4K : Sky Cinema and Entertainment UHD to launch

[gaz82]

Well let's just leave it there, your reply is seemingly turning to becoming more personal towards me rather than just debating the subject in hand, which is something I'm not prepared to continue with.

The number of posts I've submitted on this forum previously has absolutely no relevance and in no way does it undermine my right to a point of view.

Enjoy the rest of your evening.

[jfman]

It just strikes me as somewhat odd that this topic, and defending Virgin Media, has seemingly galvanised you into action on the forum.

You’ve made a number of irrelevant comparisons - purchasing a 2019 model of a car, a “fixed rate” mortgage (the purpose of which is to remove uncertainty.

The defence seemingly is that Virgin can legally do this, therefore tough. That may be so, but no-one anywhere is going to convince me as a rational consumer acting in my own interest that I should pay more for a monthly subscription service and get less.

Under your preposterous scenario I could be on the same package as when I joined Telewest in the 90s. Well, mate, you signed the contract didn’t you? They’re supplying you with exactly what you agreed to. And paying a higher monthly subscription for it too.

[OLD BOY]

Give it a rest, jfman, for God's sake. Gaz was quite right, a telephone call might resolve your problem. If it doesn't, it doesn't.

Gaz was not 'sticking up for Virgin', he was simply explaining the simple fact that you'd signed up to your existing package.

However, you are right in complaining about the extra charge for the Sky UHD, but you can blame Sky for that. Virgin would lose money if they didn't pass it on.

As for new customers, it is not unusual to offer short-term incentives to attract them into using a service.

[gaz82]

I don’t care how it’s “strikes you”! Not that I need to explain myself to you, but this is an old account that I didn’t even realise I still had. I’ve been a Sky subscriber for a number of years and have only very recently joined VM. When I tried to register an account on this forum hoping it might be a friendly community only then did I realise my e-mail address was “taken” and that this old account was still active. Hence no posts for a number of years until very recently.

Although, when I signed in I didn’t notice any secret hand shake or hidden test that I needed to complete or a certain post number I needed to reach in order to validate my opinion!

My defence isn’t with VM directly, it’s with contracts in general. You don’t seem to grasp that fact! You took out a contract detailing exactly which services you will receive as an itemised list in return for a monthly fee (which can increase in line with the terms agreed in said contract) for a set period. Just because VM may now offer something different in terms of that package it still doesn’t change what you’ve agreed to.

And your Telewest example makes no sense! The last time I checked VM don’t sign customers into everlasting contracts! They are usually a fixed term of 12/18 months after which time you are free to re-contract with new terms or walk away.

Following your understanding of the situation, should every customer using a V6 box now be forced to upgrade to the 360 box? Because that’s what the current UO bundle includes? If the current bundle removed something would expect yours to be automatically removed too? If that was the case then you would have every right to complain as you would be paying for something you’re not receiving as per your contract.

As you’ve said though, no one is going to convince you otherwise and you don’t seem to be able to engage in a conversation where there may be a chance you could see something from another point of view so I’m not sure why you’re wasting your time participating in a forum!

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Give it a rest, jfman, for God's sake. Gaz was quite right, a telephone call might resolve your problem. If it doesn't, it doesn't.

Gaz was not 'sticking up for Virgin', he was simply explaining the simple fact that you'd signed up to your existing package.

However, you are right in complaining about the extra charge for the Sky UHD, but you can blame Sky for that. Virgin would lose money if they didn't pass it on.

As for new customers, it is not unusual to offer short-term incentives to attract them into using a service.

But Virgin aren't charging everyone extra for UHD - which is my point.

I've no real gripe against "new customer offers" that's part and parcel of getting customers in the door, I've taken advantage of such offers in the past so why should nobody else yet them now.

However UHD for "new" customers isn't a promo. In months 13/19 or whatever they still get more than existing customers while paying for an identically named (and assuming no retention offers) and identically priced but substantively different product.

