Cable Forum - View Single Post

Chrysalis · 13-05-2011, 21:39

We still going round in circles.

VM staff are saying the following. MY comments in bold on each point to avoid confusion.

1 - What we seeing on the VM forums is not representative of the customer base as a whole, ie when the forums were dominated by superhub complaints this did not translate into phone calls as well. My view is this cannot be proven as I think the way tech support is handled on the phones has serious issues that will affect the way faults are tallied up. We also relying on staff here been honest which in my view can be debated given some of the comments I have heard regarding upstreams, gaming etc.
2 - The majority of customers are happy, this may be true and I am not too sceptical about this as some people are easy to please and many people are not technical so for the average joe the superhub may be fine. I dont know many in real life who use the device so I cant pass on my thoughts on that too much. A silent customer isnt necessarily happy but if they not happy it probably isnt serious either as they would otherwise ring.
3 - it isnt costing much money or at least enough to be a concern, yet VM have dumped netgear as a supplier and adopted a policy that the ceo office can dish out modems to keep churn down. If netgear is dumped then its likely VM consider themselves to not be getting value for money out of the deal. Next year shareholder report be interesting.

We have these claims yet within months of release there has been bad press, the highest complaints I have ever seen online for a VM device, dropping of supplier within 6 months, a need to do an emergency firmware update, staff in VM call centres telling customers they are flooded with superhub related calls, a VM tech saying install issues have gone upwards since started deploying the superhub as well as confirming VM are misdiagnosing faults, people refusing to upgrade to VM's flagship product purely based on the superhub, and now even business customers holding back. The latter 2 are defenitly costing VM money in lost revenue.

This is a final summary of my thoughts, yes the superhub isnt necessarily a technical failure (depending what was expected of it) but it is a PR and in my view a financial failure.

13-05-2011, 21:39	#352
Chrysalis cf.mega poster Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 12,048	Re: Vmng300 We still going round in circles. VM staff are saying the following. MY comments in bold on each point to avoid confusion. 1 - What we seeing on the VM forums is not representative of the customer base as a whole, ie when the forums were dominated by superhub complaints this did not translate into phone calls as well. My view is this cannot be proven as I think the way tech support is handled on the phones has serious issues that will affect the way faults are tallied up. We also relying on staff here been honest which in my view can be debated given some of the comments I have heard regarding upstreams, gaming etc. 2 - The majority of customers are happy, this may be true and I am not too sceptical about this as some people are easy to please and many people are not technical so for the average joe the superhub may be fine. I dont know many in real life who use the device so I cant pass on my thoughts on that too much. A silent customer isnt necessarily happy but if they not happy it probably isnt serious either as they would otherwise ring. 3 - it isnt costing much money or at least enough to be a concern, yet VM have dumped netgear as a supplier and adopted a policy that the ceo office can dish out modems to keep churn down. If netgear is dumped then its likely VM consider themselves to not be getting value for money out of the deal. Next year shareholder report be interesting. We have these claims yet within months of release there has been bad press, the highest complaints I have ever seen online for a VM device, dropping of supplier within 6 months, a need to do an emergency firmware update, staff in VM call centres telling customers they are flooded with superhub related calls, a VM tech saying install issues have gone upwards since started deploying the superhub as well as confirming VM are misdiagnosing faults, people refusing to upgrade to VM's flagship product purely based on the superhub, and now even business customers holding back. The latter 2 are defenitly costing VM money in lost revenue. This is a final summary of my thoughts, yes the superhub isnt necessarily a technical failure (depending what was expected of it) but it is a PR and in my view a financial failure.