Regulator slams MoS premium rate promo

Back to the article

Suckers!!!! #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 07:39 GMT

Serves them right for ringing a premium rate number, given all the scandal lately over dodgy premium rate competition lines. That said, I would love to see this sort of competition get pulled, given that I have always been strongly against premium rate phone-ins.

It's the same with the X-Factor and the like - they make plenty of money from the show, mostly from the extortionate call rates, and the idiots who will vote twenty-plus times for their favourites.

Anonymous Coward

Entries #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 07:39 GMT

Shouldn't the people who enter these sorts of competitions be fined for stupidity?

Paul Bottomley

and I bet the answer to win is... #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 07:41 GMT

llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch

Les

Fine.. #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 08:16 GMT

@AC - Surely the cover price of the Mail on Sunday *is* a fine for stupidity?

Steve

@Andy #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 08:35 GMT

"given that I have always been strongly against premium rate phone-ins."

Any justification for that?

I don't call these things myself, but banning things is a very nu-labor thing to do, especially if the ban is based on your personal dislike.

Craig

MoS #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 08:56 GMT

Is that the official acronym for the Mail on Sunday now? I thought Ministry of Sound had done something wrong :)

Jason Hall

@Steve #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 08:56 GMT

I agree with you, banning something that people (somehow) find enjoyable is not something that should be considered.

Making references to nu-labour is below the belt though... I'm sure no-one who reads the reg is dumb enough to follow that political scumfest.

The problem is when the regulator has been proven to be completely lacking in controlling the issue, time and again.

I have no idea what the answer is, but then since I never use these premium rate rip-offs I don't really care :)

Chris Hamilton

Can you really trust.... #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 09:27 GMT

....a regulator of premium rate phone lines whose name sounds as if they should be advertising dodgy "240 month contract, don't pay and we own your children" mobile phone deals in the back of the Daily Sport??

Paris, because according to another advert in the Daily Sport, you can listen to her talk dirty for only £17.95/minute on 0906 554.....

Spleen

@Jason Hall #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 10:18 GMT

"The problem is when the regulator has been proven to be completely lacking in controlling the issue, time and again."

No, the problem is that people are stupid enough to call premium rate lines and sad enough to enter meaningless competitions. I mean, a Mail on Sunday treasure hunt? What was the prize, a can of petrol and a map of local asylum hostels?

Terry Ellis

Regulator name #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 10:57 GMT

The regulator is called 'PhonepayPlus'!?

That seems like the name of a dodgy phone company rather than the heavy hand of the law...

Dave

regulator name?? #

Posted Thursday 1st May 2008 12:46 GMT

The regulator now calls itself 'PhonepayPlus'!??!?!?!?!?!?

WTF in the name of all that is halfways sensible is that all about????

TWFKAI* would have made more sense than this

The state of the country become more than somewhat dismal when a regulator (intent: to hold to account the activities of profiteering corporations on behalf of the people) truly believes that changing its name to a misleading collection of letters is more important than fulfilling its function

* The Watchdog Formerly Known As ICSTIS

I'm emigrating to somewhere with minimal gumment - any suggestions?

Ideala2

You're wrong... #

Posted Friday 2nd May 2008 05:15 GMT

The answer was...

IMMIGRANTS!

Anonymous Coward

Iz Confuzed #

Posted Friday 2nd May 2008 07:40 GMT

M++l readers pay over the odds for something they do not want, cannot use, or are not sure how to operate.

Where's the problem?

Forums

Forums home