Which Contract next?

Dipak

Firstly sorry if this has already been post. Please move if its in the wrong place

I am with Orange at the moment and i get 1000 off-peak x-net mins and no text for £30 which suits me to the ground because i get free texting from work anyway and i only use the phone in the evenings. My contract is up on 30th June and need help find another similar contract. I have tried contacting orange but they dont seem to be interested. I have read Martin's suggestions but 'Which' only find a traiff for 500mins or less. I have found T-mobile are offering 1000 off-peak to landlines and tmobile only with 500 txt for life, which i think is good but my mates are other networks so it dont really work in my favour.

Anyone suggest any good deals out there? or where i should start hunting.

chicarg

Hi!

I suggest you check the site https://www.onecompare.com

There you can input your requests like in your case 1000 off peak xnet min, etc; and it will search the best deals for you.

I just did a quick search and it came up with O2 tariff of 0.99 per month with cashback, actually paying £20.99 a month. Didn't look into it too deeply though but you can do your own search and see what suits you better.
In most cases is including a new handset.

Happy hunting!

richardjames73

Mmm, I would look at t-mobile again if i were you. For what you are paying now you can get 3000 minutes off peak to any network and 500 texts a month for life.

See here

http://www.tmobile.co.uk/Dispatcher?menuid=plans_offpeak&chosenPricePlan=pmt

Everyone 3000 off peak on an 18 month contract. If you opt for a 12 month contract your off peak minutes drop to 2000.

RichyRich

I can definitely recommend www.onecompare.com. After it tells you which is the best deal and which e-tailer it is, go to www.quidco.com and see if the company has a link on there, meaning you can get an extra £30 ish back too (£31.50 in the case of e2save, for example).

***Board Guide note, white label website removed***


Generally shop around

Rich

RichyRich

Ahem

Given that Edinburghlass decided without consultation that I had a vested interest in a web site that I posted in the above post which, might I add, I do not, I thought that I had better explain the bit that she's pulled out of my post.

It linked to a web site, similar to onecompare.com, that allows you to see what deals are available. In addition to standard "cash back" deals, it also lists deals where you can get PSPs, Xboxs, TomTomGos etc as an incentive to get the contract. These can be sold on eBay in lieu of cashback (or, of course, kept for yourself).

Since the merciless removal of the link, I have investigated the site and it is in fact a "white label" web site, although I would like to stress that I have no connection whatsoever with it other than being a (not particularly active) member of the site's forum and a subscriber of its mailing list. The 'underlying' site is http://www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/.

NOTE TO BOARD GUIDES: The web site listed here is the 'core' or 'root' web site underlying the link given previously. It is not a "white label" web site in that it is not contracted to an affiliate of the site, but is the site itself.

May I also suggest that the removal of the link on this thread was a little over-zealous? It was posted completely innocently due to an email I received from the site owner and is in fact very useful. May I respectfully suggest that in future you send a quick PM to check whether the link is indeed "spam" or a simple mistake whose deletion could result in MSErs not being able to find the best deals? Using the link previously supplied and the link given in this post will give the same net result to the purchaser and it's not as if I was linking to my own web site - if I was I'd hardly have mentioned onecompare (whose service I happen to find better) would I? Do you really think that after 500+ posts (many of which reporting spam!) I'd risk being ejected from the forums and have to rebuild what I've already put in for the sake of a few quid's worth of referrals? Can we have some common sense please?

Peace,
Rich

Reestit_Mutton

RichyRich wrote:

Ahem

Given that Edinburghlass decided without consultation that I had a vested interest in a web site that I posted in the above post which, might I add, I do not, I thought that I had better explain the bit that she's pulled out of my post.

<SNIP>

(1) Darren Ithell's affiliate network has caused no end of grief on these forums, not least for Edinburgh Lass who has generously given up some of her time to maintain some kind of order on here.

(2) It was an MSE decision to ban all mention of any of Darren Ithell's affiliates' sites, including Darren's own site, for the reasons set out in (1) above. It is therefore unfair to criticise Edinburgh Lass for simply doing her job and adhering to the ruling.

(3) It might also interest you to know that when Darren first launched his site last year he tried to sell white label copies to the members of the MSE forums. This was clearly against the rules of this forum.

(4) For someone who has nothing whatsoever to do with Darren Ithell's affiliate network, you sure are very insistent about putting forward his site. I don't think this attitude will do much to persuade people of your independence in this matter.

I trust this explains matters sufficiently so we can just move on.

best regards,
Reestit Mutton

RichyRich

Reestit_Mutton wrote:

(1) Darren Ithell's affiliate network has caused no end of grief on these forums, not least for Edinburgh Lass who has generously given up some of her time to maintain some kind of order on here.

Who the hell's Darren Ithell?

