The puny £50k fine would become irrelevant if even a small percentage of the 6500 who signed back up then went on to upgrade or renew packages as a result of being signed back into marketing info. Should have been a £500k fine and VM then might think twice about chancing their luck with that kind of activity in future.
VM made approx £5.1 billion profit last year, so a £50,000 fine amounts to around FIVE MINUTES of that profit ...
Boo BLOODY Hooooo 😢
And people wonder why they don't give a hoot about their customers. They were 'bragging' today that they had finished their 1-gigabit upgrade when a lot of people can't even get half of what they are paying for!
And God only knows how many that have signed up, then hit the 'unable to connect you due to external works' which then goes on for months while engineers come and go, stating that it's construction/council/prepull/installation, or the mythical beast 'field manager' or any number of other 'factors' that are stopping connection, whilst VM pretends 'it is doing all it can' whilst in reality, it's sitting with it's finger up it's rectum!!
'Don’t forget who pays the fine, it’s YOU. Just means the cost of your service will increase. Fines like this are just counter productive'
So what do you suggest instead of a fine? By what other means do you 'punish' these companies for these transgressions? There has to be some sort of meaningful response to breaches like this, or would you just prefer they were 'told off' and let it go at that?
It's a difficult situation, but, punishment for breaking rules should be enforced, surely?
Quote: Virgin Media’s owner faces a shareholder revolt for paying its boss $1 million a week during the pandemic.
Mike Fries, the American chief executive of London-based Liberty Global, pocketed $52 million (£36.7 million) last year, even as the broadband and TV provider was hit with a deluge of customer complaints !
That's where to hit them ... Surely these companies are required to hit performance targets ... Cut Fries' wage to £300 a week and knacker his internet ... Let him live with what his customers have to live with, and maybe something will happen in our favour (though I doubt it)
... And while he may not have been privy to the working of his minions, he is still, by definition, responsible. Unless you are extremely fortunate, you don't walk into a position like his without knowing what's going on ... I mean, the last thing you would expect to hear from someone in his position, let's say the Chairman of VW, is to hear him say: "We make Cars?"
So while he may not have been all knowledgeable about the minuté of Virgin Media, he still should be acting, or by proxy, acting on those who caused this problem and be working to resolve it. Short of VM coming up with the proverbial ... 'Offer, I can't refuse' ... I will be dropping them like a VERY HOT BRICK the second my contract is up.
'surely it is who made the decision to spam people that should be punished. i doubt fries would have even have had knowledge of it until the investigation was announced.'
Another case of the 'figurehead' not even having his finger on the pulse of the company...
Another CEO who sits in his ivory tower, surrounded by sycophants who just pretend they all know and agree with 'whatever' goes, oblivious to the REAL world, just happy to draw big fat salaries, and turn a blind eye to what goes on to obtain it??