Why am I paying £20 p/m for a 2MB 'M' connection?

[Pepperdog]

Somehow it seems like I'm being ripped off...

When I log into my virgin media I see I am on a 2MB 'M' connection.

When I go to 'upgrade my broadband' it says "Your existing package is Virgin Media broadband Size M . This is a £18 per month subscription" yet on my bill I'm being charged £20 per month.

On the same page I can Upgrade to Virgin Media broadband: Size L (presumably 10 MB) @ £25 per month subscription. However, when I browse to broadband services through the main VM site the 20MB XL size is only £20 per month (I have VM telephone line as well and we pay by DD.)

Forgive the sentiment but streuth :mad:! Either I'm being a dime-bar (not unusual) or I'm being bent over and thoroughly reamed by VM here.

In all honestly I had to laugh or I'll cry.

I'm obviously going to phone them to mildly express my disappointment but before I do, to avoid embarassment and cancelling my services unnecessarily, have I got this all wrapped around my neck?

Also, I have an ntl home 200 cable modem which I was led to believe (by an ntl engineer) is old hat and only capable of limited throughput - is this true and should I be requesting that they replace it?

[webcrawler2050]

Firstly, watch the "shortened swearing" appreciate the anger but no need.

Secondly. Phone retentions and or CS. Will give you a good deal.

[Pepperdog]

Firstly, noted and amended (regardless of the insignificance of it and how pedantic it is.) On the extremely rare occasion I've used 'WTF' as an exclamation (without even thinking about it) in a thread, it's never been an issue. If you're really that serious and I've offended you then I apologise unreservedly and I'll never do it again.
Secondly, you don't need to reply in a list-like style in order to make yourself understood. I'm not 'entirely' stupid and it comes across as being unnecessarily officious and/or supercilious.

I note from your signature your 'warning' to people that "you always say it how it is." Negative, you say it how 'you think' it is; there's a difference. Don't get me confused with someone who won't respond if I disagree with something I see, particularly if it is directed at me or directly relates to me, regardless of where it is and whoever it is.
In future, unless you are staff, mod, the forum owner or someone else in an appropriate position of authority, you're not in any position to 'tell' me anything as far as I'm concerned so please adjust your approach or refrain from doing so.

Thanks for your response, I'll certainly be giving them a call and I hope you're right.

I'd suggest that anyone else using VM checks their bill and reconcile it against the website prices. I wouldn't imagine I'm the only person being overcharged.

[zing_deleted]

Somehow it seems like I'm being ripped off...

When I log into my virgin media I see I am on a 2MB 'M' connection.

When I go to 'upgrade my broadband' it says "Your existing package is Virgin Media broadband Size M . This is a £18 per month subscription" yet on my bill I'm being charged £20 per month.

On the same page I can Upgrade to Virgin Media broadband: Size L (presumably 10 MB) @ £25 per month subscription. However, when I browse to broadband services through the main VM site the 20MB XL size is only £20 per month (I have VM telephone line as well and we pay by DD.)

Forgive the sentiment but streuth :mad:! Either I'm being a dime-bar (not unusual) or I'm being bent over and thoroughly reamed by VM here.

In all honestly I had to laugh or I'll cry.

I'm obviously going to phone them to mildly express my disappointment but before I do, to avoid embarassment and cancelling my services unnecessarily, have I got this all wrapped around my neck?

Also, I have an ntl home 200 cable modem which I was led to believe (by an ntl engineer) is old hat and only capable of limited throughput - is this true and should I be requesting that they replace it?

Honestly mate the forum has loads of people in a similar boat to you VMs billing system is a joke.

I recently managed to get a friend of mine upgraded from 2 to 10 meg free (thanks my vm friend lol ) but also managed to haggle the price for his stand alone BB to a tenner a month.(btw CS told me 2 meg does not exist as a package anymore)

I hope you manage to get it all clarified I am awaiting my second 50meg bill after the price drop and expect to be having to make a call when that drops through the door

[RobboEdin]

You are venting your anger without being aware of the fact that Virgin Media bills ALWAYS show the 'list' price for their services BEFORE discounts are removed.

Like many before you, you then compare the 'list' price from your bill with the headline, marketing price for another product.

In your case, you are comparing your 'list' price for BB M of £20 with the 'headline' price of £20 for BB XL and getting upset.

Here are the 'list' prices (as shown on the bill) for all the BB products:

BB M £20
BB L £25
BB XL £37
BB XXL £45

Here is how the BB XL price of £20 is achieved. You have to have a phone!

Billed as follows:

Phone M £11
BB XL £37
discount -£17
Total £31

If you then take the £11 for phone off the £31 total, you get the £20 'nominal' price for BB XL.

You cannot compare the 'list' price of a service with the discounted price of another service and have a fair or useful comparison.

If you detail your charges from the Advance Services section of your bill, including all discounts, then someone will be able to comment on whether your beef is justifiable and tell you what you can do about it.

[Raistlin]

In future, unless you are staff, mod, the forum owner or someone else in an appropriate position of authority, you're not in any position to 'tell' me anything as far as I'm concerned so please adjust your approach or refrain from doing so.


Excellent advice, and I would suggest that everybody remember this.

[webcrawler2050]

Just what the doctor ordered on a Monday lol

Personally, I couldn't care - was just a 'friendly' warning, as the MODS may have given you a warning for it..

[joglynne]

Should't Pepperdog be getting his free upgrade to 10Mb soon. May be he could check to see if his area has already been done and he has been missed.

[Flyboy]

Firstly, noted and amended (regardless of the insignificance of it and how pedantic it is.) On the extremely rare occasion I've used 'WTF' as an exclamation (without even thinking about it) in a thread, it's never been an issue. If you're really that serious and I've offended you then I apologise unreservedly and I'll never do it again.
Secondly, you don't need to reply in a list-like style in order to make yourself understood. I'm not 'entirely' stupid and it comes across as being unnecessarily officious and/or supercilious.

I note from your signature your 'warning' to people that "you always say it how it is." Negative, you say it how 'you think' it is; there's a difference. Don't get me confused with someone who won't respond if I disagree with something I see, particularly if it is directed at me or directly relates to me, regardless of where it is and whoever it is.
In future, unless you are staff, mod, the forum owner or someone else in an appropriate position of authority, you're not in any position to 'tell' me anything as far as I'm concerned so please adjust your approach or refrain from doing so.

