(PENDING)Phonesafe, Beware!!!!!
Discussion
A point of note I think: Would the advertisers who moan about the fact that Phonesafe wasn't an option have been aware of the phone charges themselves? It strikes me that if the punters didn't know the exorbitant call costs, the advertisers wouldn't have either.
If I was listing a car and knew that by selecting PhoneSafe would mean anyone interested in it would have to shell out 37.5p a minute, I wouldn't use it simply because I would know that next to no one would actually phone the number if they knew how much it was going to cost them.
If I was listing a car and knew that by selecting PhoneSafe would mean anyone interested in it would have to shell out 37.5p a minute, I wouldn't use it simply because I would know that next to no one would actually phone the number if they knew how much it was going to cost them.
pincher said:
It's late where I am and so I apologise if I have missed the bit where you have answered my question regarding what you have been doing for the last year since OllieM said a replacement solution had been identified. Lack of dev resource is absolutely no excuse for not even having a tangible solution.
The replacement solution has been identified, it is the same one from last year. We've had to go back and forth with the supplier to try and get them to meet our requirements. As I mentioned previously, none of the other suppliers we went to could give us the service we needed. Tie that in with our lack of resource and inevitably projects are pushed back. I'm sorry it's not here already, but a functioning and stable website had to take precedence.Durzel said:
A point of note I think: Would the advertisers who moan about the fact that Phonesafe wasn't an option have been aware of the phone charges themselves? It strikes me that if the punters didn't know the exorbitant call costs, the advertisers wouldn't have either.
If I was listing a car and knew that by selecting PhoneSafe would mean anyone interested in it would have to shell out 37.5p a minute, I wouldn't use it simply because I would know that next to no one would actually phone the number if they knew how much it was going to cost them.
Fair point well made... I just checked the advert listing process, and at the bit where the PhoneSafe option is offered it makes no mention that it costs more for the prospective buyer to call, therefore might put some people off.If I was listing a car and knew that by selecting PhoneSafe would mean anyone interested in it would have to shell out 37.5p a minute, I wouldn't use it simply because I would know that next to no one would actually phone the number if they knew how much it was going to cost them.
KatieM said:
The replacement solution has been identified, it is the same one from last year. We've had to go back and forth with the supplier to try and get them to meet our requirements. As I mentioned previously, none of the other suppliers we went to could give us the service we needed. Tie that in with our lack of resource and inevitably projects are pushed back. I'm sorry it's not here already, but a functioning and stable website had to take precedence.
That's the first time you have told us that. I really don't know why you drip-feed the info in the way that you do. It make you look so amateurish.Edited by pincher on Tuesday 21st February 15:31
Seeing as the ugly subject of money and resources arises
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/05/haym...
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/05/haym...
Guardian said:
The company, which was co-founded by Heseltine in 1957, said the small increase in operating profit was due to growing demand for online content, especially the motoring brand Pistonheads
Perhaps the big bosses could think of spreading a little more love our way...
Jesus, is this still going on?
Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
R8Steve said:
Jesus, is this still going on?
Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
Well it's not ofcom for a start - I posted the regulator a few pages back.Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
Feel free to register a formal complaint to them...
Vaud said:
R8Steve said:
Jesus, is this still going on?
Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
Well it's not ofcom for a start - I posted the regulator a few pages back.Every time i see it i get reminded of the time i lost 60 odd quid phoning about a car.
How OFCOM haven't been onto this i've no idea.
Surely you can at least change the wording to include a warning? The current wording 'FREE PhoneSafe - No time wasters' is probably not helping.
Feel free to register a formal complaint to them...
I shouldn't have to, the formal complaint has already been made to Pistonheads/Haymarket about 3 years ago.
Looking at an advert with Phonesafe, the deceptive thing is the link text is "Pricing info" which doesn't really tell the user that the call charges will be more than they might expect. It's so vague it could even be seen as a link to pricing information about that car model. "Call costs" or "Call charges" would be FAR more helpful.
I must say what a tragic pisstake this thread is. People are asking for a simple, quick fix - something an average 15 year old with basic coding knowledge could do on their phone while sitting on the toilet - and the response is LALALALALALALALALA, SORRY WHAT ARE YOU SAYING? LALALALALALALALA. And this has been going on since 2009. And they are still working on it. I'm glad I never advertised any of my cars here. HAHAHAHAHAHA.
KatieM said:
The replacement solution has been identified, it is the same one from last year. We've had to go back and forth with the supplier to try and get them to meet our requirements. As I mentioned previously, none of the other suppliers we went to could give us the service we needed. Tie that in with our lack of resource and inevitably projects are pushed back. I'm sorry it's not here already, but a functioning and stable website had to take precedence.
Now that you have a stable website with https: is this now a priority?Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff