Eircom investigation on Tom McGurk show

Dangger

Consumer law investigation with Eircom examples on RTE Radio One now, presented by Tom McGurk.

eircomtribunal

Tried unsuccessfully to find it on the rte website. Is it there?
P.

Mr E

Tom is in Marian Finucane's slot at the moment (oo er...)

Try downloading todays show here.

eircomtribunal

No success with your link...
I've had a closer look at the rte site – after listening through last Mondays show http://www.rte.ie/radio1/summerdays/ – this Mondays show is not online yet.

P.

spongebob

Its worthy of redaction. Poor eejit ends up spending €60 on hold to one Eircom support number trying to get his internet connection working . Last bit I heard sounded like he has a splitter on the line or worse. Don't tell him about this Board as the poor fúck does not even have a stable 2.54k connection not thatr that matters any more. Boogied around from one number to another. Onto and off FRIACO without being told its an off peak product (you must ring another number again) . It would be funny if this was not standard practise in Eircom . I turned off the Radio before the Winback man arrived to promise shiny new toys.

Tom could get a whole summer outta Eircom........1 dismal tale a day , and twice that outta Comreg.

M

mike65

The ra link will be live from tomorrow morning or if lucky later this evening - I heard some of it. Poor fella and his mobiles being eaten out of credit as he got passed from
Billy to Jack.

Mike.

spongebob

As IrelandOffline is a National Organbisation we could offer our services to Tom to

1. Fix the line and get him on the h-Interweb for starters
2. Demand full compensation from Eircom fro the myriad of woes inflicted on him.
3. Demand that the Fat Fúck Doherty do his bit for the consumer over in Comreg

And keep Tom updated on his show weevery morning on the progress of the project . Twould get others ringing in and so on and so forth.

M

Dangger

Muck,

Is your phrasing of point three really necessary?

Dave.

mike65

Muck by name....

Mike.

gandalf

Yeah calling the guy fat is not really on. Now lazy...........ineffectual........

MarcusGarvey

Originally posted by Dangger


Is your phrasing of point three really necessary?

Yeah Muck, maybe kiss ass sycophant* would be better than fat ?

Sure we all know that crawling to Comreg and having tea and biscuits with Ministers got IOFFL everything it wanted. Oh actually no it didn't did it ?

Is IOFFL a lobbying group or someone that stays polite and minds its manners as the consumer takes it up the rear from Eircom and their ilk while Comreg provide the lube ?


*thanks Guns N Roses

Moriarty

I'm not speaking with any authority here, but.. if we want people (government, industry, whatever) to take us and our objectives (whatever they might be ) seriously - which is presumeably why we're all here in the first place - calling people names isn't the best way to show that we're serious people that have serious issues that need dealing with.

'<future comms minister> Oh, ireland offline? Aren't they the crowd that get their shits'n'giggles by calling people names over the interweb that a twelve year old would find sad?'


There's a large chasam between not being sycophants and just being plain puerile.

oscarBravo

FWIW, Muck is not, and never has been, a committee member of Ireland Offline. What he calls people bears no relation to Ireland Offline's position.

I know a lot of people identify Muck with IO, but no such identity exists.

Moriarty

Originally posted by oscarBravo
I know a lot of people identify Muck with IO, but no such identity exists.

I know that, and you know that, but not everyone does. To somone that knows nothing about us, he could very easily look like a (pretty big) part of ireland offline. I'm just saying that perceptions (be they right or wrong) still matter.

eircomtribunal

What about your sig?
We train young men to drop fire on people. But their commanders won't allow them to write "f uck" on their airplanes because it's obscene!"
-- Col. Kurtz

P.

MarcusGarvey

Moriarty, if the Minister is looking for excuses not to meet with IOFFL then he'll find anything no matter how kiss arse IOFFL is. He'll complain about your sig, the colour scheme of the forum, the fact that boards has not upgraded to VBB3.

It's like that eejit at the big IOFFL meeting years ago (not sure was he an Eircom eejot, a Govt eejit or Esat eejit) who said he didn't want to turn up because some 13 year old kid suggested putting a bomb under their cars. Pffft.