Thanks for your response, I'll certainly be giving them a call and I hope you're right.

I'd suggest that anyone else using VM checks their bill and reconcile it against the website prices. I wouldn't imagine I'm the only person being overcharged.

I like Pepperdog. :D

Welcome.

[faisalabadi]

im paying £21.49 for phone and apparently 2mb

[Pepperdog]

You are venting your anger without being aware of the fact that Virgin Media bills ALWAYS show the 'list' price for their services BEFORE discounts are removed.

Like many before you, you then compare the 'list' price from your bill with the headline, marketing price for another product.

In your case, you are comparing your 'list' price for BB M of £20 with the 'headline' price of £20 for BB XL and getting upset.

Here are the 'list' prices (as shown on the bill) for all the BB products:

BB M £20
BB L £25
BB XL £37
BB XXL £45

Here is how the BB XL price of £20 is achieved. You have to have a phone!

Billed as follows:

Phone M £11
BB XL £37
discount -£17
Total £31

If you then take the £11 for phone off the £31 total, you get the £20 'nominal' price for BB XL.

You cannot compare the 'list' price of a service with the discounted price of another service and have a fair or useful comparison.


So much for transparency then...

I have no doubt that you're correct about VM's senseless way of displaying billing data and applying discounts in a weird manner. However, you're incorrect about me and my perception of the fact that VM are ripping me (and I'm confident I won't be alone) off.

I have a VM landline, BB and pay by DD and fit the criteria for the 20MB XL at £20, as published on their website. Regardless of how it's wrapped up, other customers are receiving ten times the bandwidth I get for the same price (on a service that apparently doesn't really exist anymore.) I'm not sure which part of that you think I'm failing to understand, unless you're telling me they publish deals/offers that don't exist?
There are discounts applied to my bill but as far as I've been led to believe, they are (and should be) part of a compensation agreement between VM and I and have nothing to do with my broadband services.

I'll try to explain without it becoming too much of an epic.

Basically, due to the provider's failure to migrate my account from dialup properly I ended up paying for parts of the top tier BB service that were never delivered, for several years, in fact. Rather than argue the toss about a refund spanning over years, VM and I negotiated gratis services; cable TV actually (which I would never have paid for otherwise; has it cost them anything to serve me with something I wouldn't have paid for anyway?) This was on a pretty much permanent basis (until 2012 anyway, I was told.) Great, they kept my custom and I got free cable; everyone was happy and have been for years.
Charges have been applied (incorrectly) occasionally due to changes in the billing system since this agreement, and when I've queried this the notes have been checked and I've been refunded and compensated very fairly. Up until now there hasn't been any grievance that we haven't been able to satisfactorily resolve through discussion and compromise.

I have now spoken to VM retentions who were unwilling to accept what I was saying and were unwilling to check the notes (as they have always done in the past,) let alone come to some sort of compromise. For the first time in the many years I've been with VM I spoke to a retentions rep who seemed poorly trained, wasn't dynamic, lacked compassion and any negotiation skills. She managed to get my back up pretty quickly when in the past I've phoned them in far more 'excited' states and ended up coming away satisfied and full of praise (regardless of whether I came away with exactly what I wanted or not.)
I told her to cancel my services and then she tried lying about the fact that I was in a contract; nice try :p:. It didn't take long to convince her of the error of her way and in the end they agreed to cancel. Congratulations on losing a long term customer :rolleyes:.

So, much as I didn't anticipate (or want) it working out this way, it looks like I'm in the market for another telecomm and IS provider. Apart from American Chopper and Mythbusters I won't miss the luxury of endless repeats and constant advertisements from cable TV.
The only real inconvenience I perceive is losing my email address, but I'm going to sort out a domain so I won't find myself in the same boat again... que se ra, another thread in the rich tapestry of life, simples.

BT landline will work out cheaper for me. O2 broadband will be £5 per month cheaper for ten times the bandwith (in fact it will be more than £10 per month cheaper if I switch mobile phone provider, which I was looking to do anyway.) In fact, if I do decide I can't live without a TV package then I think Sky actually works out cheaper (the setup costs will be recovered within 6 months.) That's before I've spent a great deal of time needling out the best offers. Who loses?

The moral of this episode is that regardless of what VM tell you (or in some cases publish) always get it in writing lest they decide to go flaky on an agreement, and and beware of them lying about contractual obligations.

That said, there are 30 days left before they disconnect me and I don't believe there are too many things that are absolutely beyond redemption. Afterall, I'm just after a good deal on services from a provider who's prepared to be transparent and honest (and not shirk on deals they've agreed to.) They'll have to pull something pretty damn good out the bag if they want me as a customer now though.
I wouldn't imagine they'll contact me but I may decide to write to them anyway to furnish them with the benefit of my experience, although I have written to them before and didn't get a response (even though they are legally obliged to do so.) We'll see.

Thank you all very much for your replies, much appreciated.

[Sephiroth]

Firstly, noted and amended (regardless of the insignificance of it and how pedantic it is.) On the extremely rare occasion I've used 'WTF' as an exclamation (without even thinking about it) in a thread, it's never been an issue. If you're really that serious and I've offended you then I apologise unreservedly and I'll never do it again.
Secondly, you don't need to reply in a list-like style in order to make yourself understood. I'm not 'entirely' stupid and it comes across as being unnecessarily officious and/or supercilious.

I note from your signature your 'warning' to people that "you always say it how it is." Negative, you say it how 'you think' it is; there's a difference. Don't get me confused with someone who won't respond if I disagree with something I see, particularly if it is directed at me or directly relates to me, regardless of where it is and whoever it is.

In future, unless you are staff, mod, the forum owner or someone else in an appropriate position of authority, you're not in any position to 'tell' me anything as far as I'm concerned so please adjust your approach or refrain from doing so.

.....
Good for you. well said. Fo shizzle.

[Ignitionnet]

You are venting your anger without being aware of the fact that Virgin Media bills ALWAYS show the 'list' price for their services BEFORE discounts are removed.

Like many before you, you then compare the 'list' price from your bill with the headline, marketing price for another product.

The only problem being of course that said 'list' doesn't appear to exist. I have asked 3 different departments and the only 'list' is the 'marketing' one.

I doubt that Trading Standards will find pricing produced from an imaginary list too amusing.

