"No need for a Phone line" I see nothing has changed with virgin then ?

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Regardless of how you take in the information from that sentence in regards to delivery method in comparison to alternative methods of which today you can get broadband from multiple suppliers other than virgin media and still not have the need for a landline, it still uses the term "pay for a landline" within that sentence and is therefore directly relative to promoting potential cost saving to the customer which simply put does not exist when you do the maths.

But the sentence does not claim that taking broadband on it's own is either better or worse value than taking it with either a BT or VM landline. All it is saying is you don't need one.

[Digital Fanatic]

Is the OP just winding everyone up?

[NitroNutter]

Actually it does imply exactly that by not requiring a landline there is a potential cost saving and so is my belief as to why that exact term was used and talking of logic, to me it is very logical to asume if you dont need a particular service because a delivery method does not need it there is potential for cost savings which is exactly how that sentence reads, still I should have known better than to come here where forum staff who have had nothing to contribute to the thread have attacked me in private on this topic due to past differences of opinions on completely unrelated topics hence why rep has now been disabled.

Perhaps someone should go and ask someone in authority inside of virgin media how that sentence may read to the consumer like Mr Branson himself, meanwhile as I have nothing better to do I will take the matter directly to consumer direct and the advertising standards authority seeing as all virigin staff themselves can do is little more than publicly belittle a potential customer due to their blinkered approach and inability to accept an advertising document may not read to all how they intended it to be read.

Meanwhile you will have to accept my most sincere apologies for having such skewed logic that it will not bend to your views on how an article should be read.

PS Multi quote does not seem to be working on this forum.

[Stephen]

Its implying that you only need to pay for the broadband, where as ADSL requires you to pay for broadband and a phoneline.

So its simply showing that the price you see for BB is what you pay and you don't need to add the cost of a landline to the price as you do when you see ADSL pricing.

So the cost saving is not having to pay the landline.

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Its implying that you only need to pay for the broadband, where as ADSL requires you to pay for broadband and a phoneline.

So its simply showing that the price you see for BB is what you pay and you don't need to add the cost of a landline to the price as you do when you see ADSL pricing.

So the cost saving is not having to pay the landline.

Thank you for finally agreeing with me, now can you please demonstrate to me where that cost saving is within virgins pricing because to me it simply does not exist.

[BenMcr]

BB XL £30 + BT landline = £44.54

So you save yourself £11.54 if you didn't have a BT landline

The total cost is also £1 a month less if you don't have a Virgin line - as I pointed out earlier

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

meanwhile as I have nothing better to do I will take the matter directly to consumer direct and the advertising standards authority
.

I fail to see the issue as all Virginmedia are doing is pricing their products in favour of the customer taking a phoneline and even TV, many many companies do exactly the same in their advertising.

I fully expect any queries with Consumer Direct or the Advertising Standards Authority will quickly make you aware that the is no problems with Virginmedia's advertising in this way.

We have many customers that just take broadband as a standalone product as they do not want a phoneline regardless of the poitential savings.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Thank you for finally agreeing with me, now can you please demonstrate to me where that cost saving is within virgins pricing because to me it simply does not exist.

Who was agreeing with you?? Surely you just agreed with everyone else?

Again the cost saving is not needing to pay for a landline as many people don't need or use them, where as with ADSL you are made to pay for a landline in addition to your BB monthly pricing. So Virgin is cheaper than ADSL+Land Line

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

BB XL £30 + BT landline = £44.54

So you save yourself £11.54 if you didn't have a BT landline

The total cost is also £1 a month less if you don't have a Virgin line - as I pointed out earlier

Originally Posted by Moldova

I fail to see the issue as all Virginmedia are doing is pricing their products in favour of the customer taking a phoneline and even TV, many many companies do exactly the same in their advertising.

I fully expect any queries with Consumer Direct or the Advertising Standards Authority will quickly make you aware that the is no problems with Virginmedia's advertising in this way.

