Eir - who? what?

privateBeavis

hairyslug wrote: »

What the hell does the 16mil get spent on.
You get a new design, shops fitted out, New logos on stationary, a brief advertising scheme but what else.

Also, if anyone was in st Stephens green shopping centre yesterday, you may have seen a very panicked shop manager. The Eir flagship store was opening after rebranding, media was on the way and they had just realised that the EIR sign on the front of the shop (there had been a black film attached to it) had been fitted upside down

0.5 mil on the branding
15.5mil to buy eir.com

legocrazy505

HandsomeDan wrote: »

+1

It's a private company. It's their money to spend/ invest. What exactly has some people appalled?

It's a stupid investment though when you think about it, that's 16 million that could have been better served being put into expanding their fibre reach. Obviously 16 million doesn't go far but it's better than making a logo that looks nearly as bad them simply writing "Eir" in comic sans and then scribbling it onto the helmets and vans. From even a business perspective this is only to hype up how amazing they are so they secure the NBP tender and ruin rural Ireland like they have been doing for the past decade.

TallGlass

So they've dropped three letters and the prices are sky high after 3/6 months nearly doubling or trippling in some cases. Eircom just needed a refresh no need for a full rebrand. Then with eir.net been some forgein operator also selling broadband !

mass_debater

Got a quick look at one of the kitted out vans today, some job. The ladder fits inside, it slides in from the back in a chamber that goes up under the passenger seat. Yer man was delighted, no roof rack anymore, no noise, no drag, more efficient.

Banjoxed

HandsomeDan wrote: »

+1

It's a private company. It's their money to spend/ invest. What exactly has some people appalled?

Half the broadband, twice the price.

Totofan99

I've just seen their ad on the telly.

"Live life on eir."

Jesus.

Capt'n Midnight

TallGlass wrote: »

Eircom just needed a refresh no need for a full rebrand. Then with eir.net been some forgein operator also selling broadband !

LOL


http://www.eir.net/Area-assistenza/Assistenza-tecnica and you can even contact them by fax
http://www.eir.net/FIBRA 50Mb/10Mb for €34.95 a month

Jhcx

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

LOL


http://www.eir.net/Area-assistenza/Assistenza-tecnica and you can even contact them by fax
http://www.eir.net/FIBRA 50Mb/10Mb for €34.95 a month

my favourite part

37 € VAT included
per month.
Forever!

Eir have standards to live upto now that people could get confused. believe me people will get confused :pac:

Boscoirl

I am going to ring them tomorrow for that deal, looks good

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Will the Eircom.net email addresses remain? They certainly can't change to eir.net

I don't know if this has been mentioned already but I'm not sure how they came up with "eir fibre" considering that there's already a business ISP called Airfibre here.

sm213

So just got a letter through the door for eircoms rebrand as eir.
Boasting 1000Mb broadband speeds with eir fibre extreme and 4g as standard on all phones.
How long is it actually going to take to roll this out?
Why is it only available to 1.3 million of us?
They state it as something to be proud of.
Tbh for fairness sake I'd rather keep the service I have and see it rolled out everywhere to make it available to all.
I get up to 70Mb with the Ethernet cable. About 40 to my phone via WiFi.

Ignatius in bloom

sm213 wrote: »

So just got a letter through the door for eircoms rebrand as eir.
Boasting 1000Mb broadband speeds with eir fibre extreme and 4g as standard on all phones.
How long is it actually going to take to roll this out?
Why is it only available to 1.3 million of us?
They state it as something to be proud of.
Tbh for fairness sake I'd rather keep the service I have and see it rolled out everywhere to make it available to all.
I get up to 70Mb with the Ethernet cable. About 40 to my phone via WiFi.

Different name, same promises, more expensive bill.

whisky_galore

mass_debater wrote: »

Got a quick look at one of the kitted out vans today, some job. The ladder fits inside, it slides in from the back in a chamber that goes up under the passenger seat. Yer man was delighted, no roof rack anymore, no noise, no drag, more efficient.

It's not as if a phone company van is going to be travelling at Concorde speed anyway.:pac:

durtybit

Was this an intelligent move from Eircom to got you all talking or what ......

16 Mil got everyone talking about them

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

durtybit wrote: »

Was this an intelligent move from Eircom to got you all talking or what ......

