View Single Post
Old 14-04-2008, 22:35   #3313
Pasanonic
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Services: VM XL TV + MUTV 20MB Phone.
Posts: 115
Pasanonic has a spectacular aura about themPasanonic has a spectacular aura about themPasanonic has a spectacular aura about themPasanonic has a spectacular aura about them
Re: Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
Hi,

Will be sending this to Mr Branson tomorrow via registered mail, but would appreciate comments etc.

April 14, 2008

Sir Richard Branson
Virgin Management Limited
120 Campden Hill Road
London
W8 7AR



Dear Sir Richard,

/snip

WinstonS
Winston.

I've been meaning to touch on this point since I started reading here. I feel it is again time to point out that even though VM cable and television services operate under the name of Virgin Media they are in fact still NTL Telewest operating under a new leased name. The company bought out a majority share in the mobile division of Virgin and as part of that they obtained a 20 year lease for use of the name and Sir Richard in return obtained a stake in the NTL Telewest company.

I feel that Sir Richard has at times in these forums come under attack for issues which really don't have anything to do with him personally. I agree it is good to bring this matter to his attention as it is often implied that he might be involved in this.

My mother is an acquaintance of Sir Richard and I myself have met him twice. Given that I have his West London home address here I may write to him myself asking if he is aware of this issue and ask for his feelings on the matter but as he is a businessman who has received a holding in NTL as part of a trade I'll not be claiming that he is responsible, but rather that he might want to go on record as he is the highest profile name attached to the Phorm issue by default of NTL using the VM brand name.

I think what I'd like to get across is that the company operating the virginmedia cable services is not a Virgin holding and is still NTL by another name.

regards

Craig.

---------- Post added at 22:35 ---------- Previous post was at 22:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
Just a small thought, how many small shareholders have stakes in BT? Quite a few no doubt. Each therefore has voting rights. I have no idea what is involved, but could these shareholders stir things up a bit at an AGM or EGM by requiring some sort of motion that BT do not use Phorm?
This is indeed an interesting option to pursue. Both my parents are BT stockholders in a small measure and I'll make some enquiries as to the procedure for calling and extraordinary general meeting and see if there are reasons to do so regarding the trials.
Pasanonic is offline