NTL Complained about I-Stream

BoneCollector

NTL also Argued against I-Stream
(Not sure if anyone saw this but...)

ASAI Complaints Bulletin 01/6 - CA/0110/196

Product: i-stream
Advertiser: eircom
Medium: Radio and Press



Complaint:


NTL objected to a press advertisement which appeared on 4th October 2001 for the eircom product i-Stream. NTL claimed that the advertisement was in breach of Section 2.44 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland which requires advertisers to be in the position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising. The advertisement made no reference to the fact that the product in question was unavailable due to on-going discussions between eircom and the Office of the Direct of Telecommunication Regulation (ODTR). These negotiations were referred to in a holding statement on the eircom website:
“Due to ongoing discussions with the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation (ODTR), eircom regrets to announce that the commercial launch of eircom’s new ADSL service, scheduled for Tuesday 2nd October 2001 has been postponed. eircom will make every effort to resolve all outstanding issues with the ODTR and to bring ADSL technology to customers as soon as possible.”

NTL claimed that the fact that eircom has not yet launched the i-Stream product means that it cannot meet the customer demand created by the advertisement as required by the ASAI Code. A consumer complainant raised similar issues. He also claimed that a person must already be an eircom customer before eircom would consider offering the i-Stream service to him. He felt that this was unfair to Esat customers.

Dustaz

This is VERY interesting. Well spotted Bonecollector.

NTL claimed that the advertisement was in breach of Section 2.44 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland which requires advertisers to be in the position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising.

Ericom cannot provide DSL to anyone outside Dublin and up to 50% (?) of people in dublin. I would say that is 'not being in a position to meet reasonable demand'.

Might be worth visiting www.asai.ie and registering a complaint if you live in a non-dsl area.
Unless ive read this wrong, in which case im talking thru me arse:)

fabien

Just emailed this complaint to the ASAI (compiling some comments from previous posts, hope no-one will mind):

"Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to complain about Eircom's I-Stream advertisement, which has been and still is in serious breach of Section 2.44 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland which requires advertisers to be in the position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising.

Firstly, the press advertisement which appeared on 4th October 2001 for the Eircom product i-Stream made no reference to the fact that the product in question was unavailable due to on-going discussions between eircom and the Office of the Direct of Telecommunication Regulation (ODTR). These negotiations were only referred to in a holding statement on the eircom website.
The fact that eircom had not yet launched the i-Stream product meant that it could not meet the customer demand created by the advertisement as required by the ASAI Code.

Secondly, now that the negociations between Eircom and the ODTR have concluded, and Eircom can now launch I-Stream (at outrageous prices), its advertisements continue to mislead potential customers. Indeed, Eircom currently cannot provide DSL to anyone outside Dublin and up to 50% of people in Dublin. That means up to 80% of the country's population CANNOT have access to this product. I would say that this is 'not being in a position to meet reasonable demand'.

Finally, a person must already be an eircom customer before eircom would consider offering the i-Stream service to him/her. I feel that this is very unfair to Esat customers.

Eircom Should have mentionned its on-going discussions with the ODTR and the unavailabilty of I-Stream back in october 2001 (by the way, the main reason for the discussions was the outrageous prices Eircom wanted to charge). Eircom should also limit its current advertising broadcasts to the areas which CAN avail of the product, or make it available to everyone BEFORE advertising it, or they would be in breach of Section 2.44 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland which requires advertisers to be in the position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising.

Trusting this will be investigated,
Thanks in advance"

After sending it, I just realised these ads are probaly in breach of all the following articles, what do you think?

"Availability of Products

2.43 Advertisers should be in a position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising. If a product proves to be available in insufficient quantity, advertisers should take immediate action to ensure that any further advertisements are amended or withdrawn.

2.44 Where there is limited availability on some or all of the products advertised, apart from indicating that there may be other terms and conditions which apply, advertisers

should not exaggerate the availability of any of those products;

should be able to demonstrate that there is a reasonable supply or proportion of each of the various products available.

2.45 Products should not be advertised as a way of gauging possible demand unless the advertisement makes this clear.

2.46 Advertisers should not use the technique of switch selling, where sales staff criticise the advertised product or suggest that it is not available and recommend purchase of a more expensive alternative. Advertisers should not place obstacles in the way of purchasing the product or delivering it promptly."

BoneCollector

You will recieve a letter in the post within a week from asai telling you that they are or not persueing the matter...

Let us know which they choose

lynchie

Originally posted by fabien
2.46 Advertisers should not use the technique of switch selling, where sales staff criticise the advertised product or suggest that it is not available and recommend purchase of a more expensive alternative. Advertisers should not place obstacles in the way of purchasing the product or delivering it promptly."