16 Mil got everyone talking about them

There's talking and there's talking. This ain't the good kind.

And don't give me that old there's no such thing as bad publicity line because it's wrong.

durtybit

Maxton Sweet Ghost wrote: »

There's talking and there's talking. This ain't the good kind.

And don't give me that old there's no such thing as bad publicity line because it's wrong.

LOL

Menas

Maxton Sweet Ghost wrote: »

There's talking and there's talking. This ain't the good kind.

And don't give me that old there's no such thing as bad publicity line because it's wrong.

Unless your name is Katie Hopkins!

Rubberchikken

i pay 45 euro a month for efibre unlimited. if this rebranding increases that cost i will err! on the side of cop on and cancel my sub.
what a load of cobblers.

coolbeans

donegaLroad wrote: »

I remember when Aer Lingus came under fire for the enormous cost of their re-branding back in 1995, where all they did was tilted the shamrock on the logo back slightly, at the cost of a couple of million.

They completely changed the livery in fairness . A-lot more than tilting the shamrock.

Ten of Swords

Deleted User wrote: »

Anyone know what the music in the ad is? Tried Shazam but no luck.

It is a traditional Scottish Gaelic song called Fionnghuala

dubhthach

Deleted User wrote: »

Anyone know what the music in the ad is? Tried Shazam but no luck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=017Jk6tg2PA

Some explanation here:
https://blog.eir.ie/blogpost/view?id=5&bt=behind-the-music-the-new-eir-tv-ad

Aoibhinn_C

I don't think Eircom thought that name change through much.... the word 'eir' just sounds really awful when said with a skanger accent... I bet you they'll spend another €16m changing the name back in a few months time!

Hits954

HandsomeDan wrote: »

+1

It's a private company. It's their money to spend/ invest. What exactly has some people appalled?

Meanwhile they fob off people to whom they've been promising decent broadband speeds with "coming soon" for years.

I rang when I saw the announcement, stated my case and said to close the account.

Last week I was telling a pushy Vodafone rep that I was staying put, despite the frustration of eircom being too busy chasing UPC customers to invest in just-outside-suburbia areas with hundreds of potential customers; this week I rang to cancel, and have 30 days to find an alternative.

The rep actually said "but broadband costs millions to provide...."; you can imagine my answer, although I did reign in the sarkiness and venom, as it's not her fault she works for people not interested in providing a service.

If they even dropped prices for second-rate crap then fair enough. Say €5 a month for 1.5MB.

But no. You pay the full whack for a sub-standard service because their refusal to provide said service; they get paid regardless.

What incentive is there for them to give decent service if they make the same profit anyway ? Actually, even more profit, as the decent stuff costs to provide, whereas the obsolete infrastructure is well past its install date.

So if they want profit and can get away with fobbing you off, they're sorted.

And despite this, they get a government contract for FTTH (or whatever half-assed version of that they'll decide to cobble together) during the week.

Even being on hold was a teeth-grating experience, listening to revoiced & reedited recordings mentioning "eir" - a constant reminder of where their priorities are just before you get to the poor unfortunate rep.

"Eircom. Go Further." was an old incarnation's marketing urge.

Yup. Gone.

mass_debater

Hits954 wrote: »

Meanwhile they fob off people to whom they've been promising decent broadband speeds with "coming soon" for years.

I rang when I saw the announcement, stated my case and said to close the account.

Last week I was telling a pushy Vodafone rep that I was staying put, despite the frustration of eircom being too busy chasing UPC customers to invest in just-outside-suburbia areas with hundreds of potential customers; this week I rang to cancel, and have 30 days to find an alternative.

The rep actually said "but broadband costs millions to provide...."; you can imagine my answer, although I did reign in the sarkiness and venom, as it's not her fault she works for people not interested in providing a service.

If they even dropped prices for second-rate crap then fair enough. Say €5 a month for 1.5MB.

But no. You pay the full whack for a sub-standard service because their refusal to provide said service; they get paid regardless.

What incentive is there for them to give decent service if they make the same profit anyway ? Actually, even more profit, as the decent stuff costs to provide, whereas the obsolete infrastructure is well past its install date.

So if they want profit and can get away with fobbing you off, they're sorted.

