforms, saying the government had outlined its expectations last year when the legislation passed parliament, and that the tech companies should be engaging with the eSafety commissioner on their responses. 'Social media platforms have been on notice since December last year that this was coming. They have had 12 months to work with the eSafety Commissioner to determine what that looks like for their individual platforms,' she told a press conference in Parliament House. 'The onus here is on the platforms. Come 10 December, if your kid has a Facebook login, Facebook account, it is on Facebook to deactivate that account. It's not on the parent to police that on behalf of Facebook. 'These are not set-and-forget rules, these are set-and-support rules. They are world-leading. But this is manifestly too important for us not to have a crack.' YouTube last week wrote to the government, vowing to consider legal action if it was included in the ban. The company on Wednesday claimed YouTube was a video platform 'not social media'. 'We share the government's goal of addressing and reducing online harms,' a spokesperson said. 'The government's announcement today reverses a clear, public commitment to exclude YouTube from this ban. We will consider next steps and will continue to engage with the government.' Albanese said the government wanted to be 'cooperative' but believed tech companies could implement the ban with existing information they held. 'We acknowledge that this is not going to be simple or easy … Some of this will be inevitably a work-in-progress,' he said. 'But what we know is that social media does have more information about what [a person] does than perhaps some people who are your close friends. Where you go, who you talk to, what you're interested in, you know, they do keep that information … They can use the capacity which we know that they have.' While the Coalition backed the social media ban, the shadow communications minister, Melissa McIntosh, accused the government of a 'blatant broken promise' over including YouTube after its prior exemption. 'When the government introduced the legislation in November, they specifically excluded YouTube. This was the premise on which the legislation passed the Parliament,' she said. 'The Albanese Labor government can change a Minister, but they cannot hide the fact they deliberately misled the public,' McIntosh said. Greens spokesperson Sarah Hanson-Young called the push 'delusional', calling for stricter rules and a duty of care for users. 'A blanket ban is simply a blunt instrument that will not make kids safer, we know that kids are going to get around it.' Albanese will use the United Nations general assembly in September to drum up international support for Australia's world-first social media crackdown. He said Australia would hold an event at the session in New York City, to advocate for the policy.
