Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

I would politely ask that you refrain from stalking my posts in the Mortgages and Endowments section and making disparaging remarks.

You already made that post in the thread, (where you have been pulled up after you accused your competitors (who work fee free) of giving "crap" service) and I have replied to it.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3049180

So what possibly could be your motive in posting this open message to me again here?

MillicentBystander

Perhaps because your PM inbox was full? I would imagine even your faithful lieutenant/puppy dog Cardew would be having misgivings about this sort of thing. It's all just a little bit weird. Not to mention embarrassing. I just it's hope it's an online only activity for you.

Meeper

It's still going on. Hopefully the MSE Forum team will get hold of these reports and take action soon. Disgraceful abuse of posting ability to behave in such a way.

It's all just a little bit weird. Not to mention embarrassing. I just it's hope it's an online only activity for you.

This made me giggle though.

MillicentBystander

I see from the trading update that UW are currently sending out over 1,000 cash back cards per week and the new mobile SIM only deals (the ones that Quentin and Cardew agree are the cheapest in the UK) seem to be going very well - apparently UW have seen 'a significant increase in the proportion of new customers who are including this service in their multi-utility bundle over the last eight weeks.' Doesn't surprise me, they are amazing value (hence the total silence on here from Quentin and his sidekick)

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

All of this nonsense is irrelevant. It is absolutely clear over the last couple of pages that you and your friends have no substance and nothing to say other than "UW are dishonest and just use spin". Anyone reading these pages can't fail to recognise it, and the more you post, the more desperate you look.

You say there is no "substance" when it's posted that uw reps post "spin" here regarding the uw.

Then come out with this in answer to a post pointing out how expensive uw energy prices are (which is undeniable - you yourself admit you are paying £370/year more by taking uw energy):

Meeper wrote:

The most important element in saving money is how much goes out of your bank account. I have less money going out of my bank account now than I did before. I am therefore saving money. Ching!

You aren't "saving money" if you are happily handing over £370 more than you need to!

Just out and out spin, whether the £370 comes out of your bank or (in your case) the uw take it directly from your busy fool "cashback", you are still paying £370 to uw which you don't need to!

Why is it that its only a uw rep who can't see this?

TwittersPVFC

If you don't have the energy you don't get the cashback so if Meeper switched he would lose £370 a month in cashback so the savings of one are offset by the losses of another. So it isn't as black and White as you make out.

Quentin

TwittersPVFC wrote: »

If you don't have the energy you don't get the cashback so if Meeper switched he would lose £370 a month in cashback so the savings of one are offset by the losses of another. So it isn't as black and White as you make out.

More spin. Don't you get the "cashback" based on how much you spend on your card, not how much expensive energy you buy at the uw?

Or if you have to buy expensive energy in order to "qualify" to also buy the risky card, surely that's just another reason to forget uw, buy much cheaper energy elsewhere and get your shopping cashback/discounts elsewhere where you can keep them for yourself instead of mekly following the uw line, signing up for expensive energy then having to spend £1000s on the risky card?

(To recoup the £370 plus the card costs, Meeper needs to spend £13000 at Sainsburys!)

Meeper

TwittersPVFC wrote: »

If you don't have the energy you don't get the cashback so if Meeper switched he would lose £370 a month in cashback so the savings of one are offset by the losses of another. So it isn't as black and White as you make out.

Thank you Twitters, for pointing this out.

It's not black and white at all, as I have been trying to say for a long time now, but some people are not open to other points of view.

Being a UWDC customer works for me. Regardless of being a distributor, why would I want to spend more than I needed to for my stuff? Why would I want more money to go out of my bank account than needed to? If it was costing me money, I wouldn't do it - unless of course there was another reason that I felt was important.

Key Statement: So, at the moment, based on what I was doing pre-UWDC, I am better off every month because less money goes out of my bank account. It doesn't matter a jot to me as an individual where a company makes its profit, as this has no effect on the amount of money which goes out of my bank account. In addition to the money, I enjoy other benefits from being a UWDC member, all of which mean that even if the numbers meant that I could have less money going out of my bank account by moving my services elsewhere, I would be reticent to do so because of the UK based call centres, excellent customer service, fantastic online shopping search engine, and many other added features.

There is no intrinsic benefit to me as a distributor to use the services. Whether I use the services or not forms no part of my new customer presentation, so none of my customers would have a clue who I had my services with. I wonder therefore why I would, as a well educated individual, cost myself hundreds of pounds per year needlessly? Answer: I don't, because LESS money comes out of my bank account now than it did before, so I am SAVING money based on my previous arrangements.

In the words of a famous TV personality - "Simples"!

MillicentBystander

It really would help his argument if Quentin actually backed up his 'advice' by giving actual examples of these other ways of getting cashback instead of the UW card. Then of course we could all have a look at the pros and cons. What exactly is he so scared of, I wonder? As he isn't going to give an answer, I will. As per usual he's backed himself into a corner by saying the UW card is 'risky' when he knows full well that any other alternative is, by his definition, at least as risky or even more risky (non pin-protected shopping vouchers/gift cards through the post, anyone?:eek:) . That would destroy his argument and he knows it so he never goes into any detail (detail?? We never even get a name!! I just got interminable links to MSE articles when I asked about a better deal on my telephony!). So predictable.

Meeper

As an aside and quite amusingly - I spend about £250 per week on a mixture of Sainsbury's and ASDA, which equates to the £13,000 per year referred to above. We spend £100 per week on regular shopping and £75 per week each on two cars.