PDA

View Full Version : Telecom to pay $120,000 for misleading advertising



Trev
18-06-2010, 11:31 AM
Here. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10652724)
Who do they think they are ?
:)

Battleneter2
18-06-2010, 12:17 PM
Ah yes well I remember these plans well, and was fairly mad as it sucked in old people (who the hell can surf for a month on 200MB).

Telecom are now reaping the rewards of everything they have sown for the last 10 years, there share price is directly proportionate to how they have treated NZ consumers imo.

ohh should add Telecom did this to boost broadband uptake numbers to make it look good for the government :P

pablo d
18-06-2010, 12:30 PM
Helping to fund something which will promote competitors' broadband pricing, that's gotta be salt in the wound :p

Roscoe
18-06-2010, 01:12 PM
$120,000? A mere drop in the bucket. They will ask the receptionist to take it out of her petty cash - just 24% of one day's profit!:illogical

Previous misdemeanors have attracted fines of a similar amount. It's about time Telecom was held to a realistic account. They should have to pay back 24% of a week's profit at least - $3,360,000 according to my calculations based on a profit of $14m - $2m per day.

R2x1
18-06-2010, 04:31 PM
. . . misleading advertising.

Why are people picking on Telecom for this? It is not as if it is a major (for them) transgression, or even an "out of character" performance. They are merely putting their mouth where their heart is and doing what they have always done - what has changed?

Battleneter2
18-06-2010, 04:57 PM
Why are people picking on Telecom for this? It is not as if it is a major (for them) transgression, or even an "out of character" performance. They are merely putting their mouth where their heart is and doing what they have always done - what has changed?

no its not a "major" transgression for them, hell at least they are being consistent ah :xmouth:

Metla
18-06-2010, 05:03 PM
Right, lets get this sorted, Someone display a picture of the CEO fishing, That should do it,Super rich Scottich Twat on a luxury holiday,

All warm and fuzzy, go on, give us a go.......

R2x1
18-06-2010, 06:32 PM
It may be more serious than that - maybe it will take a Logo transplant.

decibel
18-06-2010, 09:01 PM
And while we are talking about bozos at Telecom, why do they allow the news media to photograph /film something as non-technical as the photo shown here?

Do they want to look as though they are still in the pre-internet days??

wainuitech
19-06-2010, 09:09 AM
Ah yes well I remember these plans well, and was fairly mad as it sucked in old people (who the hell can surf for a month on 200MB).

Telecom are now reaping the rewards of everything they have sown for the last 10 years, there share price is directly proportionate to how they have treated NZ consumers imo.

ohh should add Telecom did this to boost broadband uptake numbers to make it look good for the government :P Many people can do with 200mb a month, I see it all the time. Not every one downloads pirated music, videos and does online gaming or look at places like youtube.

Metla
19-06-2010, 09:43 AM
Many people can do with 200mb a month, I see it all the time.

Even if they can "make do" on a crumb, Its not in anyway worth more then a few cents at best.

The concept and marketing behind the plan was reprehensible.

R2x1
19-06-2010, 09:47 AM
200MB is not going to leave a lot of slack if some retard on your e-mail list has incredimail, or you have been foolish enough to use Windows and leave auto-update turned on.

Battleneter2
19-06-2010, 01:06 PM
Many people can do with 200mb a month, I see it all the time. Not every one downloads pirated music, videos and does online gaming or look at places like youtube.

You can easily use 5-10MB just going through a few layers on one web page with a lot of pictures. A bit of light browsing each night over 30 days will blow that.

Most of those I knew that went on those plans got heavily stung even AFTER being warned.

So yea sorry I don't believe your claim.

wainuitech
19-06-2010, 01:36 PM
So yea sorry I don't believe your claim. I dont give a toss if you believe it or not, it can and does happen.

The inlaws, and at least 5 of my customers were on that plan. Over the time they had it, only once did the in-laws go over the 200mb, and that was by about 5 MB, they had it for around 6 months then changed to Telstra to get the TV as well.

One customer only goes on the PC on Saturdays to look at the weekend news , and look for any emails. If shes lucky she will get six - ten emails a month.

It depends on what you do on a PC.

A bit of light browsing each night over 30 days will blow that.

Hate to advise but believe it or not there are people that have a real life and dont live on computers every day and night.

I'm not saying the plans low, because it is, but to make a statement
who the hell can surf for a month on 200MB. -- It can be done.