[Sephiroth]

So much for transparency then...

I have no doubt that you're correct about VM's senseless way of displaying billing data and applying discounts in a weird manner. However, you're incorrect about me and my perception of the fact that VM are ripping me (and I'm confident I won't be alone) off.

.......

Thank you all very much for your replies, much appreciated.

I see you've come across some of my eveil words on VM's "transparency". Im now an even greater fan of yours!

Incidentally, I have exactly the same pricing issue to sort out with VM when I get a moment.

[BenMcr]

Well instead of all this ranting about the pricing, why doesn't someone actually contact Trading Standards and see what they say?

[Sephiroth]

Well instead of all this ranting about the pricing, why doesn't someone actually contact Trading Standards and see what they say?

Why doesn't VM do things properly and transparently?

They are less than honest and you can't defend that.

[BenMcr]

As I've said elswhere I have no involvement in VM's pricing policy, so I cannot comment on why the pricing works as it does.

However, the prices you pay are the prices you agree to when you take out services. Virgin are under no obligation to charge you anything different - even if they change the price for new customers later on

[Sephiroth]

.......However, the prices you pay are the prices you agree to when you take out services. Virgin are under no obligation to charge you anything different - even if they change the price for new customers later on

That is downright shameful.

When BT lower their prices or O2 lowers its tariff, every customer benefits. Apparently not so Virgin. Downright shameful.

Virgin's good name is under attack here and they should respect their customers a great deal better than they do.

[webcrawler2050]

That is downright shameful.

When BT lower their prices or O2 lowers its tariff, every customer benefits. Apparently not so Virgin. Downright shameful.

Virgin's good name is under attack here and they should respect their customers a great deal better than they do.

Well, alot of firms do this - drop prices for new customers and exsitings gets "shafted" as it where. Nothing new there. However, I believe, if you speak to the right department, they may do something abotu it as a gesture of goodwill.

[Sephiroth]

Well, alot of firms do this - drop prices for new customers and exsitings gets "shafted" as it where. Nothing new there. However, I believe, if you speak to the right department, they may do something abotu it as a gesture of goodwill.
Who else does this, then?

[webcrawler2050]

Who else does this, then?

Web Hosting Companies are a fine example. GYM's in Swindon are a good example aswell.

[Sephiroth]

Web Hosting Companies are a fine example. GYM's in Swindon are a good example aswell.
OK - accepted.

But that's surely not mainstream like Virgin, BT, O2 and the like, which is the issue here. Fringe companies are incidental, IMO.

[faisalabadi]

all companies do you over

[webcrawler2050]

Well, co-lo does it, dedicated servers - shared hosting, reseller hosting - companies worth Millions, Fasthosts, 1und1 the list goes on and on - infact, alot of companies do this.

[Sephiroth]

Well, co-lo does it, dedicated servers - shared hosting, reseller hosting - companies worth Millions, Fasthosts, 1und1 the list goes on and on - infact, alot of companies do this.

The class of company you're talking about are business-to-business. Contracts are different there.

This (and other threads) is about business-to-consumer.

[Ignitionnet]

Well instead of all this ranting about the pricing, why doesn't someone actually contact Trading Standards and see what they say?

Already done thanks.

[webcrawler2050]

No, hosting, budget spefically, is sold to "joe blogs" , the consumer. Hosting, is business to consumer & business to business, however, that said, the likes of Fasthosts, should never be considered as a business service. Infact, as they all offer "unlimited" it shouldn't be "used" etc, due to various, issues, overselling etc etc

Now, if it was B2B, the price would be considerably higher, there would be SLA etc etc

I ask, very nicely, please don't talk to like that :)

[Ignitionnet]

I ask, very nicely, please don't talk to like that :)

I must've missed that part of the thread where someone said something rude to you.

---------- Post added at 21:52 ---------- Previous post was at 21:52 ----------

The class of company you're talking about are business-to-business. Contracts are different there.

This (and other threads) is about business-to-consumer.

Sephiroth, webcrawler has run a couple of fringe web hosts at least one of which has had court action brought against it so probably has some experience in these matters.

[webcrawler2050]

Sephiroth, webcrawler has run a couple of fringe web hosts at least one of which has had court action brought against it so probably has some experience in these matters.

Is there a need? Actually, the company went into liquidation, due to

1) Working 23 hours a day on TS
2) Grew to fast, i.e 200 / 300 new clients a day.

Please dont patronise.

[Sephiroth]

I must've missed that part of the thread where someone said something rude to you.

---------- Post added at 21:52 ---------- Previous post was at 21:52 ----------



Sephiroth, webcrawler has run a couple of fringe web hosts at least one of which has had court action brought against it so probably has some experience in these matters.
Good luck to him. I hope he does very well in business, eventually.

In the meantime, it looks to me like he's got baggage and remains on the fringe - well apart, it seems, from the mainstream sentiment here on this issue.

[Ignitionnet]

Is there a need? Actually, the company went into liquidation, due to

1) Working 23 hours a day on TS
2) Grew to fast, i.e 200 / 300 new clients a day.

Please dont patronise.

Err, right, companies that are that successful with all the money 2-300 clients are paying for startup fees, etc, often liquidate as opposed to hiring staff or going to the bank with this massive client list and incredibly fast growth for a business development loan.

Doesn't really explain the rapid company name changes and re-incorporations but never mind.

I'm ignoring that the previous company was compulsorily liquidated via a creditor's wind-up order of course.

[Kymmy]

Off-topic guys... lets stick to the OP's question shall we

[webcrawler2050]

Err, right, companies that are that successful with all the money 2-300 clients are paying for startup fees, etc, often liquidate as opposed to hiring staff or going to the bank with this massive client list and incredibly fast growth for a business development loan.

Doesn't really explain the rapid company name changes and re-incorporations but never mind.

The new brand was to be a change "rebrand" however, didnt happen and wont happen. New company, is to have accounts filled and dissolved.

[Kymmy]

I don't want to have to repeat myself

This thread is about VM and why the OP is paying the amount for the specified speed, not about any other company existing or otherwise

[Flyboy]

As I've said elswhere I have no involvement in VM's pricing policy, so I cannot comment on why the pricing works as it does.

However, the prices you pay are the prices you agree to when you take out services. Virgin are under no obligation to charge you anything different - even if they change the price for new customers later on

Excuse me, but when a service provider advertises a price, that forms part of the contract. Ergo, they are obliged to not charge you any more than they have advertised the price at.