(2) It was an MSE decision to ban all mention of any of Darren Ithell's affiliates' sites, including Darren's own site, for the reasons set out in (1) above. It is therefore unfair to criticise Edinburgh Lass for simply doing her job and adhering to the ruling.

The rules regarding White Label web sites do not state this. In fact, they say:

We have become aware that a number of people are advertising their own, or white label versions of mobile phone websites that they own to make referral/affiliate money.

Whilst any genuine offer someone may have spotted to save other moneysavers cash has always been encouraged, we have very clear rules about advertising and using these boards to make an income. The time has now come for us to put a stop to this activity.

Any member spamming this board with their own site, or a white label / affiliate site that we suspect them to have a vested interest in, may have their posts removed and persisting in such activities may result in those members having their posting privileges removed

Thanks,
MSE Forum Manager

If they said, "Do not list a mobiles4everyone link" I could understand it being deleted. If it was my own personal referral link, I could understand it being deleted. However, my post didn't fulfil either of those criteria. I didn't spam the site, I mentioned it once, alongside another comparison site. Not for my own gain, not for referral/affiliate money (indeed, I mentioned going through Quidco so I wouldn't get owt anyway), but as a genuine offer that I had spotted to save moneysavers cash. Er, I think that the post regarding these web sites says that is encouraged.

(3) It might also interest you to know that when Darren first launched his site last year he tried to sell white label copies to the members of the MSE forums. This was clearly against the rules of this forum.

So? What does that mean? Are you saying that we should not use his site, even if it means saving money? Get real. This is the real world. If I save more money using Mr Ithell's web site than with onecompare, I'll use Mr Ithell's web site. Surely that's what moneysaving's about?

(4) For someone who has nothing whatsoever to do with Darren Ithell's affiliate network, you sure are very insistent about putting forward his site. I don't think this attitude will do much to persuade people of your independence in this matter.

For someone who isn't Edinburghlass, you seem to know an awful lot about which site I was trying to mention! The link came up as www.!!!!. How would you know which web site this was? I could have been linking to anything but no, Reestit Mutton, who also A. happens to live in Edinburgh and B. happens to have his own mobile phone comparison site, knows exactly which web site I was talking about! Further, in my post, I recommended using either onecompare or mobiles4everyone (.com, in case anyone's wondering) to find the best deal, and then use Quidco or similar in order to get the commission yourself. If I owned one of those sites, I'd hardly be likely to tell people to do that when I could get the commission myself would I?

I trust this explains matters sufficiently so we can just move on.

best regards,
Reestit Mutton

No, actually, it doesn't. I have been a member of this board for quite some time and I think I have contributed to the community. I don't like having aspersions cast on my integrity by people who don't even know me and whose presence is dubious in itself (i.e. sticking up for E/Lass's decision, also being from Edinburgh, having a competing web site). Do you really think that I would go to all the trouble of building up a reputation and contributing to the MSE Community for over a year just so that I could put ONE link to my own web site into a relevant discussion, when that could undermine everything I've ever said on these boards and lets face it would just be a waste of time? Come on, give me some credit for christ's sake!

Edinburghlass removing the link and just putting, "Link Removed - White Label" made it look like I was deliberately promoting my own web site for my own personal gain when, in fact, I was trying to point out an alternative to onecompare. When I try to make an explanation so that people don't think I was doing that, and I link to the source web site instead (instead of mobiles4everyone), because I thought that was the problem not the owner, who I don't even know, you jump down my throat! I thought that the problem was that *** was an affiliate version so I tried to link to the underlying one instead - it came up as !!!!!s (which you seemed to immediately know what it was) so I offered to PM it to anyone who wanted it.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, but a PM wouldn't have hurt to check whether it was innocent.

Can't do right for doing wrong today

Rich

Edinburghlass_2

In fact RichyRich I am on holiday in US at the moment and don't/didn't have the time to pm any user whose post I deleted and/or edited although I usually do and those pm's are kept until such time as the "problem" whatever it might be is fixed.

I am well aware of where Reestit lives although I have never met him and I'll thank you not to assume that I have and am in any way connected with him and that, that fact will influence my position on MSE.

The website you posted was only registered at the beginning of May and as a matter of course being a white label site I removed it and referred the website to the abuse team.

If you have a problem with this please email [EMAIL="buse&#64;moneysavingexpert.com"]buse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

I have referred this thread to abuse and will close it on this note so I can continue to enjoy the rest of my holiday, thank you

RichyRich

Can you explain how Reestit knew which web site I was attempting to link to?

Edinburghlass_2

Nobody knows exactly what website you originally posted except abuse, you and I. However its is fairly obvious to anyone who follows MSE what website sells white label affiliate websites that you refer to in your second post.

Apology received from Rich and I will take the time to reply to his pm once I return home, thank you for taking the time out to pm.

Have a nice day folks