They don't have to like IOFFL to talk to them. Muck's pissed, he has a right to, we all do. Look at Comwreck and see why we should ALL be pissed off.

gandalf

Well my opinion on this is clear. If they have done something to merit respect they will get it. The current Minister has actually done alot more than those that sat behind the desk in the past.

However Comreg and all that sail in her are fair game imho. These people should have been pushing the incumbant to improve facilities and service all around for the benefit of the country, consumers, business and the future, instead of this we have still not caught up with the majority of countries in Europe and are being left behind by our competitors in the accession countries. If Comreg cannot do this then why have we got people like John Doherty getting paid multiples of the average wage to head up nothing better than a talking shop with no teeth.

Anytime I have looked their website or seen their press bites in the newspapers all I see are word like "proposed", "could", "publications", "consultation" all waffle. When they do actually find someone in breach of their regulations (which is rare) they have NOT FINED them in any major way to ensure it doesn't happen again from what I have seen from their website.

I say cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war, the time of being nice, inclusive, diplomatic, prompting has passed, its time to shame these people into action in a very blunt fashion.

sceptre

Originally posted by MarcusGarvey
It's like that eejit at the big IOFFL meeting years ago (not sure was he an Eircom eejot, a Govt eejit or Esat eejit) who said he didn't want to turn up because some 13 year old kid suggested putting a bomb under their cars. Pffft.

Derek Kickham waddentit? Esat eejit in that case. Bill Murphy's managed to get himself a far better rep than Derek ever did (shame about the CS holding his company in the "useless" box)


Might sound like I'm sitting on the fence but I can easily see both points of view on this one. While Marcus is right in that if someone doesn't want to meet with us they'll use any excuse or make one up (look at what Cullen said about the ICTE (plonker never apologised for it either)), I'd tend to be of the opinion that it's pointless calling someone fat when you could just as easily say that he's useless, a waste of space and the kind of commissioner that a reasonable person with no agenda might think is taking bribes (hey look, that was probably worse than what Muck said - Muck's comments are defensible as opinion, albeit possibly offensive opinion, I'm twirling around the libel pole). I noticed Muck's comments a few hours ago and thought about editing them. Then I decided I wouldn't, or at least not yet. Now I'm not going to.

Christian's comments about being ignored by government have to be taken on board as well remember. I think there's a happy medium between going to a minister with the three bags full routine ("yes sir, no sir") and running around government buildings with a burning torch and a banshee cry but if the most recent former chairman of the organisation is convinced that the government are doing their hear no evil/see no evil/speak no evil routine then it's pointless dancing around the core problems of incompetence without referring to them. Personally I'd still run with "lazy, ineffectual, yes man, almost less than worthless" myself ("should have bank account examined" is strictly for the conspiracy theorists) over calling the guy fat. Even if he is fat - I could well do with losing a stone or so myself. Humphrey Appleby might be proud of the consultations on the cost of telephone poles rather than actually doing the job he gets paid to do (except Sir Humphrey wouldn't be proud as people have noticed the weak distraction trick.). The shocking thing, as we've all noticed, if that Doherty actually goes on the radio and TV and defends the highest line charges in Europe, the lack of availability of broadband, the high charges for same, as well as the lack of action by the organisation charged with doing something about it (his).

My ear is always open (like everyone else's on this board) if Mr Doherty feels like defending his lame-ass performance. I'll even give the guy a thread of his own and leave it locked for 24 hours after every single Doherty post provided before letting the hounds in, can't say fairer than that. Even if he cared enough to post rather than just read (hello John, hello minions), I rather doubt he thinks himself that his performance is defensible. Because a retarded monkey hanging off an old organ with a bag of peanuts could see that it isn't.

Anyone think (especially with the hope we once had) that he's actually worse than the last one? I'm asking this as a serious question.

Ripwave

Originally posted by sceptre
Anyone think (especially with the hope we once had) that he's actually worse than the last one? I'm asking this as a serious question.

No, he's not worse than the last one.

Not by a long shot.

Dohertys position is that he can make more progress through concensus than through the Four Goldmines. Much as I want him to put manners on eircom, I can't say that he's wrong about avoiding legal battles, that eircom always wins in fact, even if they lose in court.

sceptre

Originally posted by Ripwave
through the Four Goldmines

Somehow I'd actually forgotten about the long court dates (I obviously need sleep). I did mean it as a question rather than a thesis but that's a good enough answer for me to pull the question, thanks.

