50M : Avoiding installation fee for a new customer

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Kursk

VM make £bns in profits

Do they? I'd quite like a sauce for that baloney.

[Sephiroth]

Students do indeed have long memories. An interesting point. Looking at this in greater depth, one could think that in a 4 or 5 student house, one will make him/herself responsible for organising t'Internet.

That person has the longest memory if there is anything to grumble about; he/she'll be getting a kicking from the others for taking so long and when it eventually comes, the others will merely pay their whack to the lead.

Later, when they're out inn the wide world, there's a case for saying that c. 60% of them will find themselves in a VM area and more than 50% of those will find that the VM service in their area, even the 50 meg basic, will be faster than FTTC due to copper distance from the cabinet.

So the loss of future business to VM, if they do the calculation at all, wold be somewhat small because of long memories.

Does that make sense?

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I'm sure having to pay for anything at all irks some students. After all they're renowned for being perpetually broke.

You're right, sod 'em. Why don't they get jobs and earn a living? Strewth.

Originally Posted by Kushan

Do they? I'd quite like a sauce for that baloney.

Source

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Students do indeed have long memories. An interesting point. Looking at this in greater depth, one could think that in a 4 or 5 student house, one will make him/herself responsible for organising t'Internet.

That person has the longest memory if there is anything to grumble about; he/she'll be getting a kicking from the others for taking so long and when it eventually comes, the others will merely pay their whack to the lead.

Later, when they're out inn the wide world, there's a case for saying that c. 60% of them will find themselves in a VM area and more than 50% of those will find that the VM service in their area, even the 50 meg basic, will be faster than FTTC due to copper distance from the cabinet.

So the loss of future business to VM, if they do the calculation at all, wold be somewhat small because of long memories.

Does that make sense?

Possibly. They may also collectively agree that "youtube ain't working again, how much did you say we paid up front for this four-letter service?"

Enough.

If I see one more childish comment or attack I will suspend you for a day.
In case this is not clear, Im mainly referring to Kushan & Kursk. Act like adults.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Source

And yet again you're avoiding the point I've raised.

Here's some news for you: Virgin Media only turned their first ever profit in 2012. The value of that profit? Just shy of £76Million. A far cry from your "£Bns of profit", no matter which definition of billion you use. They've been heavily in debt since the NTL/TW merger. Complain all you want about their prices, but they're not evil overlords raking in all of the money, not the way you're making them out to be. The truth of the matter is they need to charge these kinds of prices, not just to stay competitive, but to stay afloat and actually be able to invest back in the network.

The profitability of the company is a very recent thing indeed.

EDIT: I trust my above comment to be purely factual in nature.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Kushan

And yet again you're avoiding the point I've raised.

Here's some news for you: Virgin Media only turned their first ever profit in 2012. The value of that profit? Just shy of £76Million. A far cry from your "£Bns of profit", no matter which definition of billion you use. They've been heavily in debt since the NTL/TW merger. Complain all you want about their prices, but they're not evil overlords raking in all of the money, not the way you're making them out to be. The truth of the matter is they need to charge these kinds of prices, not just to stay competitive, but to stay afloat and actually be able to invest back in the network.

The profitability of the company is a very recent thing indeed.

EDIT: I trust my above comment to be purely factual in nature.

That doesn't comply with reports I have seen. If you are right and the respected sources on the internet are wrong, then I accept your word that profit is only £76m . Only £76m...

[craigj2k12]

haha sauce

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by craigj2k12

haha sauce

Haha. Not even sure what the 'sauce' is for Kushan's profit figures. The Financial times report much larger profits but you can always trust them to post baloney .

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Haha. Not even sure what the 'sauce' is for Kushan's profit figures. The Financial times report much larger profits but you can always trust them to post baloney .

Stop making up rubbish. The Financial Times reports no such thing.

