Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35297637)

No, we were debating whether it was that Virgin Media were too "cheap" to pay the appropriate price for Sky Atlantic, or was it more likely that Sky had made the price too steep, and to support the "too steep" proposition, I (and a few others) pointed out that none of the other potential routes to market (BT Vision, Smallworld, Wightcable) had seemed to reach a deal with Sky either.

It is called "providing examples to back up your proposition", rather than just continuously stating, without supporting examples, "VM are cheap" (and I don't regard Sky stating it as supporting evidence....:D).

You do like to narrow the focus down to the only part that supports your position, excluding contradictory evidence, don't you?;)

Originally Posted by devilincarnate (Post 35297143)

Why does this seem like that this forum is now becoming a VM bashing forum. As most of the threads are like this now?

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35297711)

There is a difference between VM bashing and helping some customers with their problems (which this forum is here for). While we do have a hard core of members who will complain about VM whatever they do (yet mysteriously, some never leave the company who apparently fails them so regularly), I think the results to this poll show that the bulk of people think VM are doing either a good or excellent job.

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35297711)

There is a difference between VM bashing and helping some customers with their problems (which this forum is here for). While we do have a hard core of members who will complain about VM whatever they do (yet mysteriously, some never leave the company who apparently fails them so regularly), I think the results to this poll show that the bulk of people think VM are doing either a good or excellent job.