NTL/Virgin Media broadband SNAFU
"harrogate3" wrote in message
...
"Gonz" T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m wrote in message
...
"Gareth" wrote in message
...
I do not believe that all f NTHells failings can be cured
overnight
but I cannot see Richard allowing any company using his trade
name to
continue to be as poor as NTHell
Is this a joke? Seriously I can't tell if you're joking or not.
The example of Virgin Mobile demonstrates that Virgin management
is
more than capable of screwing up a perfectly good and once very
efficient quality of customer service: incorrect basic
information, a
complete lack of technical support, a less than satisfactory call
feature set and some of the stupidest tubbies I've ever
encountered.
Instead of developing the virtual provider's own technical support
there's a complete absence of technical support - calls are I
suspect
shunted off to T-Mobile to be answered who knows when.
The Virgin brand was, during the 80s and early 90s, a marketing
success but it's now more rhetoric than reality in terms of
quality
service - outdated and backward looking crap by and large. Even
the
name is capable of alienating a large part of the middle and older
age
generation whilst the younger generation will tend not to have the
disposable income to afford some of the mid range or more
expensive
Virgin Media packages.
Far from offering more choice the Virgin Media rebranding has been
just a rebranding - coupled with some stupid and adolescent
labelling
of sometimes over priced packages as "M, L and XL"! Calling the
pimply
**** that was NTL by any other name doesn't change a thing.
And now the Virgin brand is right at the bottom of the ISP ratings
list.
Way behind Tesco, and just on top of Orange.
The curious thing is that what was ntlworld - now Virginmedia - also
hosts Tesco, Which, and a couple of others, so if the basic feed is
the same how can there be much difference between them?
ADSL v Cable.
|