Moriarty

Originally posted by eircomtribunal
What about your sig?

What about it?

Seriously.

/shrugs

dahamsta

Originally posted by Ripwave
Dohertys position is that he can make more progress through concensus than through the Four Goldmines. Much as I want him to put manners on eircom, I can't say that he's wrong about avoiding legal battles, that eircom always wins in fact, even if they lose in court.

Very true. Isn't that a bit circular though? Isn't it Comreg's fault that Eircom always wins? Or does 100% of the blame lie at the feet of the politicians that won't give them the power?

adam

damien

Originally posted by gandalf

I say cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war, the time of being nice, inclusive, diplomatic, prompting has passed, its time to shame these people into action in a very blunt fashion.

You know I'm with you on this, but I think we should maybe walk once around the perimeter with the dogs still on the chains, then knock on the door, be polite and say we want to talk not shout, we want dialog not slagging, tell them we're here to help the country and it's people, just like they are meant to do.

Then if they slam the door in our face or do it in a very polite manner but the message is pretty much the same, then we know for sure what their intent is. Right now they deserve the benefit of the doubt from the new kids on the block.

If they tell us to go away then we can show them how loud, in your face, stubborn and a huge pain the ass we are and we'll only get worse.

** Oh and by the way hello to Dermot's people and John's people who we all know read this forum daily. Hello to Eircom's people, Esat's people and everyone else. Here's a little tip for y'all. I suggest you make the first move while you still can. Get in contact with us and ask for dialog. It would mean a lot to us. info (at) irelandoffline.org should reach the committee if you want to email, though you probably have some of our numbers already anyway so g'wan give us a bell. **

gandalf

The guy has a mouth hasn't he, if he hasn't got the power he should ask for it. If it isn't forthcoming from the minister raise the stakes go public. We need someone thats willing to take on the vested interests and not someone who is pussyfooting around like this guy is.

After hearing the inept lilly livered hogwash from his mouth on Newstalk last week I am convinced that Comreg in its current guise is of no use in sorting out the mess that is Telecommunications in this country. Comreg is like a rudderless ship with no power on the high sea allowing the currents decide its direction. What is needed is firm Government direction from a Minister who is willing to really get things moving, unfortunately it looks like the best man for the job is moving on.

De Rebel

Originally posted by dahamsta
Very true. Isn't that a bit circular though? Isn't it Comreg's fault that Eircom always wins? Or does 100% of the blame lie at the feet of the politicians that won't give them the power?

adam

Two different threads getting mixed up here..... the more important one first - The effectiveness of COMREG.

Firstly, let’s understand this................. COMREG is a regulatory body. It applies the law and the regulations. It does NOT determine policy. It does NOT determine strategy. It does not consider the national good, or anything else. It regulates. That is all it does. And it actually has quite a narrow focus and margin of operation.

Secondly, let’s accept that COMREG is a redundant entity. It was established first and foremost because under European legislation the DCMNR could not be both the incumbent’s shareholder and the regulator at the same time. So the regulatory function was spun off. Now that Eircom has been removed from public ownership, there is no reason whatsoever why COMREG should not be abolished and its functions returned to the DCMNR. I would argue that this would be a good thing for two reasons:

(1) It removes the confusion about who is responsible for policy implementation (currently this is falling between the cracks, partly its the DCMNR's job, and partly COMREG's job) Be allowing COMREG’s role to be subsumed back into DCMNR responsibility, accountability and all authority would be vested in a single body.

(2) It focuses overall responsibility for a key area of national interest fairly and squarely where it belongs - at the Minister's feet.

De Rebel

With regard to the way we interact with the powers that be (The Minister, DCMNR, COMREG, Eircom, ESAT, The Media, etc etc) it is important to say that most of these people are professionals, who act and behave like professionals to the best of their ability and expect to be treated in the same way. Frustration arises on all sides, but if IOFFL is to be taken seriously it needs to behave in an adult and mature manner. Calling anybody a fat fùcker is totally out of order. It achieves nothing and frankly is more likely to be counter productive.

As Damien rightly points out, and as the admins have verified on numerous occasions, these boards are perused by all manner of people in decision making positions. That alone signifies our influence.

