Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[Cogster]

Originally Posted by mark777

Do these financial statements need to be signed off by auditors?

E&Y?

Indeed.. p12 of the AP. and I'm sure they are correct and in good order.. El Reg comment and quote would seem to be directed at the validity of parts of the Chairman's statement on p6.

What the law is regarding this i have no clue for IANAL.... (always wanted to say that)

[mark777]

Interesting

Preliminary results 10th April

http://www.phorm.com/reports/Prelimi...0-Apr-2008.pdf

Tie in with VM quoted


Final results 30th April

http://www.phorm.com/reports/2007_Final_Results.pdf

No mention of VM

Auditors = Deloitte & Touche

-----

They're having a barney.

-----


http://www.phorm.com/investors/reports.php

Anyone know what the 'RNS' stands for on the 10th April link and if it was there a few days ago?

[Cogster]

Originally Posted by mark777

No mention of VM

Auditors = Deloitte & Touche

-----

They're having a barney.

Try p6 and p7

[AlexanderHanff]

To keep upto date on Phorm stories on Digg add the following url to your RSS reader:

http://digg.com/rss_search?search=Ph...th&section=all

Slashdot unfortunately don't offer an RSS for searches.

On another note I just had an hour long phone call with Claer Barrett who writes for the Investors Chronicle at Financial Times about Phorm and RIPA. It was a very constructive discussion and I extended gratitude on behalf of us all to the Financial Times for getting actively involved in the issue.

I will let you all know when the article is due to be published.

Alexander Hanff

[Cogster]

Originally Posted by mark777

Anyone know what the 'RNS' stands for on the 10th April link and if it was there a few days ago?

'RNS' Regulatory news service?

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/e...ducts/irs/rns/

[mark777]

Originally Posted by Cogster

Try p6 and p7

They talk about agreements with 3 key ISP's, but I can't find the word 'virgin' in the whole document, whereas you can in the preliminary.

I take the point though. Who is the 3rd key ISP they have an agreement with?

BT + CPW + ?

Or are they using the word agreement in a very wide sense?

[vicz]

Originally Posted by Cogster

Indeed.. p12 of the AP. and I'm sure they are correct and in good order.. El Reg comment and quote would seem to be directed at the validity of parts of the Chairman's statement on p6.

What the law is regarding this i have no clue for IANAL.... (always wanted to say that)

I understand that they are pretty relaxed about these things in Delaware...

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

On another note I just had an hour long phone call with Claer Barrett who writes for the Investors Chronicle at Financial Times about Phorm and RIPA. It was a very constructive discussion and I extended gratitude on behalf of us all to the Financial Times for getting actively involved in the issue.

I will let you all know when the article is due to be published.

Alexander Hanff

Interesting - I thought the FT were one of those signed up to OIX?

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Paddy1

Surely its a big no no to tell outright lies in your annual report. Or at least be misleading.

Where is the lie. Different spin. VM have announced they signed an MOU which probably included an exclusivity clause. Phorm announced they have an exclusive agreement with VM, which they do.

[warescouse]

After receiving a call on my answer phone last Saturday and a follow up email which stated if and when Virgin Media adopted Phorm it would be Opt in, I finally managed to get hold of the lady who called and left her number (and extension) in their customer services (She called me back @ work today!).

She admitted to me after the first sentence or two that she knew little about the technical aspects of Webwise/Phorm but had read all the 'advertised literature' given to VM and I must say what a pleasant and reasonable lady she was to talk to. She listened to all my concerns about Phorm (& 121 Media past history), allowed me to explain in simple technical terms that I would consider my data still being intercepted if it still went through Phorms black box after I had opted out even if it was 'not' profiled. I also explained I would consider that under my DPA notice I would not even expect to see any later opt in or opt out notice should Phorm be implemented in the future as I had already opted out using section 11 of the DPA via a written letter.

To be fair she listened to all I had to say and I left the phone call feeling that she would go away and find out a little more about it and Phorm for herself.

Nothing has changed but hopefully the more people who complain by letter and explain to customer services why they are unhappy this will help the privacy cause and help eradicate the possibility of this inbuilt 'spyware' at the ISP.

To do nothing is a mistake and I felt better for the effort I have made so far voicing my concerns. So don't just post on the forums or the The Register etc. please also communicate directly with the ISP.

Incidentally, great news that VM have contradicted Phorm's claims that they had already signed up to Phorm/Webwise. It's not over yet!!

Isn't there a law against attempting to inflate the share price by being 'economical with the truth'?

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

I rate accountancy houses only just above cockroaches and PR departments. I understood that financial statements had to be signed off by auditing accountants as a true and fair reflection of the situation and performance of the business.

Directors reports are checked for consistency with the FS but forward looking statements are more covered by listing authority rules.

Originally Posted by mark777

They talk about agreements with 3 key ISP's, but I can't find the word 'virgin' in the whole document, whereas you can in the preliminary.

I take the point though. Who is the 3rd key ISP they have an agreement with?

BT + CPW + ?

Or are they using the word agreement in a very wide sense?

Que? The final report still mentions Virgin. However, the final seems to be scanned, ad thus is not searchable.

[mark777]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

Que? The final report still mentions Virgin. However, the final seems to be scanned, ad thus is not searchable.

Doh. My apologies everyone.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

Interesting - I thought the FT were one of those signed up to OIX?

I find it hard to believe any of Phorm's statements now. Certainly at the 80/20 Meeting during the questions panel Kent was put to task over the Guardian dropping them and he made a bit of a slip along the lines of No company have actually signed up to OIX yet but they are in discussion with lots of interested parties.

I would need to see the video (yes calling Simon shortly) of the question panel at the end of the meeting to clarify on that but I am pretty sure it was along those lines.

Alexander Hanff

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by mark777

http://www.phorm.com/investors/reports.php

Anyone know what the 'RNS' stands for on the 10th April link and if it was there a few days ago?

Regulatory News Service