"Dear Mr Lynch,

Thank you for registering your interest in ADSL. DSL is a distance sensitive technology that uses exisiting copper wires.

Im sorry but your line failed our tests and we cannot provide this service to you even though you are only 25 meters from your exchange.

But WAIT - Why not get connected with High-Speed ISDN and we will charge you more for your calls than you would with DSL. And if you order a second ISDN you can combine them and we will charge you even more again. Call 1800-HI-SPEED-RIP-OFF now and allow us to consume more of your monthly income"

Those letters that they send out trying to get you to use hi-speed instead must be in breach of the above. They clearly try and recommend a more expensive product.

BoneCollector

CC the ASAI

fabien

lynchie (or anyone else)

Can you post the original text/date of the Eircom letter you mentioned, I think this is definitely in breach of 2.46, I will send them a "follow up" complaint with all the articles I reckon Eircom breaches 24/7. There could be other ones in there but I don't have time to read them now.

They are also definitely breaching 2.43 (I got the number wrong in my email) 2.44 (how can they demonstrate that the product is in reasonable supply when 80% of us can't access it !!) and 2.45 (although this one might be difficult to prove/document, I think we can all agree that they are giving it a try - and then shoving their ISDN into our homes)

Lemming

That looks like switch selling to me.

Lynchie ... take a hammer, and four nails .... and hammer eircom to the wall. One through each hand, and one thorugh each ball (or alternativaly get in contact with the ASAI)

fabien

As the ASAI directed me to their online page to make my complaint, I took this opportunity to re-write it (it's quite long I know but I wanted to keep a record somewhere, and this forum seemed like a good place... I'll keep you posted on progress, if any...):

"I wish to complain about Eircom's i-Stream advertisements, which I believe have been and still are in serious breach of Sections 2.43, 2.44, 2.45 and 2.46 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland dealing with the Availability of Products.(See Appendix 1)

Breaches of Sections 2.43 and 2.44:

1) The press advertisement which appeared on 4th October 2001 for the Eircom product i-Stream made no reference to the fact that the product in question was unavailable due to on-going discussions between eircom and the Office of the Direct of Telecommunication Regulation (ODTR). These negotiations were only referred to in a holding statement on the eircom website.
The fact that eircom had not yet launched the i-Stream product meant that:
- it could not meet the customer demand created by the advertisement as required by the ASAI Code 2.43
- it could not demonstrate that there was a reasonable supply or proportion of the product available as required by the ASAI Code 2.44

2)Now that the negociations between Eircom and the ODTR have concluded, and Eircom has now launched i-Stream (at outrageous prices), its advertisements continue to mislead potential customers. Indeed, Eircom currently cannot provide ADSL to anyone outside Dublin and up to 50% of people in Dublin. The fact that eircom has only got the means to supply i-Stream in a very limited area (at least 80% of the country's population CANNOT access i-Stream), but advertising it nationally means:
- it is not in a position to meet the customer demand created by the advertisements, therefore in breach of Section 2.43.
- it cannot demonstrate that there is a reasonable supply or proportion of the product available as required by the ASAI Code 2.44

Breaches of Sections 2.45 and 2.46:
Although this is difficult for me to prove/document, it is clear to me and other people that i-Stream is advertised as a way of gauging possible demand because eircom and its advertisements DO NOT say when and where i-Stream is going to be released.
Instead, they ask customers to contact them via email or phone, then they test their line for ADSL (which will fail for 80% of us), and suggest immediately: "But Why don't you try the great High Speed product?" which is a much more expensive product (4 times more expensive and 8 times slower...)
The fact that eircom have not published a list and schedule of areas to be upgraded to i-Stream capabilities, and the fact that they are taking advantage of that to recommend purchase of a more expensive alternative means they are in breach of Sections 2.45 and 2.46

Conclusions:
Eircom Should have mentionned its on-going discussions with the ODTR and the unavailability of i-Stream back in october 2001 (by the way, the main reason for the discussions was the outrageous prices Eircom wanted to charge). Eircom should also limit its current advertising broadcasts to the areas which CAN avail of the product, or make i-Stream it available to everyone BEFORE advertising it, or they will remain in breach of Sections 2.43 and 2.44 of the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland.
They should also decide/publish when and where this product is going to be released, or they will remain in breach of Section 2.45.
Finally eircom should immediately stop suggesting their more expensive High-Speed product to the 80% of people who cannot access i-Stream, as this is in breach of Section 2.46.