---------- Post added at 09:17 ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 ----------

Originally Posted by gaz82

I don’t care how it’s “strikes you”! Not that I need to explain myself to you, but this is an old account that I didn’t even realise I still had. I’ve been a Sky subscriber for a number of years and have only very recently joined VM. When I tried to register an account on this forum hoping it might be a friendly community only then did I realise my e-mail address was “taken” and that this old account was still active. Hence no posts for a number of years until very recently.

Although, when I signed in I didn’t notice any secret hand shake or hidden test that I needed to complete or a certain post number I needed to reach in order to validate my opinion!

My defence isn’t with VM directly, it’s with contracts in general. You don’t seem to grasp that fact! You took out a contract detailing exactly which services you will receive as an itemised list in return for a monthly fee (which can increase in line with the terms agreed in said contract) for a set period. Just because VM may now offer something different in terms of that package it still doesn’t change what you’ve agreed to.

And your Telewest example makes no sense! The last time I checked VM don’t sign customers into everlasting contracts! They are usually a fixed term of 12/18 months after which time you are free to re-contract with new terms or walk away.

Following your understanding of the situation, should every customer using a V6 box now be forced to upgrade to the 360 box? Because that’s what the current UO bundle includes? If the current bundle removed something would expect yours to be automatically removed too? If that was the case then you would have every right to complain as you would be paying for something you’re not receiving as per your contract.

As you’ve said though, no one is going to convince you otherwise and you don’t seem to be able to engage in a conversation where there may be a chance you could see something from another point of view so I’m not sure why you’re wasting your time participating in a forum!

For someone who'd given up the ghost debating this last night this is quite a long response but you substantively haven't raised any further issues than those I've previously dismissed.

For someone comparing it to the purchase of a 2019 car I fail to see what credibility you have saying my comparison males "no sense".

However I'm happy to leave it there as anyone can see that Virgin are creating two tiers of customer paying the same price for a substantively different service despite having the same name. Whether they can legally do this is a straw man - that has never been in dispute.

Why anyone would be happy to pay more and get less than another customer buying an identical product from the same company is completely beyond me.

I wouldn't sit in a restaurant and go "I'll have what they're having" then not dispute when it arrives minus part of the meal. Ah but you're a regular customer here, and it's his first time would not be an acceptable explainaton.

Edging towards personal attacks here - play the ball, not the man, please.

[gaz82]

It's nothing to do with creating two tiers, it's simply adhering to the existing contract terms you've already agreed to! Using your analogy there are already many different tiers; those that are at different price points, those that have a V6 box, those that have a 360 box, those that had to pay a set up fee, those that didn't. They are all different variances that are either accepted at the point of signing up or as part of an agreed change of service between both parties.

Yesterday the UO deal included free set-up but today it doesn't, but there's a £125 reward MasterCard included instead. The offers change all the time which could involve a difference in price, the hardware you receive, any extras such as reward cards, and the services which make up the package.

You purchase a "standard economy seat" on a flight. Some are window seats and some are aisle seats. Some are in a row of 3 and others are in a row of 4. But they're all still just a "standard economy seat". My point is just because something is branded a certain way, it doesn't mean it's identical every single time.

You choose to reserve a window seat for a fee but another passenger doesn't and ends up with a window seat anyway. Do you get the hump and complain? Should every other window seat on the plane now be left empty because they haven't been specifically reserved but you paid to reserve yours?

I don't understand why you're struggling with this so much. As per a previous comment I made, if the updated UO was named something slightly different instead - "Ultimate Oomph UHD" would that appease you?

Your dismissal of my previous comments doesn't make them any less valid. It just shows that you have no counter argument to them.

Your restaurant analogy is also floored. "I'll have what they're having" insinuates that you haven't placed your order yet. But you have, you've already placed your order previously and since then the restaurant has updated their menu. Your meal has already been prepared, you've received what you ordered and you're halfway through eating it. Would you send your meal back to the kitchen halfway through eating it because someone else's meal has a few more chips?

Actually, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't even speak to the kitchen to try and resolve your issue. You would just go online and winge about the restaurant to others that have no control over your meal!