Originally Posted by Financial Times

Revenues climbed 4.2 per cent year-on-year to £1.03bn over the three months to the end of June

Pre-tax profits over the quarter were £65m, compared with £96.1m over the same period in 2011.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1422975c-d...44feabdc0.html (OK the article has a misleading title but that's pretty obvious to anyone who actually read the content)

Funny enough it's pretty much exactly the same as the Times article that craigj2k12 posted:

The UK's only remaining big cable company, created in 2006 after repeated rounds of consolidation among the country's loss-making regional operators, has reported full-year net income of £75.9m.
This profit is still tiny compared to the group's £3.992bn annual revenue

And err... right from the horse's mouth...

http://investors.virginmedia.com/pho...ancial-results

Rebased revenue increased 3% to £1,054 million in Q2 [2014] and 2% to £2,098 million YTD

Generated operating income of £39 million in Q2 and £58 million YTD

http://investors.virginmedia.com/pho...-reportsannual

Period from
June 8 to
December 31,
2013
Net earnings (loss) .................................................. ................ £ (488.0)

Period from
January 1
to June 7,
2013
Net earnings (loss) .................................................. ................ £ 99.9

Year ended
December 31,
2011

Net earnings (loss) .................................................. ................ £ 75.9

... Or a profit of £75.9 million in 2011 and minus £388.1 million pounds in 2013...


Sure you're probably going to cherry pick the 2012 results that show a profit of £2913.4 million... and ignore the fact that £2652.0 million of that came from a tax adjustment:

The 2012 amount primarily relates to the reversal of valuation allowances on certain of our U.K. deferred tax assets as these
tax assets were deemed realizable in the period. The reversal of the valuation allowance is attributable to the accumulation
of positive evidence on the realizability of these deferred tax assets.

Not actual profit. Sorry if the concept of actual profit confused you.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Stop making up rubbish. The Financial Times reports no such thing.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1422975c-d...44feabdc0.html (OK the article has a misleading title but that's pretty obvious to anyone who actually read the content)

Funny enough it's pretty much exactly the same as the Times article that craigj2k12 posted:

And err... right from the horse's mouth...

http://investors.virginmedia.com/pho...ancial-results

http://investors.virginmedia.com/pho...-reportsannual

... Or a profit of £75.9 million in 2011 and minus £388.1 million pounds in 2013...

Sure you're probably going to cherry pick the 2012 results that show a profit of £2913.4 million... and ignore the fact that £2652.0 million of that came from a tax adjustment:

Not actual profit. Sorry if the concept of actual profit confused you.

Thank you. It was very kind of you to research this for me. Can't think why I was misled by the title "Virgin Media profits up 4.2% to £1.03bn" which is all I ever read for forum discussions.

Let's keep the thread going though eh?

[Kursk]

Apologies for the double-post but I believe it to be fair to VM to record here that a local and substantial student population have received a letter drop advising them that for a limited period installation for students is free of charge.

If the OP is still reading, now is the time to get VM broadband installed. It is nice to know that Virgin are not negative about changing their policy, albeit temporarily, for a good cause and, after all, it is a shrewd business move.

Well done Virgin Media and thank you!

We know the discussions here are read by Virgin staff and if this topic in any way highlighted this issue with VM, then well done to Cable Forum too for providing the soapbox.

[Stop It]

Originally Posted by Kursk

Apologies for the double-post but I believe it to be fair to VM to record here that a local and substantial student population have received a letter drop advising them that for a limited period installation for students is free of charge. If the OP is still reading, now is the time to get VM broadband installed. It is nice to know that Virgin are not negative about changing their policy, albeit temporarily, for a good cause and, after all, it is a shrewd business move. Well done Virgin Media and thank you! We know the discussions here are read by Virgin staff and if this topic in any way highlighted this issue with VM, then well done to Cable Forum too for providing the soapbox.

While it would be nice if this thread had an impact, I think you'll find it's more likely that it's September, the start of a new University year so VM will be seeing an influx of potential customers.

A happy coincidence most likely.

[Kursk]

Originally Posted by Stop It

While it would be nice if this thread had an impact, I think you'll find it's more likely that it's September, the start of a new University year so VM will be seeing an influx of potential customers.

A happy coincidence most likely.

Agreed, but you never know . Whatever, a welcome coincidence.