Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Eircom ad on radio

  • 08-05-2015 6:03pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭


    I just heard an Eircom ad on 2FM at 18:58. It is an ad I haven't heard before. It features a female voice talking about broadband and broadband / phone products.

    It claimed that the broadband product had a speed of up to 100 megabytes. I'm not sure if this is per second, minute, hour or day.

    Can the people who created and approved this ad actually be fired?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    So, it's not even 100 Megabytes (MB), but 100 Megabits (Mb).

    Do you understand the term "bait and switch"?

    https://www.eircom.net/broadband/


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    If the ad does indeed state megabytes rather than megabits then that's incredibly misleading and a rookie mistake. 100 megabytes per second would mean a connection speed of 800 megabits per second or more, even your competitors don't offer this and it's technically impossible with the infrastructure you have.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭eircom: Alan


    Victor wrote: »
    I just heard an Eircom ad on 2FM at 18:58. It is an ad I haven't heard before. It features a female voice talking about broadband and broadband / phone products.

    It claimed that the broadband product had a speed of up to 100 megabytes. I'm not sure if this is per second, minute, hour or day.

    Can the people who created and approved this ad actually be fired?
    Hi Victor

    You're right, it should indeed be up to 100 Megabit (Mb) rather than Megabyte (MB) - thanks for your feedback on this.

    I have already reported this to operations and apologies for any inconvenience this has created.

    Thanks
    Al


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Speed is measured in amount per unit of time. Don't you mean 100 megabits per second?

    We define vehicle speeds in kilometres per hour. So, we say "John received a fine for driving at 70 kilometres per hour in a housing estate" (typically illegal, as it is dangerous and has a high nuisance value). We don't say "John received a fine for driving at 70 kilometres in a housing estate" (perfectly legal, albeit tedious).

    So, download speeds are measured in megabits per second. We say "John is able to download at a rate of 100 megabits per second". We don't say "John is able to download at a rate of 100 megabits". That would make us look foolish.

    Now, about having these presumably well-educated and well-paid, but seemingly oblivious people in head office fired?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭eircom: Alan


    Victor wrote: »
    Speed is measured in amount per unit of time. Don't you mean 100 megabits per second?

    We define vehicle speeds in kilometres per hour. So, we say "John received a fine for driving at 70 kilometres per hour in a housing estate" (typically illegal, as it is dangerous and has a high nuisance value). We don't say "John received a fine for driving at 70 kilometres in a housing estate" (perfectly legal, albeit tedious).

    So, download speeds are measured in megabits per second. We say "John is able to download at a rate of 100 megabits per second". We don't say "John is able to download at a rate of 100 megabits". That would make us look foolish.

    Now, about having these presumably well-educated and well-paid, but seemingly oblivious  people in head office fired?
    Hi Victor

    I understand your views here and the facts you have discussed are correct. In relation to your query on firing employees all matters like this will be treated internally and I will unable to discuss the position of eircom employees or give updates on eircoms operational matters.

    Thanks
    Al


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,170 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    If you look at the VDSL promo videos the head of eircom wholesale gets it wrong, so I'm not surprised the marketing crew follow suit.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭eircom: Alan


    ED E wrote: »
    If you look at the VDSL promo videos the head of eircom wholesale gets it wrong, so I'm not surprised the marketing crew follow suit.
    Thanks for highlighting this Victor I'll pass this on to operations also

    Cheers
    AL


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 12,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭dub45


    Does nobody care about presenting false information to the public?


    Does nobody in Eircom actually check anything anymore?

    This displays a shocking lack of professionalism on the part of Eircom management.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 916 ✭✭✭1hnr79jr65


    Victor wrote: »
    Now, about having these presumably well-educated and well-paid, but seemingly oblivious  people in head office fired?
    A bit presumptuous calling for folks to be fired over a mistake that was acknowledged, no ? 


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 916 ✭✭✭1hnr79jr65


    dub45 wrote: »
    Does nobody care about presenting false information to the public?


    Does nobody in Eircom actually check anything anymore?

    This displays a shocking lack of professionalism on the part of Eircom management.
    I think the rep here has publicly acknowledged there is an issue and taken the concern onboard, nothing is going to be achieved by badgering on about the issue.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Victor wrote: »
    Now, about having these presumably well-educated and well-paid, but seemingly oblivious  people in head office fired?
    A bit presumptuous calling for folks to be fired over a mistake that was acknowledged, no ? 
    dub45 wrote: »
    Does nobody care about presenting false information to the public?


    Does nobody in Eircom actually check anything anymore?

    This displays a shocking lack of professionalism on the part of Eircom management.
    I think the rep here has publicly acknowledged there is an issue and taken the concern onboard, nothing is going to be achieved by badgering on about the issue.
    On the contrary, the various phone companies are well awre that their ad.s are misleading, but continue to create new misleading ad.s


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 12,450 Mod ✭✭✭✭dub45


    dub45 wrote: »
    Does nobody care about presenting false information to the public?


    Does nobody in Eircom actually check anything anymore?

    This displays a shocking lack of professionalism on the part of Eircom management.
    I think the rep here has publicly acknowledged there is an issue and taken the concern onboard, nothing is going to be achieved by badgering on about the issue.
    Publicly acknowledged?  In a small forum that most people don't know exists? Taken on board? what exactly does that mean? Why shouldn't we highlight the shocking lack of professionalism on the part of a major company? A lack of professionalism incidentally that could have implications for Eircom though the misrepresentation to the public of its product.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,840 ✭✭✭Dav


    Folks, the team here is not in charge of marketing or creating ads. 

    Can we have a bit of perspective and reality please?  If you want to get a more detailed response maybe the reps can suggest an appropriate department to contact?


Advertisement