Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

jellygoodfellow

Maz wrote: »

I don't see why UW people should have to declare that they are distributors, after all, Usborne/Avon etc people don't have to declare and it's the same business model i.e.. network marketing..isn't that rather discriminatory?

Apart from this specific thread where MSE specifically asks for it to be done.Anybody discussing anything is asked to always declare any interest.

I notice you cant be bothered to do it. You talk of freedom of choice. If you dont accept the rules why post here ?

1carminestocky

It works both ways, jellygoodfellow. Martin has specifically requested that employees of energy companies declare that fact when they post. How many actually do? You should be saying similar things to them....if you wish to be seen as even-handed and not someone with a bugbear about one specific set of contributors, of course.;)

i. All Telecom Plus Distributers must declare it when they post
ii. All workers or those related to other utility companies must declare it

Choc

Cardew, i see your point but god has it gone against all of us. I hold a number of shares in diferent sectors but my fav is UW partly because im baised but they have been tipped time and again by eveyone in the share world.Not too long ago they were put in the top 6 safest share bets in the uk by the Investor Chronicle. Just lately this banking problem has just stopped them hitting £4.
By the way but they have always been a long term share.

Mark
UW distributor and customer.

jellygoodfellow

1carminestocky wrote: »

It works both ways, jellygoodfellow. Martin has specifically requested that employees of energy companies declare that fact when they post. How many actually do? You should be saying similar things to them....if you wish to be seen as even-handed and not someone with a bugbear about one specific set of contributors, of course.;)

Yes i can read thank you,and as i mentioned recently "Anybody discussing anything is asked to always declare any interest". I doubt very much if everybody does.If i knew they were i would mention it.

Is their anybody you are aware of from the Energy/Utility Industry promoting their own products on this site apart from some of the T-Plus Guys?

1carminestocky

Anyway, back to the 53.25p charge for 75 min call with BT that set off this chain of reactions, lol. I wonder if this has something to do with BT only allowing a 60 min call on its 'free' package before the charges start. If true, I can still only get it to 48.75p (15 x 3.25P)? Anyone else care to have a stab?

1carminestocky

jellygoodfellow wrote: »

Yes i can read thank you,and as i mentioned recently "Anybody discussing anything is asked to always declare any interest". I doubt very much if everybody does.If i knew they were i would mention it.

Is their anybody you are aware of from the Energy/Utility Industry promoting their own products on this site apart from some of the T-Plus Guys?

I've witnessed incidences of this happening and took them to task. I got attacked for it because, and I agree, many of these posters give great inside info on their company and its products (just like many UW reps on here do, incidentally). If Home Phone and Broadband from UW is SUBSTANTIALLY cheaper than the equivalent product from BT, and it certainly is to the tune of almost £123 per year, then why shouldn't a UW distributor point it out on here?. This is a moneysaving board, a UW distributor highlighted the fact that you could save £12 per month by using UW instead of BT (£10.24 INCLUDING the monthly club fee). To me, that's info that's definitely worth having.

jellygoodfellow

1carminestocky wrote: »

Anyway, back to the 53.25p charge for 75 min call with BT that set off this chain of reactions, lol. I wonder if this has something to do with BT only allowing a 60 min call on its 'free' package before the charges start. If true, I can still only get it to 48.75p (15 x 3.25P)? Anyone else care to have a stab?

BT actually charge 4p a minute at peak rate for chargeable 01/02/03 calls. I dont know how the 3.25p mentioned on the T Plus site was arrived at either.

In their example,s they need to make it clear whether they are talking about Peak , Evening ,Etc.

They dont appear to have a rate guide on their site like other phone suppliers do. Perhaps someone could point us to one.

jellygoodfellow

1carminestocky wrote: »

I've witnessed incidences of this happening and took them to task. I got attacked for it because, and I agree, many of these posters give great inside info on their company and its products (just like many UW reps on here do, incidentally). If Home Phone and Broadband from UW is SUBSTANTIALLY cheaper than the equivalent product from BT, and it certainly is to the tune of almost £123 per year, then why shouldn't a UW distributor point it out on here?. This is a moneysaving board, a UW distributor highlighted the fact that you could save £12 per month by using UW instead of BT (£10.24 INCLUDING the monthly club fee). To me, that's info that's definitely worth having.

How do you arrive at a saving of £123 on broadband and homephone on a like for like basis?

How did the distributor come to a saving of £10.24 on a like for like basis?

Can you point to or provide some calculations please.

1carminestocky

jellygoodfellow wrote: »

How do you arrive at a saving of £123 on broadband and homephone on a like for like basis?

How did the distributor come to a saving of £10.24 on a like for like basis?

Can you point to or provide some calculations please.

The whole calculation starts from post 779. In fact, it's not really a like for like comparison as the BT offering has (for BT) the financial cushion (burden more like for the punter) of tie-ing the punter into an 18 month contract whereas the UW has no min. contract length (although, AS POINTED OUT BY A UW DISTRIBUTOR , there is a £50 canx fee in the first year).

PS The BT offering is up to 8mb speeds, the UW offering is up to 24mb, so, again, not like for like but I can't see you highlighting this fact :rolleyes:

jellygoodfellow

1carminestocky wrote: »

The whole calculation starts from post 779. In fact, it's not really a like for like comparison as the BT offering has (for BT) the financial cushion (burden more like for the punter) of tie-ing the punter into an 18 month contract whereas the UW has no min. contract length (although, AS POINTED OUT BY A UW DISTRIBUTOR , there is a £50 canx fee in the first year).

PS The BT offering is up to 8mb speeds, the UW offering is up to 24mb, so, again, not like for like but I can't see you highlighting this fact :rolleyes:

He is not comparing like for like as he compares BT,s Non LLU Product against UW LLU Product .

Up to 24mb would only be available on LLU and then to get you would have to live near an exchange.

BT(Non LLU) would average out of 18 months at approx £24 a month which includes inclusive and weekend calls. + £ 10.50 a month line rental,= £35.50 a month.

UW(Non LLU) would be £31.99 a month including line rental and inclusive weekend calls. Unless you had more then two services they want about £3 plus for inclusive evening calls,+ £1.76 a month membership fee = £36.75 a month.