Quote:
Originally Posted by James79
If you had read the entire post (which isnt large by any amount) you would have come to the conclusion that I am not (and most people arent) bothered with Skys publicity stunts! See Post Number 4!!
|
Well I am.
I think both companies are wasting money...and ultimately it's money their customers are paying. How is the childish spat improving the service?
VirginMedia have more pointless adverts than, err, a pointless advert thing.
Tons and tons telling us about NTL:Telewest changing [why send one letter when you can send 10, eh?] and no worthwhile improvements at all to the service to justify all the shouting about it.
Ideas - implementation - then advertise, don't shout about nothing.
The only changes I see are that they've pretended that on demand is a new channel called 'Virgin Central' whilst making a bunch of old repeats that are on the on demand service free. Wow.
I know both companies have to advertise their products but Ideas - implementation - then advertise, don't shout about nothing.
But, for example I'd think VM were spending much better if in 2007 they actually improved the service by giving customers a set top box that works and that is worthy of the 21st century we're currently in - as standard rather than charging £10 or £15 extra for it.
That'd be better than the "free" TV gimmick - give the people that are happy to pay for XL TV, something to make it worthwhile, and then you could advertise that. Much better than spending our money advertising your crying about big bad bully sky or spending it in legal fees and then more advertising telling us "Sir Richard says 'Today we spent most of your money on Brian Fothergill QC, because I like seeing my beard in the paper...err no I mean it's better for customers...a V+ box? Nah, seriously you want to read a full page advert in the mirror telling you I care about you...don't you? Well, whatever, it's a lot easier for me to fax the advert copy than I would be to actually make the service better and I reckon 75% of customers will believe the service is better if they read it in my advert'
I'd think they were better if instead of only having the cheap 2 for £20 and 3 for £30 and 4 for £40 packages, which all have slow internet, and two overly expensive £85 and £125 packages that both have 10mb, they'd had some middle ground - even NTL had a £49.99 package with 4mb internet and Family pack TV.
Or better yet, forget the "bundles" - they were a symptom of NTL:Telewest's in ability to do any better. If they'd spent some of the money that went to Uma putting a system together instead that meant customers could pick which TV [XL or whatever] / Internet [XL, L or whatever] / Phone M - mix and match what they actually wanted, see the price for it and order it, all on one page, rather than having the fixed, useless "marketing" bundles then it would be worth shouting about.
I'd think they'd spent better if they actually made NTL:Telewest better rather than just spending money on advertising the new name and trying to convince that flogging a £10 sim card alongside the old NTL and telewest packages with a new black and red logo is somehow a new and innovative service that's never been done. Shouting about nothing, on the existing customers coin.
As for the "dispute" - an untrained monkey could have come up with better ideas and a better response, but no, what we got was just more and more adverts, silly childish immature dummy spitting, on top of what was already a ridiculous amount of pointless VirginMedia PR.
I hope someone at VirginMedia is listening and there's a plan to actually do something different and then shout about it. Of course, if you have some ideas and manage to find the team to implement good ideas, you'll need to advertise them - all over again.
Join CF
You are here: 