[webcrawler2050]

Excuse me, but when a service provider advertises a price, that forms part of the contract. Ergo, they are obliged to not charge you any more than they have advertised the price at.

Not necessarily, if they advertise a price and put something like "**" there could be "extra" charges in the contract.

[Flyboy]

But those additional conditions must be lawful, relevant and reasonably expected. That said, there are no extras as far as the advertised price for 20mbps BB from Virgin.

[webcrawler2050]

But those additional conditions must be lawful, relevant and reasonably expected. That said, there are no extras as far as the advertised price for 20mbps BB from Virgin.

Well, it wasn't a VM thing, but other ISP may do this, I.e costs for hardware, setup, etc etc.

[Flyboy]

Like I said, those conditions must be lawful, relevant and reasonably expected. For example, a company cannot advertise a price of a mobile phone for ten pounds and then add in the small print to say that it doesn't include the cost of the very specific battery, for which you will have to pay two hundred pounds.

[Sephiroth]

Well, it wasn't a VM thing, but other ISP may do this, I.e costs for hardware, setup, etc etc.

We're discussing VM's billing/pricing here. That's the topic.

[BenMcr]

Excuse me, but when a service provider advertises a price, that forms part of the contract. Ergo, they are obliged to not charge you any more than they have advertised the price at.And they don't - because you are paying the price advertised when you signed up for it and the price on your contract (barring any notified price changes as per the T&Cs)

If the advertised price has since changed that does not automatically mean your price will change as the new advertised price is not part of your contract.

[Kymmy]

Also the new advertised price does tend to state *new customers only*

[Ignitionnet]

Problem is..

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=15208

If you change any part of this package, standard prices apply.

Where's the standard price? It's none of the prices listed there?

You see the issue, no use saying 'standard prices apply' when there's no record anywhere of what the standard prices are.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3246

Ditto there - note thread on VM trying to make a guy pay 37GBP for XL.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3264

No alternate price whatsoever listed there.

[RobboEdin]

Where's the standard price? It's none of the prices listed there?


I have to agree that there is no webpage with the 'list prices'. This could so easily be remedied.

The real prices do exist on your bill and in Selfcare (except it is wrong at the moment).

This has all really arisen because of Virgin Media's desire to display pricing in a similar way to the competition, i.e. without inclusion, except in the smallprint, of the need for line rental charges in addition.

Virgin Media are also too free and easy with giving away profit through Retentions via discounts. Standardising and clearly displaying pricing would be the way forward.

[Ignitionnet]

I have to agree that there is no webpage with the 'list prices'. This could so easily be remedied.

The real prices do exist on your bill and in Selfcare (except it is wrong at the moment).

And for new customers who won't have a bill and don't have access to selfcare, which is wrong anyway?

This has all really arisen because of Virgin Media's desire to display pricing in a similar way to the competition, i.e. without inclusion, except in the smallprint, of the need for line rental charges in addition.

No, it's arisen out of a desire to rip off present customers and punish the pariah 'bundle breakers' by keeping a hidden price advertised nowhere to charge them while advertising lower pricing on the website, etc. Nothing to do with line rental charges, they do at least mention those on the web pages.

[Pepperdog]

And they don't - because you are paying the price advertised when you signed up for it and the price on your contract (barring any notified price changes as per the T&Cs)

If the advertised price has since changed that does not automatically mean your price will change as the new advertised price is not part of your contract.

So when you've served the obligation of the 12 month contract there's little or no incentive to continue subscribing to the services. Would you disagree with that? If so, then please explain objectively why you think I should reverse my decision and stay.

Their apparent attitude towards loyalty or retaining long term subscribers indicates a fundamental lack of simple respect apart from anything else, but it just serves to alienate existing customers who find out they're being ripped off. Maybe it's part of the strategy but it seems to make no sense whatsoever to anyone on the receiving end... Come on, it's a surreptitious way of taking more money off exisiting subscribers who have plenty of other more pressing matters than constantly checking the cost of their services; ensuring they pay by DD and encouraging them to do away with a conventional paper bill (that is more likely to get looked at each month than an e-bill which requires you to log onto an area on a bad website) all contribute to the effectiveness of the ploy.

[Flyboy]

And they don't - because you are paying the price advertised when you signed up for it and the price on your contract (barring any notified price changes as per the T&Cs)

If the advertised price has since changed that does not automatically mean your price will change as the new advertised price is not part of your contract.

Well...I am sure that made sense to you when you were writing it. ;)

If a consumer agrees to purchase something at an advertised price (irrespective of asterixis) and the price changes at the point of purchase, that is unlawful. For example*, when RyanUnfair advertises a fare for one pound and it ends up costing you one hundred pounds, when you add in all the mandatory extras they charge you for, this has been deemed as unlawful (apart from the fact O'leary has stuck two fingers up at the law, because he is above the it, apparently).



*An example only, this is not to deemed as an attempt to start a new topic. All opinions expressed are those of the author and will be charged at an exorbitant rate to be decided when the author feels like it. :D

---------- Post added at 19:58 ---------- Previous post was at 19:53 ----------

Problem is..

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=15208



Where's the standard price? It's none of the prices listed there?

You see the issue, no use saying 'standard prices apply' when there's no record anywhere of what the standard prices are.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3246

Ditto there - note thread on VM trying to make a guy pay 37GBP for XL.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3264

No alternate price whatsoever listed there.

I'd imagine that the standard prices are the those that the contract will revert to when the offer period is up, So, the eighteen pounds a month offer, will revert to the twenty eight pounds a month standard charge.

[Sephiroth]

Read this link. It's very explicit. The prices shown for existing broadband customers are the "Recommended Retail Prices.......We'll never charge you more than our RRPs".

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/cgi-bin/formactions/existing_customer.pl

When you scroll through the further linked pages, the RRP (we've established that now) for a 20 mbps service with telephone for existing customers is £20 + £11 = £31.

Thereafter it gets murky because I can't find a price for XL TV without a phone line. So all of a sudden, Virgin's deceit has just got worse because it is impossible for an existing customer to reach an RRP position.

To my mind that's a Trading Standards issue at least.

And downright shameful.