Your attitude is exactly what one of the problems is with todays world. Everyone wants what someone else has got and has no regard for a contract that has already been agreed between both parties. I'm sure if it was the other way round, if VM jacked up your price mid-contract above and beyond the stated increase clause, you would be the first use the contract terms as a defence!

What further compounds the situation is that you're not even prepared to call VM and discuss it with them directly, and give them the opportunity to resolve your issue by negotiating a new deal.

I guess that just doesn't fit within your rhetoric which is to bash VM at any given opportunity!

[jfman]

I’m not sure what purchasing a seat on a flight has to do with anything. A further irrelevant comparison from a completely different market. We’ve now had cars, mortgages and now flights. All one off purchases not monthly subscriptions.

When I purchase a seat on a plane I get the same options as everyone else. If I don’t pay for an aisle seat or extra legroom then I know I’m rolling the dice the same as everyone else who doesn’t. Easyjet (or anyone else) don’t set out to create two tiers of customer buying the bog standard ticket, but among those of us who didn’t select our seats I had exactly the same chance as everyone else of an “upgrade”.

Save the personal attacks I can live without them. I’m just a rational consumer in the marketplace. I’m not sure what you are but Virgin Media are entitled to criticism where due. If, as it would seem, you think Virgin Media are beyond reproach then you’ll find yourself at odds with around half the posters on here who have some grumble or another. As I’ve said before I think this is a bizarre position to hold such a strong belief in.

[gaz82]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m not sure what purchasing a seat on a flight has to do with anything. A further irrelevant comparison from a completely different market. We’ve now had cars, mortgages and now flights. All one off purchases not monthly subscriptions.

Which further shows your mis-understanding as to what a contract is. My examples are all totally relevant. A one-off purchase or a monthly subscription makes no difference. A contract of sale is still created at the time of purchase. You don't start a new contract every month when you pay your subscription. You're still adhering to the original contract terms formed at the point of sale.

Originally Posted by jfman

Save the personal attacks I can live without them. I’m just a rational consumer in the marketplace. I’m not sure what you are but Virgin Media are entitled to criticism where due. If, as it would seem, you think Virgin Media are beyond reproach then you’ll find yourself at odds with around half the posters on here who have some grumble or another. As I’ve said before I think this is a bizarre position to hold such a strong belief in.

Pot, Kettle and Black springs to mind! Seemingly you are happy to dish out the personal attacks but cannot handle it when others challenge your opinion. Arrogance and a closed minded attitude are not appealing traits.

As I've repeatedly said, I'm not defending VM per-se, I have other issues with their business and I'm happy to criticise them where applicable. However, in this instance I'm defending the act of adhering to a contract with set terms laid out in black and white and agreed by both parties at the time of commencement.

Again, you seem to only be interested in criticising VM based on third party information. You are not prepared to contact them yourself and discuss it with them directly to give them the chance to resolve your issue personally. Had you taken this course of action and they did not resolve your query then you would then have every right to feel aggrieved.

In fact, I'll save you the hassle. I just called them myself. They offered me the ability to start a brand new 18 month contract today at the new customer price of £89 on the new terms which includes UHD or I can add it to my existing terms at £6 with no further commitment. I currently pay £77 so the second option would work out cheaper for me in my situation. I'm sure if you just call them they may also offer you a resolution and you can then get on with the rest of your day.

But this conversation is going no-where so let's agree to disagree and move on.

[jfman]

I’m fully aware what a contract is and as I told you before that’s a straw man argument.

At no point have I accused Virgin of acting illegally. If they were I’d be talking to OFCOM not someone with two dozen forum posts relentlessly defending them at all costs.

Virgin stating new customers to Ultimate Oomph can get UHD for free while existing customers pay £6 a month is not third party information it’s literally their own press release. It is, regardless of how you present it, creating two tiers of Ultimate Oomph customer.

Your anecdotal evidence based on your own single experience doesn’t change that fact either.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by gaz82

It's nothing to do with creating two tiers, it's simply adhering to the existing contract terms you've already agreed to! Using your analogy there are already many different tiers; those that are at different price points, those that have a V6 box, those that have a 360 box, those that had to pay a set up fee, those that didn't. They are all different variances that are either accepted at the point of signing up or as part of an agreed change of service between both parties.