And despite this, they get a government contract for FTTH (or whatever half-assed version of that they'll decide to cobble together) during the week.

Even being on hold was a teeth-grating experience, listening to revoiced & reedited recordings mentioning "eir" - a constant reminder of where their priorities are just before you get to the poor unfortunate rep.

"Eircom. Go Further." was an old incarnation's marketing urge.

Yup. Gone.

Look, Eir have no obligation to bring you better speeds. They are a private company out to make money so will go for the low hanging fruit just like UPC, Siro etc. It's the failings of successive Governments you should be directing your frustrations at, they wasted funds on lots of bandaid fixes that helped nobody in the long run.

HandsomeDan

HandsomeDan wrote: »

+1

It's a private company. It's their money to spend/ invest. What exactly has some people appalled?

Yes, it's their money, but where do they get their income from?
Customers! Me and you if you're an Eircom customer both directly and indirectly, you may have your phone bill from telco-x, but the last mile to your house is rented from Eircom.

Cable customers are the exception to that rule.

Hits954

mass_debater wrote: »

Look, Eir have no obligation to bring

Yup. Agreed. They had an edge because of the whole "it used to be ours" vibe.

Ironically despite it being ours they sold It to some of us (not me, paying me for part of something I supposedly partly own seemed nuts)

Yesterday exposed their priorities 100%: optics over service and so - since that jolted me of nostalgia - they're history.

Unfortunately the idiots in government seem to have given them some contract or other, despite their track record, but hey - what's new!

Hotblack Desiato

jamesbere wrote: »

Always someone who brings Irish Water into it.

First they make you pay for water, then they make you pay for eir

StudentDad wrote: »

This reminds me of the rebranding by RTE of RTE 2 to Network 2 and then a few years later back to RTE 2.

Then to RTE TWO and then back to RTE 2 again :rolleyes:

Tarzana2

And I left Eircom this week. Not related to the rebranding, I left because they're shíte.

Toodles!

mass_debater

Tarzana2 wrote: »

And I left Eircom this week. Not related to the rebranding, I left because they're shíte.

Toodles!

Left them for who?

legocrazy505

mass_debater wrote: »

Look, Eir have no obligation to bring you better speeds. They are a private company out to make money so will go for the low hanging fruit just like UPC, Siro etc. It's the failings of successive Governments you should be directing your frustrations at, they wasted funds on lots of bandaid fixes that helped nobody in the long run.

Eir do in fact hold an obligation to bring us better speeds because we are all in rural Ireland paying them for the service (line rental). They hold a monopoly, the government don't hold it. The only thing the government should be doing is helping the people with 3rd world broadband put across their frustrations.

UPC came in and did what they set out to do, provide fast broadband to urban areas. Nobody is complaining about them.

Siro haven't even properly started so we need to give them time.

But Eircom who apparently now live on air have had a monopoly over the majority of the landmass and they have done nothing. It's about time customers started sending weekly emails to them demanding the service they pay for. We pay here for "up to 24mbps" we are lucky to get .9mbps. It's about time comreg banned the phrase "Up to" and it's about time Eir were told they are making false claims and overcharging customers for services we are not getting.

The Government too by the way should be able to depend on the "expertise" of Eir to provide services. When they give them money to contracts they should be the ones going "Let's make this more ambitious" or "Let's roll out a global fibre network that will be easily developed over the next few decades". Eir clearly however don't have the expertise to run a company that holds a monopoly and I really hoped they had gone bankrupt ages ago so someone else could buy the infrastructure (maybe the gov).

323

mass_debater wrote: »

Look, Eir have no obligation to bring you better speeds. They are a private company out to make money so will go for the low hanging fruit just like UPC, Siro etc. It's the failings of successive Governments you should be directing your frustrations at, they wasted funds on lots of bandaid fixes that helped nobody in the long run.

Not quite true, they are the National Communications Provider. As such they have been handed the monopoly that gets the line rental from all line subscribers in the country. They are totally responsible for the banjaxed state of our national communications network.

blueser

jimgoose wrote: »

Interestingly, Eircom seem to have difficulty bringing decent telephone service to those who need it. They're the greatest shower of yahoos since Irish Water and I can scarcely be blasphemous enough about them. Sod them, from a height.