[Sir John Luke]

Am I missing something? The link above states that the prices are the RRP, and they'll never charge you more, but the prices then state 'from £xx'. What the ... does that mean?

[Sephiroth]

Am I missing something? The link above states that the prices are the RRP, and they'll never charge you more, but the prices then state 'from £xx'. What the ... does that mean?

Eventually you navigate (in the BB XL case) to
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3246

There you'll see £30/month without phone line and £20 + £11 with phone line.

So for Broadband, the RRP is there.

Where it gets murky is that there's no price for XL TV without the phone line.

Worse than murky - pretty schmitty.

[Ignitionnet]

I'd imagine that the standard prices are the those that the contract will revert to when the offer period is up, So, the eighteen pounds a month offer, will revert to the twenty eight pounds a month standard charge.

I would assume likewise but evidently not given that VM want to charge considerably more.

[Pepperdog]

There's a chap here http://www.avforums.com/forums/virgin-media/1095360-go-virgin-stick-sky.html apparently getting:

V+ Box free with free install
XL Phone
XL TV
L BB
Multiroom for free

all for £34.75 a month. How does that sound? Does anyone have a better deal?

[tehazza]

the entire problem of this is someone moaning because some one else is getting a slightly better deal on something.

For example there are lots of us that have a £1 discount for setting up ebilling before it became a fad.

A brilliant example would be complaining to the shop that an item you liked isnt on offer this week but was last week. Or saying that my mate was in here last week and got x for £y and i want that too

and the thing on bundles its like expecting to get the cheapest bundle with sky which basically gives you free internet then cancelling that and then demanding that they continue to give you free internet for life. its absurd they work with psychology if they give you a free settop box they do it as at least 25% of people after looking at the amount of grey in the tvguide will upgrade to a higher tv package. not the same with BB but hey.

By pricing the BB+Phone as they do they basically make you take the phone service. they could do exactly the same by changing the prices about.

The entire thing of people moaning about prices in this way is absurd. Its like going into morrisons, loading the trolley up to full and going to the tills and saying "I only think that this stuffs worth £x so im only giving you that much" or saying "This item was on offer last week, so i only want to pay the expired offer price for it.

Haggle with them if you will, but dont be suprised if they dont give you the world for free. NTL:Telewest got into alot of mess with the old style retentions so its good they're sorted out now.

[fugu]

There's a chap here http://www.avforums.com/forums/virgin-media/1095360-go-virgin-stick-sky.html apparently getting:

V+ Box free with free install
XL Phone
XL TV
L BB
Multiroom for free

all for £34.75 a month. How does that sound? Does anyone have a better deal?

*when you take out a vm phoneline at £11?

Im out of contract and have just been trying to upgrade my package from:
M TV
L BB £25
M phone £11
BB + phone discount -£8, ebill -£1
= £27 p.m

to
M+ TV
XL BB
M phone

After calling I was told they could do TV or BB for £2.50 extra but both would be £8.50 which seems crazy, so I said i'd think about it. Then when i called back I was told that it would be £8.50 for both or £5.50 for each one. Its this kind of inconsistency that annoys me.

[Pepperdog]

the entire problem of this is someone moaning because some one else is getting a slightly better deal on something.

For example there are lots of us that have a £1 discount for setting up ebilling before it became a fad.

A brilliant example would be complaining to the shop that an item you liked isnt on offer this week but was last week. Or saying that my mate was in here last week and got x for £y and i want that too

and the thing on bundles its like expecting to get the cheapest bundle with sky which basically gives you free internet then cancelling that and then demanding that they continue to give you free internet for life. its absurd they work with psychology if they give you a free settop box they do it as at least 25% of people after looking at the amount of grey in the tvguide will upgrade to a higher tv package. not the same with BB but hey.

By pricing the BB+Phone as they do they basically make you take the phone service. they could do exactly the same by changing the prices about.

The entire thing of people moaning about prices in this way is absurd. Its like going into morrisons, loading the trolley up to full and going to the tills and saying "I only think that this stuffs worth £x so im only giving you that much" or saying "This item was on offer last week, so i only want to pay the expired offer price for it.

Haggle with them if you will, but dont be suprised if they dont give you the world for free. NTL:Telewest got into alot of mess with the old style retentions so its good they're sorted out now.

We're not just talking about a 'slightly' better deal (which is incidental,) I certainly never specifically asked for anything for free, and I don't think there has been the suggestion of my having cancelled components within a bundle with the expectation of getting any remaining parts of it for free.
I did, in the past, reasonably discuss fair compensation for not having received services I'd paid for and (because I'm not a desperately unreasonable individual) was prepared to compromise and accept gratis services based on certain criteria, rather than persue compensation of a pecuniary nature. Are you telling me that you feel it's ok to enter into an agreement with somebody (effectively a verbal contract) and then change your mind at some random point afterwards whilst still within the bounds of said agreement? This constitutes part of my beef, which is what this thread is about; the rest of it is fairly self explanatory within the original post and elaborated on within subsequent replies thereof (and the points, as well as the issue is echoed across other threads.)
Somehow I feel this may be a rhetorical question but have you actually read the rest of the posts in this (and indeed the other recent threads regarding similar grievances) thread? Either way it's apparent that you've fallen somewhat short of the mark.

Regardless of your failure to either read or to understand the impetus of peoples' dissatisfaction and thus the reason for this, and similar threads/posts: Using your "if you went into Morrison's" analogy, are you trying to tell me that if you and the chap in front of you had an identical trolley full of goods, you'd be content with being charged 50% more for the same goods? They don't just ad lib the prices in morrisons at point of sale, dependant upon which cashier you talk to at the time.

I went into it further with a view to educating you and I wasn't going to be harsh, but I changed my mind having reviewed your post and given it due consideration. I have now deleted several paragraphs prior to posting this.

Please address your ignorance and read things properly before you return to cast spurious, unfounded comments.

[Ignitionnet]

and the thing on bundles its like expecting to get the cheapest bundle with sky which basically gives you free internet then cancelling that and then demanding that they continue to give you free internet for life.

Actually at least in my case it's about expecting to be charged the standalone price for products, as advertised on the website, not some almost punitive higher rate that features precisely nowhere apart from in VM's billing system.

If VM advertise the ongoing rate of a service on their website as being a certain price that should be the maximum anyone is charged, it's not acceptable or indeed I think legal to keep a separate price, unadvertised and, given that there is no price list, undocumented for the bundle breaking pariah.

