Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

Maz

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Steve, I notice also that your original reply to me, quoting my post has also gone!!!! :rotfl::rotfl:

Hilarious!

MillicentBystander

It really is quite unbelievable, isn't it? Cardew and Quentin take this soooooo incredibly seriously you do wonder as to the reasons behind their motivation/actions. OK, TP is a fairly large company (in fact I think it's more than quintupled in size since C&Q's campaign started) but in comparison with any of the Big6 it's still tiny. Why do they concentrate the majority of their efforts on the G&E forum (in Quentin's case it's 100% of his/her efforts) on UW? According to Which, this is the most distrusted industry in the UK (even more than the banking industry FGS!) yet they only seem to get involved in slagging off one of the minnows? Bizarre. I just don't go with the paid to do it theory as they would have been fired years ago as they are rubbish at it. I really can't explain it. A mystery.

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone

Just a reminder, we remove posts when they're reported if they're off topic/arguing/breaking our rules. Unfortunately that sometimes means relevant content you also included in the post goes too.

If you don't argue but just add people you don't get on with to your ignore list we don't need to remove posts and the relevant content stays.

Meeper

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

Just a reminder, we remove posts when they're reported if they're off topic/arguing/breaking our rules. Unfortunately that sometimes means relevant content you also included in the post goes too.

If you don't argue but just add people you don't get on with to your ignore list we don't need to remove posts and the relevant content stays.

I object.

Maz's post which was removed simply explained a situation where she had been able to benefit an individual, and to remove it shows that there is no interest in having any positive mention of UW products and services.

More of the UW distributors posts get removed than the naysayers, although they are the ones who are more argumentative than anyone else.

We can't add people to our ignore lists, because they will then have free reign to post whatever they like without anyone being able to pull them up on their nonsense.

Please lock this thread.

Maz

MSE_Andrea wrote: »

Hi everyone

Just a reminder, we remove posts when they're reported if they're off topic/arguing/breaking our rules. Unfortunately that sometimes means relevant content you also included in the post goes too.

If you don't argue but just add people you don't get on with to your ignore list we don't need to remove posts and the relevant content stays.

Can you enlighten me where I was off topic/arguing or breaking any rules?

Meeper

Doubtful Maz. Omniscient forum-beings never need to justify their actions, they just get delete-happy and get rid of anything that they like without having to say why. Or blanket it under "it was argumentative instead of factual". One wonders how Cardew and Quentin have posting rights at all, if that's the case.

Cardew

keggs wrote: »

There is likely to be only 2 people that would do that. .

I can't speak for anyone else, but I most certainly have not reported any of those posts.

What you don't seem to appreciate that your posts - in particular, and those of other UW IDs don't address UW prices and sales techniques but are concerted personal attacks on Quentin, myself or anyone who comments unfavourably about UW.


My motives are quite simple. This is a money saving website and without some opposition to UW salesmen( both declared and undeclared) readers of this forum will be mis-informed about UW.

I am more than happy to confine any discussion to UW prices, but will comment on IMO unethical practices if relevant.

Among those unethical practices, that are in direct contravention of a strict MSE directive, are UW salesmen pretending they have no involvement with UW in order to post in the guise of a neutral, in praise of UW.

One such poster who posted literally hundreds of posts in this thread, was recently 'outed' as a UW salesman with his own UW website.

The same questionable technique is for posters to use multiple user names.

So why not confine posts to UW prices, and perhaps we will avoid the wrath of MSE Andrea.

MillicentBystander

Cardew wrote: »

I can't speak for anyone else, but I most certainly have not reported any of those posts.

What you don't seem to appreciate that your posts - in particular, and those of other UW IDs don't address UW prices and sales techniques but are concerted personal attacks on Quentin, myself or anyone who comments unfavourably about UW.


My motives are quite simple. This is a money saving website and without some opposition to UW salesmen( both declared and undeclared) readers of this forum will be mis-informed about UW.

I am more than happy to confine any discussion to UW prices, but will comment on IMO unethical practices if relevant.

Among those unethical practices, that are in direct contravention of a strict MSE directive, are UW salesmen pretending they have no involvement with UW in order to post in the guise of a neutral, in praise of UW.

One such poster who posted literally hundreds of posts in this thread, was recently 'outed' as a UW salesman with his own UW website.

The same questionable technique is for posters to use multiple user names.

So why not confine posts to UW prices, and perhaps we will avoid the wrath of MSE Andrea.

Agreed. I believe UW's mobile sim only deals are unbeatable in the marketplace. Do you agree?

PS And do you pay less than £16/mth for your BT phone/BB package? Both of these questions you seemingly have ignored. But these are solely confined to prices so let's confine any reply solely to prices like you suggest yourself?

Cardew

MillicentBystander wrote: »

Agreed. I believe UW's mobile sim only deals are unbeatable in the marketplace. Do you agree?

PS And do you pay less than £16/mth for your BT phone/BB package? Both of these questions you seemingly have ignored. But these are solely confined to prices so let's confine any reply solely to prices like you suggest yourself?

Firstly, Mobile phones.

Personally I hardly ever use mobile phones even though I have been provided with one at work - from way back in the days when the battery pack weighed several pounds to the present generation. So the cost/value for myself was never a consideration.

I have a PAYG phone in the USA that is hardly ever used. I think $10 expires every year.

Similarly in UK I bought a Philips Lobster PAYG phone some years ago for a few pounds(it has TV, DAB radio, memo taker and a host of facilities I never use) I have put £20 on credit(with Virgin) in the time I have owned it, and still have several pounds left - I am surprised the credit doesn't run out.

The mobile phone tariff structure in UK makes Gas and Electricity tariffs seem simplicity itself; so I have no need or desire to keep up with the ever-changing tariffs.

So I am quite happy to concede that UW's mobile sim only deals might be the best on the market; I have insufficient knowledge to agree or dispute that statement. However, unless I read UW's T & C's incorrectly, you must top up a PAYG phone with £10 monthly which would certainly make it useless for many people, and I assume you must pay the UW monthly membership fee.

As for your £16 deal, you have given no detail of how it breaks down, does it include any cashback from card?, do you have to have several services? UW monthly fee? etc etc.

HappyMJ gave a detailed breakdown of UW phone/broadband prices; are you saying he is incorrect?

He also gave a detailed breakdown of his BT package, and explained how he like myself can negotiate a new annual deal.

Some months for my phone and Broadband package I pay BT nothing as I have a BT credit card!

Lastly as shown in all the comparison websites, UW have just about the most expensive gas and electricity in UK

Meeper

I'm confused. You asked me repeatedly to state what package I was on with UW in the presumed hope of being able to catch me out with something. So, I stated it previously, and not a comment in sight. What was the purpose of your asking?