We have many customers that just take broadband as a standalone product as they do not want a phoneline regardless of the poitential savings.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Who was agreeing with you?? Surely you just agreed with everyone else?

Again the cost saving is not needing to pay for a landline as many people don't need or use them, where as with ADSL you are made to pay for a landline in addition to your BB monthly pricing. So Virgin is cheaper than ADSL+Land Line

Page 7 of the same brochure entitled "Virgin Home Phone - fantastic value"

The last paragraph is the key paragraph

"Or maybe you dont need a home phone"
"These days, most people have a mobile and many are deciding they don't need a home phone at all. And with us, you don't need one. Thats right.
No line rental at all. With anyone. Ever"

Forgetting the poor english how is this possible with virgin media ? It again refers to landline rental as unnessecary in the written word and therefore implies again a potential cost saving to the customer, but the pricing strategies of virgin media make it an impossibility and is therefore contradictory to its own promises hence misleading at best and potentially false as such facts are not disclosed within the same document.

You agreed with me Stephen because you confirmed the document imples there is potential cost saving due to not requiring a specific service in addition to the broadband element, as you have failed to demonstrate where that cost saving potential lies within virgins pricing can I asume you cannot do so ?

Finally who here from virgin media would care to confirm wether virgins medias current pricing strategy is incorrect and needs adressing or if its deliberately designed to ensure the forcing of additional services onto a customer that may not be desired or required.

I am a person who likes choice, I am also a person who will not on principal subscribe to companies who force services onto me that I do not wish to have, so if I chose to have no landline at all I expect a companies pricing to reflect as such especially when that is what is implied as something that is possible in that companies advertising medium.

[Stephen]

By not paying for a land line you are already saving money.

Every other post is telling you this but you are failing to listen or understand this.

It doesn't mean the broadband is priced cheaper but that you aren't paying extra for a phone line you don't need.

[Angua]

And by not having a land line you are also saving the cost of the calls, which may be where Virgin actually make the money from in call costs.

[roger skillin]

NITRONUTTER, are you bored or something, obviously nothing better to do with your time, should i call you Victor meldrew?
You're the sort of person that would complain that a bag of peanuts you brought didn't warn you that they contain nuts, well fear not, they now do include that information so you're ok

[Digital Fanatic]

Maybe this thread should be closed? It's serving no purpose as the OP is not listening to EVERYONES advice on here, staff and non-staff.

[Stuart]

NN, the *fact* is that you don't physically need a phone line to have cable BB. For a long time, VM (and before them, NTL) have pointed out to their customers that they need to add the cost of line rental to an ADSL based ISP's prices to make the comparison fair.

Admittedly, that doesn't apply if you have to have a BT line for other reasons (like I do), as you'd be paying the line rental anyway.

As for bundling their packages together so you get something cheaper if you take another product or service. Well, VM is not the only company who does this by a long chalk. I know for a fact that Sky does it, and I am fairly certain BT does as well.

Finally, there is nothing stopping you having a choice of multiple ISPs with cable installed. You *do* have to have a BT line installed as well, but it is do-able. I know, I did it.

[m419]

Physcologically,it is cheaper, because if you take out the phone service,you will be tempted to make phone calls no matter what the cost,I know I would and then you end up spending more than what you need to.

But Virgin Broadband(10MB) alone plus Vonage Unlimited UK calls comes to: £25.99 per month

Compare that to BT Broadband Option 1 with Anytime Calls comes to: £32.48 including BT line rental

So it is better value.

Virgin Broadband costs £20 per month without a Virgin Phone line and £15 per month with a Virgin Phone line on Talk Weekend,Talk Evenings&Weekends,Talk Unlimited and Talk Anywhere,it cannot be taken with Talk Off-peak as its for telephone only customers, those on Talk off Peak taking Broadband and/or TV will automatically be transfered to another plan.