Yesterday the UO deal included free set-up but today it doesn't, but there's a £125 reward MasterCard included instead. The offers change all the time which could involve a difference in price, the hardware you receive, any extras such as reward cards, and the services which make up the package.

You purchase a "standard economy seat" on a flight. Some are window seats and some are aisle seats. Some are in a row of 3 and others are in a row of 4. But they're all still just a "standard economy seat". My point is just because something is branded a certain way, it doesn't mean it's identical every single time.

You choose to reserve a window seat for a fee but another passenger doesn't and ends up with a window seat anyway. Do you get the hump and complain? Should every other window seat on the plane now be left empty because they haven't been specifically reserved but you paid to reserve yours?

I don't understand why you're struggling with this so much. As per a previous comment I made, if the updated UO was named something slightly different instead - "Ultimate Oomph UHD" would that appease you?

Your dismissal of my previous comments doesn't make them any less valid. It just shows that you have no counter argument to them.

Your restaurant analogy is also floored. "I'll have what they're having" insinuates that you haven't placed your order yet. But you have, you've already placed your order previously and since then the restaurant has updated their menu. Your meal has already been prepared, you've received what you ordered and you're halfway through eating it. Would you send your meal back to the kitchen halfway through eating it because someone else's meal has a few more chips?

Actually, no you wouldn't. You wouldn't even speak to the kitchen to try and resolve your issue. You would just go online and winge about the restaurant to others that have no control over your meal!

Your attitude is exactly what one of the problems is with todays world. Everyone wants what someone else has got and has no regard for a contract that has already been agreed between both parties. I'm sure if it was the other way round, if VM jacked up your price mid-contract above and beyond the stated increase clause, you would be the first use the contract terms as a defence!

What further compounds the situation is that you're not even prepared to call VM and discuss it with them directly, and give them the opportunity to resolve your issue by negotiating a new deal.

I guess that just doesn't fit within your rhetoric which is to bash VM at any given opportunity!

I'm not really sure what you are arguing against and making ridiculous analogys to further that point. If Sky or VM launch new channels but only add them to the ultimate oomph bundle of new customers and not existing customers, people would be annoyed and rightly so. If VM are going to start adding stuff (UHD) to a bundle then it needs to be in that bundle for everyone, not just new customers. Otherwise we are now in a position of the ultimate oomph bundle isn't actually the ultimate oomph bundle for existing customers.

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by Mythica

I'm not really sure what you are arguing against and making ridiculous analogys to further that point. If Sky or VM launch new channels but only add them to the ultimate oomph bundle of new customers and not existing customers, people would be annoyed and rightly so. If VM are going to start adding stuff (UHD) to a bundle then it needs to be in that bundle for everyone, not just new customers. Otherwise we are now in a position of the ultimate oomph bundle isn't actually the ultimate oomph bundle for existing customers.

That is absolutely correct.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

That is absolutely correct.

+1

[Bob]

I mean this whole situation isn't without precedent. There were several versions of the VIP package floating around which had different broadband speeds depending on when you signed up. Remember my parents being locked on 200MB even though they could have 350MB but they couldn't take advantage even when they upgraded their modem/router.

But regardless, drawing a distinction between old and new customers on a seemingly similar package ALWAYS leaves a sour taste. You'd think that companies would have learned by now...

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by Bob

I mean this whole situation isn't without precedent. There were several versions of the VIP package floating around which had different broadband speeds depending on when you signed up. Remember my parents being locked on 200MB even though they could have 350MB but they couldn't take advantage even when they upgraded their modem/router.

But regardless, drawing a distinction between old and new customers on a seemingly similar package ALWAYS leaves a sour taste. You'd think that companies would have learned by now...

From what I remember though I could be wrong, those on the VIP packages with different speeds were just waiting for their area to be upgraded. I'm sure that's what happened to us in the past but were eventually upgraded to the correct speed.