Arguably, IOFFL’s most influential period (and I’m sticking my neck out here) was during the period of David Long’s stewardship. David was a lobbyist in the classic mould, and one of the best I’ve seen in action – mainly because he had a backbone and beliefs, qualities lacking in many lobbyists. He certainly outmanoeuvred many bigger guns. His non confrontational style, where he listened, argued and reasoned impressed many and gave IOFFL unprecedented access to the corridors of power. I will readily admit to being frustrated by his reasonableness at times, but it certainly got IOFFL listened to, and got our objectives not just a hearing, but saw the minister making our objectives his own and delivering on a number of the key ones. And thats not just my opinion, I've heard similar opinions being voiced by those on the dark side

I am not suggesting capitulation, or some retarded namby-pamby sit in the corner and speak when we are spoken to approach. We need the power of our convictions and the will and the energy to communicate them effectively. But we also need to remember that those who we deal with are human beings, who deserve to be dealt with in a restrained and respectful manner.

dahamsta

I don't agree with you on the idea of shifting ComReg back into Government, mainly because Government is by definition too political. If anything ComReg should be moving in completely the opposite direction.

I don't agree with you on Dave either, and I mean no disrespect to Dave when I say that; I simply believe that getting that political was the wrong way to go. Political, yes; but not without consultation, and certainly not without activism.

We got lost somewhere along the way.

(Again, no offense intended towards Dave at all. We always had different ways of doing things.)

adam

damien

Actually I agree with Adam, I think a regulator should be independent from the Government. It should be free from meddling by politicians in an ideal world.

It might be a good idea to compare Comreg and Ofcom in the UK who are always mentioned here as a model. Ofcoms charter is pretty interesting:

Ofcom exists to further the interests of citizen-consumers as the communications industries enter the digital age.

To do this Ofcom shall:

* Balance the promotion of choice and competition with the duty to foster plurality, informed citizenship, protect viewers, listeners and customers and promote cultural diversity.

* Serve the interests of the citizen-consumer as the communications industry enters the digital age.

* Support the need for innovators, creators and investors to flourish within markets driven by full and fair competition between all providers.

* Encourage the evolution of electronic media and communications networks to the greater benefit of all who live in the United Kingdom.

Comreg on their website states:

ComReg enables competition in the communications sector by facilitating market entry through a general authorisation to provide networks and services and by regulating access to networks so as to develop effective choice for consumers both business and residential. In a rapidly evolving sector, both in technological and commercial terms, ComReg provides the framework for the introduction of new services such as 3G.

The focus of regulation for the postal service in the partly liberalised market is the maintenance of the Universal Service Obligation (USO) and in ensuring that An Post prices are geared to cost.

Our activities are geared to operators and business & residential users of communications services.

Maybe Comreg needs to be made more consumer loving and have "value for money" randomly pasted in a few times in the charter.

spongebob

Originally posted by damien.m
Ofcom exists to further the interests of citizen-consumers as the communications industries enter the digital age.

To do this Ofcom shall:

* Serve the interests of the citizen-consumer as the communications industry enters the digital age.

Ofcom has one of those vision things . BTW Has anybody rung Tom Mc Gurk to say that we understand the situation into which that poor man has landed.....and the impossibility of getting any satisfaction from Eircom or their soi-disant regulator Comreg.

For starters we might get his computer fixed and get him on the h-interWEB so that he can tell his own story in his own words......if we knew where to find him that is.

Then we could advise him on how to get his money back ?

( my Boards profile has not been edited for years and declares ...lest one be curious... what I am....... )

M

spongebob

Originally posted by Ripwave
No, he's not worse than the last one.

Dohertys position is that he can make more progress through concensus than through the Four Goldmines. Much as I want him to put manners on eircom, I can't say that he's wrong about avoiding legal battles, that eircom always wins in fact, even if they lose in court.

Again I find myself agreeing with Ripwave to a large extent.........it must be the heatwave

Doherty is proceeding at a glacial pace with the big picture stuff such as LLU and the functioning of various or even myriad Wholesale markets but in so doing he is demonstrating beyond reasonable doubt that Comreg has considered all the angles....even the price of a Telephone Pole as we remember from the spring. These analyses are grinding along in parallel.