So no it's nothing to do with wanting things for free at all, and I can only say that your post is horribly one sided given you appear to suggest that the issues people have are purely those of wanting to pay less than they should and that the billing systems are fine. They aren't, and I can't speak for anyone else but I just want to pay the prices that VM say things are on their site. That I shouldn't have lost bundle discount is another issue, and one that I won't let distract me from them picking prices out of a hat.

---------- Post added at 16:33 ---------- Previous post was at 16:29 ----------

Eventually you navigate (in the BB XL case) to
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3246

There you'll see £30/month without phone line and £20 + £11 with phone line.

So for Broadband, the RRP is there.

Where it gets murky is that there's no price for XL TV without the phone line.

Worse than murky - pretty schmitty.

RRP for 50Mbit is apparently 38 without phone line and 28+11 with phone line, yet they are charging me 45. Yes I agree with you it's a trading standards issue which is why I have involved them.

[RobboEdin]

There's a chap here http://www.avforums.com/forums/virgin-media/1095360-go-virgin-stick-sky.html apparently getting:

V+ Box free with free install
XL Phone
XL TV
L BB
Multiroom for free

all for £34.75 a month. How does that sound? Does anyone have a better deal?

... and he is almost certainly either a Virgin Media employee or someone on Mates Rates. I just wish these people would state that, rather than give others an expectation of that level of pricing to the general public.

....or, please forgive me, a liar!

[Pepperdog]

... and he is almost certainly either a Virgin Media employee or someone on Mates Rates. I just wish these people would state that, rather than give others an expectation of that level of pricing to the general public.

....or, please forgive me, a liar!

I understand entirely what you're saying and, of course, cannot know whether you are correct in any of those cases; you may well be. May I ask though, in what capacity you seem to staunchly believe you are? Without substantiation, based on the inconsistencies in VM's pricing that have been demonstrated here and in other threads, it doesn't seem unreasonable to consider that the rates illustrated there could well be accurate (for average Joe) and thus invalidate your apparent conjecture.

[Peter_]

There's a chap here http://www.avforums.com/forums/virgin-media/1095360-go-virgin-stick-sky.html apparently getting:

V+ Box free with free install
XL Phone
XL TV
L BB
Multiroom for free

all for £34.75 a month. How does that sound? Does anyone have a better deal?
Not Mate rates or a Staff Package, and as far as I am aware Multiroom is a SKY product.

[Pepperdog]

Not Mate rates or a Staff Package, and as far as I am aware Multiroom is a SKY product.

It's anyone's guess whether it's just a figure of speech or he means a second box.

[Peter_]

It's anyone's guess whether it's just a figure of speech or he means a second box.
At a guess I would say he was talking Bull droppings:D

[Pepperdog]

At a guess I would say he was talking Bull droppings:D

You may well be right. There's no way of me knowing that you are though :). To be perfectly honest I wasn't actually looking for that post, it really was a coincidence that I came across it whilst looking for for something else but there was no way I wasn't going to post it lol. It sort of begs the question as to what is the best deal someone is actually getting.

It doesn't really change anything nevertheless.

[Peter_]

You may well be right. There's no way of me knowing that you are though :). To be perfectly honest I wasn't actually looking for that post, it really was a coincidence that I came across it whilst looking for for something else but there was no way I wasn't going to post it lol. It sort of begs the question as to what is the best deal someone is actually getting.

It doesn't really change anything nevertheless.
I am staff and that is no Staff Deal, and Mates Rates is not that generous either.;)

[Sephiroth]

I am staff and that is no Staff Deal, and Mates Rates is not that generous either.;)
It would be poetic justice if "mates' rates", when billed, were convoluted with (say for BB XL), £37 less a loyalty discount less a "mates' discount".

[Ignitionnet]

It would be poetic justice if "mates' rates", when billed, were convoluted with (say for BB XL), £37 less a loyalty discount less a "mates' discount".

Haha. If I could rep again I would :D

[Pepperdog]

I am staff and that is no Staff Deal, and Mates Rates is not that generous either.;)

Aha! That settles it then :).

[Peter_]

It would be poetic justice if "mates' rates", when billed, were convoluted with (say for BB XL), £37 less a loyalty discount less a "mates' discount".
Mates Rates can be a good deal but in most cases your relative/friend has to upgrade to actually get and benefit from the deal.

Staff do pay for services and get a good deal.;)

[Pepperdog]

It would be poetic justice if "mates' rates", when billed, were convoluted with (say for BB XL), £37 less a loyalty discount less a "mates' discount".

This amuses me :D

[browney]

There's a chap here http://www.avforums.com/forums/virgin-media/1095360-go-virgin-stick-sky.html apparently getting:

V+ Box free with free install
XL Phone
XL TV
L BB
Multiroom for free

all for £34.75 a month. How does that sound? Does anyone have a better deal?

Costs me £43 for the same deal.

[Pepperdog]

Costs me £43 for the same deal.

Thanks, that's worth knowing. I wonder if anyone is getting a better deal than Browney.

[Sephiroth]

Haha. If I could rep again I would :D

I can't rep you either for some of your brilliances on this thread!

[Pepperdog]

I can't rep you either for some of your brilliances on this thread!

I couldn't PM you to thank you for making me laugh. Maybe because you've turned it off to avoid death threats or because they banned you from using it for being subversive or something :D.

So thanks :tu:

[Sephiroth]

I couldn't PM you to thank you for making me laugh. Maybe because you've turned it off to avoid death threats or because they banned you from using it for being subversive or something :D.

So thanks :tu:

I've got PM switched off.

Me? Subversive? I think I know who's been subversive on this thread!!!!

You realise that you and I aren't gonna make a damned bit of difference to VM's position on billing? Broadbanding's effort with Trading Standards could be worth watching. \when I get time, I might go down that route.

In the meantime, VSAT propagation calculations keeps me extremely busy (mercifully SNR is irrelevant - we measure BER and packet loss). Good technoblabber, eh?

Goodnight.

[Pepperdog]

How come I received an email to inform me someone posted a reply but it doesn't appear to have been added?

"ThunderPants73 has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Why am I paying £20 p/m for a 2MB 'M' connection? - in the Virgin Media Internet Services forum of Cable Forum."

Who stole the post? :ninja:

[Sephiroth]

Your e-mail would say what he wrote.