Trusting this will be investigated soon and thoroughly,
Thanks in advance

Appendix 1 - Sections from the Code of Advertising Standards in Ireland :

"Availability of Products

2.43 Advertisers should be in a position to meet any reasonable demand created by their advertising. If a product proves to be available in insufficient quantity, advertisers should take immediate action to ensure that any further advertisements are amended or withdrawn.

2.44 Where there is limited availability on some or all of the products advertised, apart from indicating that there may be other terms and conditions which apply, advertisers

should not exaggerate the availability of any of those products;

should be able to demonstrate that there is a reasonable supply or proportion of each of the various products available.

2.45 Products should not be advertised as a way of gauging possible demand unless the advertisement makes this clear.

2.46 Advertisers should not use the technique of switch selling, where sales staff criticise the advertised product or suggest that it is not available and recommend purchase of a more expensive alternative. Advertisers should not place obstacles in the way of purchasing the product or delivering it promptly.""

Dustaz

I now have 2 little postcards at home that the ASAI sent me to let me know the matter is being looked into.

lynchie

AFAIK, the first letter I received from them was a standard letter they sent out to those who registered for interest only to find their lines had failed. I have the letter at home somewhere but unfortunately im working in the UK for the next while so I can't scan it in etc. Im sure there are other user's who received the same letter. So if anybody has it could they scan it in and post it here.

niallb

Once Eircom get you on hi-speed, they want
to keep you there. You can really run up some
serious phonebills.

I was informed when requesting I-stream
that I would have to downgrade my ISDN line
at my own expense to have the line test performed - and than reupgrade at my own expense should it fail the test.

When I mentioned that a line test had been done when I upgraded to Hi-Speed several months back, I was told they don't keep records.

They don't mention that in their advertising either.

timod

FWIW, I logged a complaint regarding Eircom's radio ad. It taslk about Eircoms "wide range" of high speed internet access options
"from 49c per day"

The point I complained about is the 49c.... i.e. you cannot go on the web on hispeed for 49c a day... that's merely the rental.

Tim

sceptre

Originally posted by timod
The point I complained about is the 49c.... i.e. you cannot go on the web on hispeed for 49c a day... that's merely the rental.
Tim

Ditto. Typing it in a few minutes and sending tomorrow

I happened to be coming up from Cork this evening and heard it (maybe I should listen to the radio more often)


More to the point, it's not even the full rental price for HiSpeed/ISDN - it's the price difference between a normal line and ISDN so it's doubly misleading.

Eircom's ISDN carries a monthly rental of EUR30.99 (plus VAT)

(how do they get their figure of 49c? By deducting 16.20 (ex VAT) (monthly rental for a PSTN Line) from 30.99 (ex VAT) and dividing the remainder (14.79) by 30=49.3c per day)

Ignoring the VAT, the real cost of HiSpeed for a 30-day month is 30.99/30=EUR1.03



This is the cost they should mention in the advert. Eircom do not sell a broadband internet product (even by their definition of broadband) that anyone can purchase for anywhere near 49c per day.

From the Eirom website:
eircom hi-speed works out at just 49c per day, which makes it an even more cost-effective option for your business. Installation costs just EUR99.16 ex VAT. eircom hi-speed has a standard monthly rental of just EUR30.99 ex VAT.

The advert also fails to mention the installation charge, as well as the product not being available everywhere. In addition, even the installation charge of 99.16 is dependent on upgrading from an existing line (without an existing line to upgrade you'll be paying another 107 euro (+VAT) to get the PSTN line installed).

So they're advertising products not available to all with a price tag mentinoed that doesn't exist.

If the ASAI don't act on this there's something seriously wrong. The ODTR really should also have something to say about it, but I don't know if they have the power (or if they'd be inclined to bother, they being a useful body and all that;):rolleyes:)

timod

Marginally related:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/22/26023.html

BT get a telling off for claiming that their broadband is 40 times faster than traditional dial-up. It was argued that the 2Mb service was for businesses, and the advert was geared for consumers.

Not sure how we could work such logic here though...

fabien

I received a reply today after my complaint last week. I think they linked it to previous complaints from other people. It looks like it was first lodged in May 2002. Although their reply is "confidential", I hope the outcome won't be...

Basically they asked Eircon to explain why their ads did not mention the -very- limited availibility of I-Stream, and why they were trying to sell a more expensive, less performant alternative (hi speed) to people who expressed interest in the product, but Eircon didn't bother replying !! They don't sound to happy about that!

I don't know what happens now, but it's a start anyway.
Does anyone know what happens next? Probably not much...