Agreed. No chance of fibre broadband coming out here for at least 3 more years, probably 5. They're a joke of a company.

mass_debater

legocrazy505 wrote: »

Eir do in fact hold an obligation to bring us better speeds because we are all in rural Ireland paying them for the service (line rental). They hold a monopoly, the government don't hold it. The only thing the government should be doing is helping the people with 3rd world broadband put across their frustrations.

UPC came in and did what they set out to do, provide fast broadband to urban areas. Nobody is complaining about them.

Siro haven't even properly started so we need to give them time.

But Eircom who apparently now live on air have had a monopoly over the majority of the landmass and they have done nothing. It's about time customers started sending weekly emails to them demanding the service they pay for. We pay here for "up to 24mbps" we are lucky to get .9mbps. It's about time comreg banned the phrase "Up to" and it's about time Eir were told they are making false claims and overcharging customers for services we are not getting.

The Government too by the way should be able to depend on the "expertise" of Eir to provide services. When they give them money to contracts they should be the ones going "Let's make this more ambitious" or "Let's roll out a global fibre network that will be easily developed over the next few decades". Eir clearly however don't have the expertise to run a company that holds a monopoly and I really hoped they had gone bankrupt ages ago so someone else could buy the infrastructure (maybe the gov).

Hold on, UPC and Siro have all done the exact same thing as Eircom which is cherry pick to upgrade and install in the most profitable areas and forget about the rest, the non profitable rural areas. The only obligation Eircom have is to provide everyone who requests it with a phone line, there is no obligation for broadband. You can blame Comreg for that, they failed to regulate when they should have. They are to blame for letting the market fend for itself and not setting broadband as the minimum requirement.

Broadband has to be sold as up to, it's a contended service, you're not paying for a 1:1 connection no matter what provider you go with. You share a fat pipe to the internet, there can always be slowdowns and queuing on routers at peak times.

folamh

The -com affix is considered archaic because many tech/communications companies in the 80's and 90's had it. "Eir"s corporate image may benefit from people subliminally associating it with newness.

folamh

Aoibhinn_C wrote: »

I don't think Eircom thought that name change through much.... the word 'eir' just sounds really awful when said with a skanger accent... I bet you they'll spend another €16m changing the name back in a few months time!

Well, international bodies don't know that

legocrazy505

mass_debater wrote: »

Hold on, UPC and Siro have all done the exact same thing as Eircom which is cherry pick to upgrade and install in the most profitable areas and forget about the rest, the non profitable rural areas. The only obligation Eircom have is to provide everyone who requests it with a phone line, there is no obligation for broadband. You can blame Comreg for that, they failed to regulate when they should have. They are to blame for letting the market fend for itself and not setting broadband as the minimum requirement.

Broadband has to be sold as up to, it's a contended service, you're not paying for a 1:1 connection no matter what provider you go with. You share a fat pipe to the internet, there can always be slowdowns and queuing on routers at peak times.

UPC and Siro would have to build a whole network, it's completely different to Eircom who hold a infrastructure monopoly outside of rural areas. When BT came along and tried to mess with the exchanges to improve services, Eircom brought them to comreg over it rather than actually seeing it as a bit of help. Eircom already have a backbone of copper and they can't even do FTTC to areas that in the UK wouldn't be considered rural.

It doesn't matter what Comreg do here, Eircom own the infrastructure. And the whole broadband as a not a 1:1 connection is basically saying if I bought a server I should expect it to be at least 99% to the required uptime. 1mbps on an advertised 24mbps exchange is not acceptable and you know fine well it isn't. If you for example bought a server which shares it's connection with other servers in the building and it went down all the time or didn't provide you with the server speeds as advertised, you would complain.

mass_debater

legocrazy505 wrote: »

UPC and Siro would have to build a whole network, it's completely different to Eircom who hold a infrastructure monopoly outside of rural areas. When BT came along and tried to mess with the exchanges to improve services, Eircom brought them to comreg over it rather than actually seeing it as a bit of help. Eircom already have a backbone of copper and they can't even do FTTC to areas that in the UK wouldn't be considered rural.

Just like BT went to Comreg to try to halt the exchange VDSL rollout, held it up for months. Eircoms rural network is copper, it needs replacing, its obsolete.

legocrazy505

mass_debater wrote: »

Just like BT went to Comreg to try to halt the exchange VDSL rollout, held it up for months. Eircoms rural network is copper, it needs replacing, its obsolete.

