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

[mark777]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Now there's an interesting point... has the bearded one (if he's connected at all with VM) said anything about Phorm? Does he know that "his" brand is getting dirtier and dirtier by the day through its association with Phorm?

He must do, and I keep thinking of him looking over my shoulder as I type!

If he wants to sell the branding, he has to take the flak.

I will not be spending £200,000 on a Virgin Galactic ticket

Virgin Media, the Virgin brand and anyone associated with it (hands up Laughing Boy) need all the bad publicity we can give them.

It's only phair.

[popper]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

Now there's an interesting point...

has the bearded one (if he's connected at all with VM) said anything about Phorm? Does he know that "his" brand is getting dirtier and dirtier by the day through its association with Phorm?

he's still the largest share holder, but doesnt run the VM company or have a seat on the board AFAIK.

the VM board of directors, alongside paying for the 20 year lease of the Virgin name contract, pay RB a seperate PR fee for being the face of Virgin Media when they want to call out the big guns.

expect something real soon now if he gets to know his Brand name is looking to take a pasting...

im sure someone here might go and ask his executive office for an official comment on this and other legal points and include permission to publish the replys

go on you know you want to.

[mark777]

Originally Posted by popper

he's still the largest share holder, but doesnt run the VM company or have a seat on the board AFAIK.

.....

expect something real soon now if he gets to know his Brand name is looking to take a pasting...

Paste it!

I am amazed that Richard Branson's name should be linked to a brand that is trying to take dreadful advantage of it's customers. Richard, you have enough money.

Virgin Media is secretive, uncommunicative and evasive regarding an issue that is of major public concern, way beyond the confines of it's own customer base.

In my opinion, Richard Branson and the Virgin brand will be forever linked with an underhand attempt to invade the privacy of it's customers and set a precident for others to follow, unless Virgin Media renounces all links with Phorm and Phorm-Like companies now.

Richard, if you value your reputation and if you have no control over Virgin Media, you should renounce your relationship with them now in order to protect your good name, and swallow any financial penalties you may incurr.

People do not fly with brands they do not trust, either across the Atlantic or into low Earth orbit.

[CaptJamieHunter]

It's too late for my tired eyes to find the executive board contact details (If anyone else finds them, please post them here?) but I did come across this on the Virgin.com website under "Responsible Business Practice"

"We at Virgin believe 100% that we owe it to our customers and our staff to ensure that our future economic growth is built on firm, ethically sustainable business models. Businesses need to be bold and creative, to develop radical new products and find alternative ways of doing business. Since innovation and creativity are at the heart of the Virgin culture we feel that our group of businesses are well placed to take advantage of the opportunity this presents."
Richard Branson

Someone please explain how Phorm is ethically sustainable?

Anyway, bedtime calls.

[mark777]

I managed to find a link to Dicky Boy's companies. If you dig down enough you can find their customer service e-mail contacts.

http://www.virginbeer.com/Contact/ContactACompany.aspx

I think they should all be warned that a dodgy company is about to start intercepting their internet communications with their customers.

It may be that they need to be warned several times by several people because this is a really serious threat.

---------- Post added at 02:39 ---------- Previous post was at 02:22 ----------

By the way, does anybody know where Virgin Atlantic customers discuss all their bits and bobs?

I've no doubt that many of them book their flights over the web and they certainly deserve to know of the potential dangers inherent in doing so.

Just a thought.

[popper]

this link gives
http://investing.businessweek.com/bu...rivcapId=36312
120 Campden Hill Road
London, W8 7AR
United Kingdom
Founded in 1970

Phone: 44 20 7229 1282

Fax: 44 20 7727 8200

www.virgin.com

but im not sure if it's the direct link to richard branson's chief executive office though.

if not, they will be able to forward your letters perhaps.

[manxminx]

(from the Virgin.com website):

If you would like further information about Virgin, or if you have any other requests, for example photo, sponsorship, quotes and interview requests, then please email press@virgin.com. Please include your request, your name, and contact information including postal address.

Sounds like a good place to start. If we inundate them with questions, and ask for Virgins (and RB's) official line on data interception, we should wake them up.

[Ravenheart]

Phorm down 8% already this morning, always a good start to the day

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=LON:PHRM

[thebarron]

Here is a really pretty picture.
http://www.iii.co.uk/investment/deta...&timeframe=480

[roadrunner69]

Share price has taken a real beating this morning. Is this down to the Guardian announcement or is there something else in the offing?

[AlexanderHanff]

So Phorm want to issue 1.6M shares at 33% higher price than the markets are currently trading their stock...should be interesting wonder who is gonna buy them then?

Phorm seem to have failed to realise that it doesn't matter how many shares you issue or at what price if no-one wants to buy them

They have only had 2 buys all morning everyone else is dumping their investments faster than a street dealer dumps their stash when the popo drive round the corner.

Someone needs to stop the world so Phorm can get off.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 11:37 ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 ----------

More bad press for Phorm http://www.newstatesman.com/200803270043

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 11:39 ---------- Previous post was at 11:37 ----------

"BT, TalkTalk and Virgin are all signed up to trial Phorm's technology. But given the barrage of bad press it has received - culminating this month in virtual excommunication by the high priest of the worldwide web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, they would be crazy to pursue this plan." man I knew there was a reason I loved to read New Statesman.

---------- Post added at 11:40 ---------- Previous post was at 11:39 ----------

"Over in Germany, the constitutional court has just delivered a landmark decision on data privacy that backs up this instinct. In essence, the decision accepts an individual's online behaviour as an "expression of personality", an activity whose integrity and confidentiality are fundamentally protected in German constitutional law." <-- Interesting

[Stuart]

I'd still be interested to hear why, when you bear in mind that I take absolutely no notice of web ads (apart from on cableforum, where I need to monitor them to ensure Google doesn't advertise anthing against the site's rules), targetted ads would provide any benefit to me. Targetted or not, I wouldn't take any notice.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff

More bad press for Phorm http://www.newstatesman.com/200803270043

Thanks for the link. Commented on there before Phorm's spin machine posted its standardised bulldust spin.

[kt88man]

Just thinking, possibly out of my rear orifice.

The age of consent (no, not that one)...

Yes, I know, parents should all be aware of their children's activity on the internet. However, let's ignore that for the moment.

Assume ISP/Phorm are using a per PC cookie based opt out system. Let's say we have a young child, aged 9 or 10 for example. They have their own PC for their exclusive use which shares an internet connection via a router. Is the child in a position to give "Informed Consent" (as RIPA requires) to the profiling of their browsing behavior?

[ceedee]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

I'd still be interested to hear why, when you bear in mind that I take absolutely no notice of web ads (apart from on cableforum, where I need to monitor them to ensure Google doesn't advertise anthing against the site's rules), targetted ads would provide any benefit to me. Targetted or not, I wouldn't take any notice.

Very occasionally the ads placed next to (and semi-targetted at) an email that I'm reading in Gmail are both accurate and useful but I'd agree that generally targetted ads would pass me by.
Not least because I don't see most of them (thank you, Adblock!). About the only ads I routinely see are on websites which I deliberately "permit" to show them to me, like CableForum.