Virgin Media -- First Quarter 2012 Results

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Said poster is looking at the thread right now actually. Either typing a long winded response or trying his utmost to contain himself from countering this slight.

Its funny that you and i were thinking of the same person, Thankfully i don't see his replies .

[carlwaring]

Someone should explain to Sirius that, on forums such as this, he is bound to come across people with whom he disagrees. Given that such forums are normally used for the discussion of different views, then if he chooses to ignore everyone who holds a different, but equally valid, opinion, then what the heck is he doing joining forums in the first place?

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Someone should explain to Sirius that, on forums such as this, he is bound to come across people with whom he disagrees. Given that such forums are normally used for the discussion of different views, then if he chooses to ignore everyone who holds a different, but equally valid, opinion, then what the heck is he doing joining forums in the first place?

Assuming your opinion is equally valid by default is arrogant. I recently saw an endocrinologist, I wouldn't regard your opinion of my endocrine system as being equally valid, just as I wouldn't regard the tragically sad way you jump to the defence of a utility company at every conceivable opportunity as giving any validity to your comments on it.

Go and study with your spare time to improve your CV a bit or at very least expand your horizons rather than coming onto this forum (did you only start posting on here because you lost posting rights elsewhere?) and offering up the same viewpoint time and time again. It's gotten really, really old.

I have to say it's deliciously ironic that you apparently can't post on Virgin's own forum and Virgin staff here regard you with derision. Tragic too.

---------- Post added at 13:25 ---------- Previous post was at 13:14 ----------

Originally Posted by carlwaring

So you know he was only posting to bait another user. Isn't that against the T&C?

By that standard a large proportion of your abrasive and provocative posting, done for no apparent reason other than to irritate other people would be questionable.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

We know that all of VM's services are only available to 50% of the country. Does anyone know how much of the country BT's Broadband service covers?

(Yes, that was a rhetorical question.)

Yes, although you are aware that BT's network is open access, and that service via the Openreach network is delivered by 3-figures ISPs using the BT Wholesale network and a handful of LLU operators?

With that in mind if we talk about coverage you then have to start comparing Virgin against DSL in total. It doesn't make for good reading. We could also compare Virgin to peer cable companies and we find that their uptake in their cabled areas is relatively low. This is put down to the strength of the competition.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

If it's a larger amount (which of course it is) then there's at least one other possible reason for them adding more BB subscribers this quarter. What about last quarter, or the one before that? Is this the first time this has happened? Probably not but, similarly, what about the times (if it has ever happened) that VM have added more BB subscribers than BT? I assume those times would have just been dismissed as "an anomaly" or something?

It isn't. BT have been adding more customers per quarter for years. VM's passed areas reached near-saturation a while ago.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

My point being that, as BT are the largest broadband supplier in the UK (with VM second) it's hardly surprising that the former has added more BB customers than the latter, is it? There might (actually, probably will) be more than the one reason stated for it happening.

Not surprising in the slightest.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

If they're so good and VM so bad, what took then so long? (Four years!)

Building out their network and acquiring the customer base. Ridiculous to describe acquisition of over 4 million triple play customers in 4 years as being 'so long'. How many years did VM take to acquire 4 million, given they've been offering triple play en masse via Telewest and ntl since, what, 2001?

Going from being a single service TV operator to having over 4 million triple play customers in a served area of approximately 22,000,000 homes is pretty impressive whichever way you look at it.

Originally Posted by carlwaring

Okay. That's called stalking

Or it's noticing what it says at the bottom of the thread regarding who's looking at it, nothing too untoward, don't flatter yourself

---------- Post added at 13:28 ---------- Previous post was at 13:25 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Its funny that you and i were thinking of the same person, Thankfully i don't see his replies .

Fair point. I'd best put the asshat back on ignore before I get myself infracted. Having read him posting the same **** across various media for several years it gets really old and really tiring when he appears on here to grace us with his wisdom.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Said poster is looking at the thread right now actually. Either typing a long winded response or trying his utmost to contain himself from countering this slight.

I read this, saw the next post below yours, and burst out laughing. Loudly. In the office.

---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Its funny that you and i were thinking of the same person, Thankfully i don't see his replies .

Rest assured, it was of the page-long tl;dr type.

---------- Post added at 13:44 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

Originally Posted by carlwaring

We know that all of VM's services are only available to 50% of the country. Does anyone know how much of the country BT's Broadband service covers?

(Yes, that was a rhetorical question.)

The services we're talking about (FTTC) - 37%. They are adding 131,000 customers per quarter on Infinity alone, not including the 60 other providers running FTTC services on the same network.

If it's a larger amount (which of course it is) then there's at least one other possible reason for them adding more BB subscribers this quarter.

It isn't larger, it is smaller.

What about last quarter, or the one before that? Is this the first time this has happened? Probably not but, similarly, what about the times (if it has ever happened) that VM have added more BB subscribers than BT? I assume those times would have just been dismissed as "an anomaly" or something?

BT has been consistently adding more on FTTC than VM for the past year,

My point being that, as BT are the largest broadband supplier in the UK (with VM second) it's hardly surprising that the former has added more BB customers than the latter, is it? There might (actually, probably will) be more than the one reason stated for it happening.

BT Infinity is adding 131,000 customers per quarter, and only available to 37% of the country so far. VM's FTTN services are adding just 45,700, but are available to around 50% of the country.

So not only does fact demonstrate the exact opposite of what you state, it is more surprising when VM (wrongly) advertise their service as the fastest in the country (and unsurprisingly many people have been misled by this claim, my flatmates included)

If they're so good and VM so bad, what took then so long? (Four years!)

They've been doing it for a year, and well, with 25% availability they already overtook VM.

Pretty sure I could easily find complaints about the quality and reliability (or lack thereof) of BT's services and Customer Services without much trouble

Sure, my experience with their CS has been pretty meh, but nowhere near the downright despicable I had with VM.

For one, they've so far not once tried to blame my equipment for poor speeds and fixed the problem and called me back when promised, all things VM failed to do during my ~3 years with them.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Fair point. I'd best put the asshat back on ignore before I get myself infracted. Having read him posting the same **** across various media for several years it gets really old and really tiring when he appears on here to grace us with his wisdom.

Yep i have no intention of reading his spam, It reminds me of nerd porn and that's why i put him on ignore to save my sanity

---------- Post added at 17:20 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Rest assured, it was of the page-long tl;dr type.

Thankfully i did not have to read it

Enough of the jibes at each other, stick to the topic.