The trouble was, that some people are tight arses, they want to pay next to nothing and get large amounts of traffic.

Those are the same people that dont listen even if they are told it will cost more -- then complain about being charged extra, where if they paid a few dollars more in the first place for a better plan, then they would have been fine.

Battleneter2
19-06-2010, 01:50 PM
I dont give a toss if you believe it or no.
I dont give a toss you dont give a toss, your still blowing smoke and you know it!.

wainuitech
19-06-2010, 01:51 PM
I dont give a toss you dont give a toss, your still blowing smoke and you know it!.
Believe what you want -- I can happen - get a life off the PC.

Battleneter2
19-06-2010, 01:55 PM
Believe what you want -- I can happen - get a life off the PC.

ka? your the one with 10,000+ posts ROTFL

wainuitech
19-06-2010, 02:01 PM
ka? your the one with 10,000+ posts ROTFL Gotta do something while waiting for customers programs to run and earning $$$$ at the same time. At least I help people, as a high percentage are helping others. Not just making comments like some do.

Nomad
19-06-2010, 02:06 PM
200MB is not going to leave a lot of slack if some retard on your e-mail list has incredimail, or you have been foolish enough to use Windows and leave auto-update turned on.

with windows it was turned on after an advisory told me to, it was off before. then i wasn't aware it was downloading the stuff until i saw my router's lights. 1GB gone of my 3GB cap in the first day, lol.

videos streaming in my experience can tax 250MB per hour - tracked via my usage signon.

Battleneter2
19-06-2010, 02:09 PM
Gotta do something while waiting for customers programs to run and earning $$$$ at the same time.

Your not the only one that works in IT so do I, nothing wrong with 10+ posts but you bought up the get a life away from PC thing, which did seem a little ironic :P

Look to be fair wainuitech I do believe there were a few on these plans that benefited not having to dialup, freeing up there phone line etc, and were well blow the average internet usage.

"Largely" many were sold on the advertising of fast cheap broadband and didn't have there attention draw to the fine print. Turns out the Commerce Commission agrees.

These plans stunk to high heaven, and pretty sure there were a few other ISP's offering similar but mainly to counter Telecom.

wainuitech
19-06-2010, 02:10 PM
with windows it was turned on after an advisory told me to, it was off before. then i wasn't aware it was downloading the stuff until i saw my router's lights. 1GB gone of my 3GB cap in the first day, lol.

videos streaming in my experience can tax 250MB per hour - tracked via my usage signon. One of the Linux (ubuntu) I got had that -- run the updates took quite a while after the original, all seemed well, then the following day away they went again, was ok for a day or so, then more updates, more than what Windows does ???

Erayd
19-06-2010, 02:32 PM
One of the Linux (ubuntu)...then more updates, more than what Windows does ???Yep - most large, unstable distributions (or bleeding edge distros, although they're not always the same thing) such as Ubuntu will inevitably pull down a significant amount of update traffic; often considerably more than Windows Update. This can be for any or several of the following reasons:
The updates are for every program on the system, not just for the OS core.
If you're running an unstable distro such as Ubuntu, there will be a huge number of bugfix updates.
If you're running a bleeding-edge system, there will be a huge number of feature updates (which often imply bugfixes too - bleeding-edge software hasn't yet been tested as thoroughly as the stable stuff has).
If you're running a rolling distro of any kind (e.g. Gentoo), then improvements and bugfixes are released on a constant basis, rather than following any kind of overriding release cycle. Note that even a stable rolling distro will see more update traffic than an equivalent distro that follows a release cycle.

A good contrast is something like Debian Stable. This distro is extremely well tested prior to release, and is released periodically as a new version (i.e. it follows a release cycle, albeit a relatively unscheduled one). As a result, update traffic for this distro is extremely low, and consists almost entirely of bugfixes*.

*Unless you have some kind of third-party or backports repository you're pulling from.

Metla
19-06-2010, 02:57 PM
My laptop is asking for 685mb of updates for Vista, It ain't going to ever happen.

ubergeek85
19-06-2010, 06:35 PM
On the topic of updates chewing through bandwidth...

My father's partner got a new laptop about a week ago. First thing I did - windows update. Then Firefox.

All in all, there were three rounds of win updates. Remember, this is with me selecting every update except for office 2007 (which was uninstalled, along with norton). All up, I think it downloaded about 2Gb worth of updates.

Thank god for big time!