What did Thunderpants73 write?

[Pepperdog]

Me? Subversive? I think I know who's been subversive on this thread!!!!

What the, hey!!! How very dare you...

You realise that you and I aren't gonna make a damned bit of difference to VM's position on billing? Broadbanding's effort with Trading Standards could be worth watching. \when I get time, I might go down that route.

Aye, I know but even if it serves no other purpose I feel better and, other than walking the dog, at the moment I haven't got anything else constructive to do with my time than watch workmen to make sure they're doing what I pay them to do. If I ever run out of money or the wife stops working I might decide to get another job, sweeping the park maybe or something where I can have a clear mind to continue work on my masterplan to take over the world.

Broadbandings clearly has promise as an evil genius and I'm almost as inspired by that as I am his tenacity and wit. Rest assured I'm in the process of organising my information to present to the Trading Standards and I'm still eagerly awaiting my call from retentions... oh why oh why don't they call *sniff*? I'm sure they'll do the right thing and I know they can do better; wait, is that the phone... false alarm, the dog just trumped.

In the meantime, VSAT propagation calculations keeps me extremely busy (mercifully SNR is irrelevant - we measure BER and packet loss). Good technoblabber, eh?

Err, yeah that's gnarly, nothing short of gnarly...

Goodnight.

I'm only telling you once, don't touch my leg, dude.

---------- Post added at 23:59 ---------- Previous post was at 23:57 ----------

Your e-mail would say what he wrote.

What did Thunderpants73 write?

Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************

---Quote (Originally by Flyboy)---
I like Pepperdog. :D

Welcome.
---End Quote---
Ditto.
***************

Feel the love, brothers.

[Sephiroth]

I like Pepperdog. :D

Welcome.
You mean this post on page 1? & What's that got to do with Thunderpants73? Oh, it's all going wrong.

LOL. Hope you're not on Virgin mail!

---------- Post added at 00:03 ---------- Previous post was at 00:02 ----------

What the, hey!!! How very dare you...

......
Not you, you pirrock!

[Pepperdog]

You mean this post on page 1?

LOL. Hope you're not on Virgin mail!!

Niet comrade, look again:

ThunderPants73 has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Why am I paying £20 p/m for a 2MB 'M' connection? - in the Virgin Media Internet Services forum of Cable Forum.

This thread is located at:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33656269-why-am-i-paying-20-p-new-post.html

Here is the message that has just been posted:
***************

---Quote (Originally by Flyboy)---
I like Pepperdog. :D

Welcome.
---End Quote---
Ditto.
***************

Virgin mail, what's that then... no wait, aww pants :erm:

Not you, you pirrock!

Dang I hate it when that happens :dunce:. :D

[Sephiroth]

Clearly the CMTP was working half duplex with the UBR just when the kids had cross plugged the wires in your street box as the rear axle with the oil seal glitched on your modem.

In plain Broadbandings speak, an upstream packet from ThunderPants73 collided with a downstream packet from a couple of days ago (due to a rift in the space-time continuum orchestrated by the VM billing system that refers to yesterday's prices). The amplitude modulated RF signal was converted to optical modulation at warp 0.5 and the resultant packet collision resulted in ThunderPants73 materialising into your here and now.

Simples.

[Pepperdog]

Simples.

LOL :D.

I think I'm getting a nosebleed.

[RobboEdin]

I understand entirely what you're saying and, of course, cannot know whether you are correct in any of those cases; you may well be. May I ask though, in what capacity you seem to staunchly believe you are? Without substantiation, based on the inconsistencies in VM's pricing that have been demonstrated here and in other threads, it doesn't seem unreasonable to consider that the rates illustrated there could well be accurate (for average Joe) and thus invalidate your apparent conjecture.

Pepperdog, I have no capacity in which I post my opinions, other than being a Virgin Media customer who keeps abreast of their pricing.

When someone makes a claim of a particular price for a particular bundle, I always compare their claim with the current, standard bundle price for their services. The bundle price is an already-discounted price.

The current bundle price for the services quoted, BB L, TV XL and Phone XL with V+ and a second STB is £58.95, which represents a discount level of £13.

The person claims a price of £34.75 which represents an additional discount of £24.20 and a total discount of £37.20 - this level of discount is VERY unlikely on those services.

Only an opinion but when you test these people by asking them to show their Advance Charges from their bill they rarely reply and you can read into that what you want!

[browney]

Thanks, that's worth knowing. I wonder if anyone is getting a better deal than Browney.

I already know people are.

[Pepperdog]

Pepperdog, I have no capacity in which I post my opinions, other than being a Virgin Media customer who keeps abreast of their pricing.

When someone makes a claim of a particular price for a particular bundle, I always compare their claim with the current, standard bundle price for their services. The bundle price is an already-discounted price.

The current bundle price for the services quoted, BB L, TV XL and Phone XL with V+ and a second STB is £58.95, which represents a discount level of £13.

The person claims a price of £34.75 which represents an additional discount of £24.20 and a total discount of £37.20 - this level of discount is VERY unlikely on those services.

Thanks for clearing that up; I welcome your opinion and appreciate you spending the time to share it with me. I don't think I need to iterate this for your benefit but I was merely pointing out that without facts, you are just another person with an opinion (which you're perfectly entitled to.) I didn't post those prices whilst making any sort of claim about the validity of them and nor did I disagree with you. I'm just trying to get a handle on the pricing because nobody, including VM seem to be able make a great deal of sense out of it. The fact that you keep abreast of your own pricing isn't apparently indicative of the prices anyone/everyone else pays (or your opinion of them,) which is part of the problem. You also use the words 'current' and 'standard' with regards to VM's pricing, both of which seem to be causing a bone of contention for others.

I don't know if you saw the response we had from a VM staff member regarding those prices but, if his word is to be taken as gospel, it transpires that you were correct (in your third case iirc; it was olblocks.) As I've said, it doesn't really change anything.

I have a couple of questions for you:

Costs me £43 for the same deal.

Based on my understanding of your discount level, Browney is discounted £28.95. Do you think Browney is lying or is that acceptable in your learned opinion?
Could you please post links to the standalone prices for the products in this deal so I can see for myself how the discount is built up?

Only an opinion but when you test these people by asking them to show their Advance Charges from their bill they rarely reply and you can read into that what you want!

