View Single Post
Old 18-02-2007, 18:15   #33
punky
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Age: 45
Posts: 14,750
punky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aura
punky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aurapunky has a golden aura
Re: Variety.Com: VM have Sky 'rattled'

Quote:
Originally Posted by lostandconfused View Post
pre virgin media, how much advertisment of the ntl brand was there? not a lot compared to the VM brand being launched,
Eh? At least once a week I was getting a bloody leaflet through the post, despite already receiving (then) all 3 of ntl's services (of which I still do, some of you might like to know). And then there was all the TV adverts with the old bloke marrying the young bird, 30 seconds of looking a toilet door and listening to the the toilet flush. "if you can, you should" is imprinted in my brain. Then there was all the bus shelter adverts. And newspaper ads. And magazine flyer-drops.

All that's happened is that all ntl:telewest's are filled with Uma Thurman. Which pretty much backs up Virgin's ethos. They'd rather spend more money appearing cool/hip than on services. At least the previous ntl:tw's ads were cheap.

Quote:
if sky truely has nothing to worry about, why bother spending money advertising their benefits compared to VM... this didnt happen when it was ntl:telewest
So, by Sky advertising after the merger, its 'concerned', or to use the OP, "rattled" by VM? Not at all. Before, during and after Sky advertised more or less the same. Sky are a company, you'd expect them to advertise their services. Its not a new thing post-VM.
punky is offline   Reply With Quote