Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

Meeper

In the vast majority of cases, UW compare favourably to the "Big 6" suppliers. Perhaps using 95% was a step too far, but in the vast majority of cases that I have personally seen, UW's quotations on a like-for-like usage basis have been comparable or better than their existing contracts with the Big 6.

There, you have won a concession from me, I did something you asked.

I note you are picking holes in semantics and there is no comment about the fantastic savings achieved by my prospect from yesterday based on the figures above.

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

I note you are picking holes in semantics...

Hardly "picking holes". You don't see the need to be honest in your claims? Especially when you make them in the name of your company on a public website like this?

When selling in private to your friends/relatives, they won't expect your claims to be false! That's how we have learned you are taught to sell (ie. avoid the detail!)

See the way Gary sells uw to the gullible spanish teachers:

Take note of Gary's polite, yet assertive approach and the fact that there is very little detail in his presentation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdZcBC0Kf9k

Meeper

Of course it's picking holes. When someone says "95% of the time" they obviously mean "the majority of cases". They certainly don't mean that they have spoken to exactly 100 people and received exactly 95 positive responses. You knew perfectly well that I was simply referring to the "vast majority" but chose to focus on the definite number. Semantics.

Still no comment on the excellent savings made by my customer yesterday as per the figures above.

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

Still no comment on the excellent savings made by my customer yesterday as per the figures above.

Why would we take any of your figures/claims as gospel when you bandy about claims like the 95% one (then get upset when you are challenged and eventually back down)?

For what it's worth, (you don't tell us his proposed uw tariff, so difficult to do a proper comparison), but your customer would currently save around £233 against the uw charge (over 24%!) a year by not going to uw for his energy and going to Scottish Power (not including any cashback on offer for the switch - currently up to £62 on cashback sites!)

Meeper

As I have stated before when you asked for my figures and proofs, you would only say that I was lying anyway. Thanks for the confirmation.

His proposed Tariff was the Standard User for the Norweb region. I think we have already established that he could get his energy cheaper elsewhere. I'm not sure that's the point. I saved him £150 per year on his energy (this whole argument started after the claims that UW was exorbitant for energy pricing) and then with the cashback card saved him something like £450 a year in total compared to his previous bills. I wonder, why am I in the wrong or a disgraceful dodgy salesman to be saving someone £450 a year?

I note your SP quotation, which is lovely. Hopefully it's not like the story at thread reference 2812834 on this forum which happens every day across the country. I have been open, honest and transparent with my customer and done his calculations exactly as I laid them out above.

Please, tell me where I am a bad person or going wrong because of this.

Meeper

Nice post edit, by the way. Only £233 now instead of £377 you originally stated? Any advance on that? Perhaps you would like to obfuscate and try to confuse the issue further to cloud my previous openness and clarity with my figures.

Pathetic.

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

As I have stated before when you asked for my figures and proofs, you would only say that I was lying anyway. Thanks for the confirmation.

As already posted, you have already been caught out with a pretty big lie!


Originally Posted by Meeper

95% of the time I see UW compare very favourably against the "Big 6" energy supplier.

Meeper

I apologise.

To all of those people who read my previous comment saying that Quentin obviously has a brain and writes well.

I shall now revise that statement.

Quentin, you deliberately twist things, confuse issues and make things appear to be something that they are not. You are not helpful to people, you are trying to force your opinion upon them. I have given you very clear, precise and exact figures, to the penny, about how much I saved my customer from yesterday, and instead of admitting that, in fact, UW was able to save the individual money, had a cheaper energy price than his existing supplier and then has the cashback card to potentiall save even more, you continue to wallow in semantics, twist messages and spread your dislike of the UW practices.

Would it be so hard to admit that actually, I've just done that guy a big favour. It doesn't matter what you think of the company, but I've just saved that guy hundreds of pounds per annum based on his current spending. Hundreds. Is it so hard to admit that I've done him a favour?

Quentin

Meeper wrote: »

I note your SP quotation, which is lovely.

The quote came from energyhelpline.

I used uw as the current supplier (in manchester M22).

I used the standard UW tariff.

I used the figures you gave for 6 monthly consumption and doubled them to get an annual figure:

5330 electric & 8696 gas.

Meeper

Well done. You know how to use a website to generate a quotation. Have a cookie.

Instead of selecting one small part of the message to quote, why not read it all and understand the meaning. More smoke-and-mirrors to make me look bad. Ever considered a career in politics?