I won't read anything into it but I don't mind admitting that I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Please explain.

[browney]

Download Failed (1) (http://browneyonline.co.uk/imagehosting/view-162_1234.JPG)

As you can see it's £48pm but that is because I am paying £5 extra per month as a direct debit failed a few months ago and I haven't set it back up

[RobboEdin]

Thanks for clearing that up; I welcome your opinion and appreciate you spending the time to share it with me. I don't think I need to iterate this for your benefit but I was merely pointing out that without facts, you are just another person with an opinion (which you're perfectly entitled to.) I didn't post those prices whilst making any sort of claim about the validity of them and nor did I disagree with you. I'm just trying to get a handle on the pricing because nobody, including VM seem to be able make a great deal of sense out of it. The fact that you keep abreast of your own pricing isn't apparently indicative of the prices anyone/everyone else pays (or your opinion of them,) which is part of the problem. You also use the words 'current' and 'standard' with regards to VM's pricing, both of which seem to be causing a bone of contention for others.

I don't know if you saw the response we had from a VM staff member regarding those prices but, if his word is to be taken as gospel, it transpires that you were correct (in your third case iirc; it was olblocks.) As I've said, it doesn't really change anything.

I have a couple of questions for you:



Based on my understanding of your discount level, Browney is discounted £28.95. Do you think Browney is lying or is that acceptable in your learned opinion?
Could you please post links to the standalone prices for the products in this deal so I can see for myself how the discount is built up?



I won't read anything into it but I don't mind admitting that I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Please explain.

Thank you to browney - he has posted his advance charges.

You can see that his services are not quite the same as the other person claimed as he only has Phone L rather than Phone XL.

You will see that this means that browney's discount is £24.45 not the £28.95 that you correctly identified. The difference is that Phone L cost £3.45 and Phone XL costs £7.95 per month.

Browney's pricing and discount level is EXCELLENT at £24.45 for the service he has and hence the reason why a discount level as claimed by the other person of £37.20 is VERY UNLIKELY (as confirmed by moldova who I believe is Virgin Media staff).

Hope this helps.

In terms of pricing, you should always use the price builder to get the standard bundle price. Retentions nowadays, from my observation, not from any inside information, then have some flexibility to reduce this a little bit, perhaps by £6 or £7 but not to the level claimed.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/bundles/triple-builder.html

Browney's level of discount is beyond what I have stated but was probably given when Retentions had more flexibility than they do today.

[Pepperdog]

You're still talking about these 'standard prices' which brings us back to this:

Problem is..

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=15208

Where's the standard price? It's none of the prices listed there?

You see the issue, no use saying 'standard prices apply' when there's no record anywhere of what the standard prices are.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3246

Ditto there - note thread on VM trying to make a guy pay 37GBP for XL.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/websales/product.do?id=3264

No alternate price whatsoever listed there.


Where you agreed:

I have to agree that there is no webpage with the 'list prices'.

And then this:

it's arisen out of a desire to rip off present customers and punish the pariah 'bundle breakers' by keeping a hidden price advertised nowhere to charge them while advertising lower pricing on the website, etc.

There's little point in me regurgitating all of what's already been said, anyone with enough intent can read all about it and pick the bones out. The skinny of it is that some of it is actually fact. It really is "impossible for an existing customer to reach an RRP position" in certain cases.

Could you please post links to the standalone prices for the products in this deal so I can see for myself how the discount is built up?
Could you, please? The pricebuilder serves little use in my case (just as it doesn't for others) because more than one of the products I'm being billed for, along with the subsequent price (for at least one of those products) do not exist.
Additionally (as I've explained earlier) in my case there is a grievance regarding a compensation agreement which (because of the way VM do it; which isn't the root of this specific issue) would affect the discounts applied to my bill. Nobody, other than a VM employee with access to all of the notes on my account can do anything about this at all, I can accept that.

I won't read anything into it but I don't mind admitting that I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Please explain.
You appear to have avoided the question. Would you mind explaining what you meant, please?

Browney's pricing and discount level is EXCELLENT at £24.45 for the service he has

Retentions nowadays, from my observation, not from any inside information, then have some flexibility to reduce this a little bit, perhaps by £6 or £7 but not to the level claimed

Browney's level of discount is beyond what I have stated but was probably given when Retentions had more flexibility than they do today

Other than your rightful opinion I maintain that these are little more than conjecture. At the risk of appearing churlish, no it doesn't help.


I already know people are.

What do you make of that then? I believe him, don't you?


This has all really arisen because of Virgin Media's desire to display pricing in a similar way to the competition, i.e. without inclusion, except in the smallprint, of the need for line rental charges in addition.

Virgin Media are also too free and easy with giving away profit through Retentions via discounts.

You after a job or something?:D


Standardising and clearly displaying pricing would be the way forward.

Amen to that :tu:.

Get yer deals out for the craic ladies and germs. Good ol' Browney whapped his out on the table, bless him, who gets a better deal, anyone?

[Ignitionnet]

Description Date/period Amount
Telephone Line Rental 02 October - 01 November £11.00
Talk International 02 October - 01 November £1.50
Talk Unlimited 02 October - 01 November £7.95
XXL 50Mb Broadband 02 October - 01 November £45.00
T V Size: M 02 October - 01 November £0.00

65.45 for 50M, XL phone and Talk International. Any advances on that?

[adzii_nufc]

God you all sound like Gordon Brown In The House Of Commons

[RobboEdin]

It would appear that you find the information I have provided (which I agree is my opinion) unuseful. I intend to provide no further opinions to you.

I hope you get whatever issue you may have resolved.

[Sephiroth]

It would appear that you find the information I have provided (which I agree is my opinion) unuseful. I intend to provide no further opinions to you.

I hope you get whatever issue you may have resolved.
For for what my opinion is worth, I find your contributions helpful and interesting.

[Pepperdog]

It would appear that you find the information I have provided (which I agree is my opinion) unuseful. I intend to provide no further opinions to you.

I hope you get whatever issue you may have resolved.

In this case it's unfortunate you couldn't help me. Thank you though, I'm sure a solution will arise one way or another.

For for what my opinion is worth, I find your contributions helpful and interesting.

Your opinion is worth as much as Robbo's, mine or anyone elses. I'm sure his contributions are both helpful and interesting but in this case, his opinion was not helpful (to me) at this time.