I am not sure that he will arrive at a worthwhile conclusion after all that . View of Wood for the Trees syndrome.

It is essentially a Market/Competition centric view and not a citizen/consumer centric view. The consumer (the Comreg mindset does not extend to the citizen in the digital age) is suffering though . That is clear.

M

eircomtribunal

Originally posted by Muck


Doherty is proceeding at a glacial pace... analyses are grinding along in parallel.

I am not sure that he will arrive at a worthwhile conclusion after all that .
M

Well, there is the very clear and unambiguous ministerial directive for Doherty to get the Irish bb enduser access and up-take to at least the EU (exclusive of accession countries) average by mid 2005.

Without a drastic reduction of Irish LLU pricing (and removal of ancillary restrictive booby-traps) and without a new USO forcing our incumbent to immediately start serious work on extending bb access beyond the easy and cheap 60% of pop range – just to name the two most important measures – the Irish enduser bb access and up-take will not arrive at the average EU level by mid 2005.

ComReg did not publish any comparative figures or make any mutterings about where we stand at the moment with regards to these goals.


BTW the link to the rte McGurk programme is this http://www.rte.ie/radio1/summerdays/rams/26july.ram
The Eircom part is right at the start.


P.

Xian

[It would appear to be the way of all "divorces" that there remains some loose ends to tie up]

Originally posted by De Rebel
Arguably, IOFFLs most influential period (and Im sticking my neck out here) was during the period of David Longs stewardship. David was a lobbyist in the classic mould, and one of the best Ive seen in action mainly because he had a backbone and beliefs, qualities lacking in many lobbyists. He certainly outmanoeuvred many bigger guns. His non confrontational style, where he listened, argued and reasoned impressed many and gave IOFFL unprecedented access to the corridors of power. I will readily admit to being frustrated by his reasonableness at times, but it certainly got IOFFL listened to, and got our objectives not just a hearing, but saw the minister making our objectives his own and delivering on a number of the key ones. And thats not just my opinion, I've heard similar opinions being voiced by those on the dark side.

Ah. "Nice Guy Dave" as they used to call him. Given my recessive diplomacy gene, it would have been too much to expect me to follow in those footsteps. Adam has suggested that he himself would follow a different tack himself. That's not the issue - see below.

In addition, not having been on the committee at that stage, you won't have been aware of the amount of support from the committee necessary to propel him to those same corridors. Reports, research, documentation and consultation responses weren't pulled out of a hat, ye know.

I am not suggesting capitulation, or some retarded namby-pamby sit in the corner and speak when we are spoken to approach.

... or posting on a bulletin board.

My agenda was community networks, which didn't entail dealing with the "dark side". However, given the flagging committee support for the agenda, the only option open to me to present the idea to the government, lobby for its implementation, travel the length and breadth of the country canvassing support and the necessary expertise to give it substance, secure (arguably) funding for the initiative, see through a flagship project demonstrating the feasibility of the model, making all possible contact with the government when the implementation of the funding is deemed wrong, upbraiding the minister when this advice is ignored and having the error corrected to some degree, and finally incorporating the entity necessary to realise the objective.

But you know all that yourself.

We need the power of our convictions and the will and the energy to communicate them effectively.

As you say, the courage of your convictions is needed. Are you, for instance, willing to state on a public platform, far from the comfort of your computer screen, that ComReg should be subsumed into the DCMNR?

My opinion on whether this commitment remains is known, hence (among other reasons already explained) the motion to disband. That you've put yourself forward means you think different. The onus is therefore on you to push through an agenda that will achieve the objective of affordable Internet access through to its conclusion, to prove me wrong.

De Rebel

Just to be clear and to deal with a few of the responses I received today, here and elsewhere,

I was NOT denigrating any of the former chairmen or the interim chairman
I was NOT advocating that David Long be reappointed as chairman
I was NOT trying to conduct some objective analysis of who was the best ever chairman

I was simply trying to draw a comparison between the likely effects of talking to the powers that be on the one hand and calling them fat fùcks on the other.

spongebob

De Rebel is always right and never more so than when he gives out to me.

This is my second assurance that I will be in good behaviour mode ...already.... today.

M

DMT

TmB wrote:

Tom is in Marian Finucane's slot at the moment (oo er...)

ROTFLMAO!!