- Calling time on the Talk Talk fiasco
- Posted by NoNeedToKnow on December 17th, 2006
On 17 Dec 2006, Jethro <me@privacy.net> wrote:
A paper can do what it likes in the way of campaigning. In this
particular case it seems the journalists involved are out of touch
with the events.... in particular, CPW/TT was making noises months
ago about delays concerning the installation of equipment, and the
implication that BT was the cause of this (something about taking
BT to court!) So the paper might make a noise, and CPW/TT will
just respond that they've been hampered in their plans by BT.
--
www.netdimes.org - mapping the internet.
Join team UK-24x7 (position 227) Let's beat "United States" :->
- Posted by Dave Fawthrop on December 17th, 2006
On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 09:37:25 +0000, NoNeedToKnow <me@privacy.net.invalid>
wrote:
|On 17 Dec 2006, Jethro <me@privacy.net> wrote:
|
|>As a result, Cash today launches its Why Are We Waiting campaign
|>to put pressure on companies such as Talk Talk that promote ...
|
|A paper can do what it likes in the way of campaigning. In this
|particular case it seems the journalists involved are out of touch
|with the events.... in particular, CPW/TT was making noises months
|ago about delays concerning the installation of equipment, and the
|implication that BT was the cause of this (something about taking
|BT to court!) So the paper might make a noise, and CPW/TT will
|just respond that they've been hampered in their plans by BT.
But all bad publicly is *bad* publicity. May kick them into doing
something.
--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk> Google Groups is IME the *worst*
method of accessing usenet. GG subscribers would be well advised get a
newsreader, say Agent, and a newsserver, say news.individual.net. These
will allow them: to see only *new* posts, a killfile, and other goodies.
- Posted by Eeyore on December 17th, 2006
NoNeedToKnow wrote:
They shouldn't publicise a service that they don't have capacity for.
Why is it BT's fault ?
Graham
- Posted by kráftéé on December 17th, 2006
Eeyore wrote:
Because it's always BTs fault, just like the inept way EasyNet
installed their equipment caused SKY problems, that was caused by BT
as well. It's allways easier to blame the big (non existent) company
now (& before anybody starts up about it being in existence you should
try working between different BT companies without breaking the
equivalence rules/licencing law)
- Posted by Flying Rat on December 17th, 2006
In article <458513EB.BE106F73@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
be involved as CPW can't physically break into the exchange and do the
work itself, plus BT's engineers will be required to do any work on BT
kit.
Seems to be a two-sided affair though, with CPW forward selling accounts
which they don't have a fixed start point to be able to offer for when
the BB will go live.
- Posted by Andy on December 17th, 2006
Jethro wrote:
Ive been with talktalk since the start of the "free" just back on after
being unable to connect since Friday, 5 calls to "technical support"
resulted in them telling me there was server maintainance and it would
be down for about 24 hours.
- Posted by Eeyore on December 17th, 2006
Flying Rat wrote:
Precisely how does that make it BT's fault ?
Actually, they do do the work themselves. They like to pretend they don't of
course.
It's not BT's kit anymore is it ?
What's 2 sided about owning kit that works or not ?
Graham
- Posted by Eeyore on December 17th, 2006
Jethro wrote:
Their directors should be garotted. SLOWLY.
Graham
- Posted by Flying Rat on December 17th, 2006
In article <4585556B.99FE9149@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
world know would you?