So what do you suggest to do then? Because the government can't do anything after the infrastructure was sold. In the end the blame will fall at Eir's door because they own the networks that run the majority of the landmass.

The only hope for people outside cities is for the NBP to be a serious plan, they give it to someone other than Eircom, Siro with state backing would be relatively easy in the majority of areas.

Obviously I would agree that the root cause of the whole infrastructure issue is that of the government who privatised Eircom but Eircom have done little since and they are the group in the best position to do something.

I have the privilege of living in an a house half a mile (roads not cable) from a village that is getting efibre in 2016. I will not be able to avail of this and neither will about 15 people living around me. We aren't even on their FTTH plans either, their planned line ends about a mile from us in the other direction. I will probably move out very quickly after my leaving cert if none of this inequality is addressed.

The broadband crisis is the modern equivalent of electricity, people are and will be forced to move because of the inequalities in the infrastructure. Only Eircom currently hold the key to fix this issue though and that is what annoys everyone.

mass_debater

legocrazy505 wrote: »

So what do you suggest to do then? Because the government can't do anything after the infrastructure was sold. In the end the blame will fall at Eir's door because they own the networks that run the majority of the landmass.

Yes they could, Comreg should have regulated. Governments shouldn't have listened to and invested in mobile technologies. No point talking about what should have happened, that horse is gone.

legocrazy505 wrote: »

The only hope for people outside cities is for the NBP to be a serious plan, they give it to someone other than Eircom, Siro with state backing would be relatively easy in the majority of areas.

Wait till you see, it will be split 50/50 between Siro and Eircom. Eircom already have the most fibre and have shown in the last 2 years with their VDSL rollout how committed they are. I've been talking to some in KN Group working on the Siro rollout in Sligo, it's not a universal rollout like Eircom, it is only to be a few select estates.

RobertKK

I haven't read all the thread, but we heard it said, next thing people will have to pay for eir.

Hits954

Remember that eircom also blocked the LLU for as long as they could possibly get away with, and then some! No company switched, as they would have had to change all their stationery, liverage and website, etc, to state the new number.

I had Smart at 3x eircom speeds 10 years ago; they went under because of a billing spat, as far as I know because they owed eircom a bill and tried witholding it on the basis that eircom were preventing them breaking even by delaying the LLU that they had been explicitly told to do.

Emphasis on "as far as I know"; there may be more to it

DivingDuck

If I were still an Eir(com) customer, I would be absolutely livid about this.

While they may be legally entitled to spend their funds as they see fit, it seems like a very poor choice for them to funnel money into, especially considering that (according to the other thread) one of their first acts under the rebrand is to increase prices.

It gives the appearance that they've emptied the pot on unnecessary expenditure instead of anything that will actually improve customer experience or quality. If I saw that coming from a utility provider and felt I had a viable alternative, I'd switch very quickly. It shows the kind of disrespect for their customers which has to have a negative impact on customer retention.

Thirteen days worth of advertising airtime? Advertising what, exactly? New services, better prices, improved customer service? What concrete proof of positive change are they showing?

...Actually more than I realised, since after posting that I went to read up on it.

Most of the reportage on this issue has gone on covering their mad spend on the rebrand, but there actually are some valid upgrades, like 24/7 support and (up to) 1Gbps fibre speeds. These are good things, but they've been buried under the annoyance at the cost of the rebrand. Of course the company can't control how the media reports these things, but surely someone in the office --this being Ireland-- had to have realised that people would be quick to call that a waste of money better spent elsewhere, and be pissed off about it?

All these things could have been achieved without this level of expenditure and resultant loss of customer goodwill. Even after reading about their improvements, I still think this was a massive waste of money and a really silly choice on their part.

whisky_galore

folamh wrote: »

The -com affix is considered archaic because many tech/communications companies in the 80's and 90's had it. "Eir"s corporate image may benefit from people subliminally associating it with newness.

How many will be fooled by this exercise in turd polishing?

folamh

whisky_galore wrote: »

How many will be fooled by this exercise in turd polishing?

Well, the effect is subliminal.

whisky_galore

folamh wrote: »

Well, the effect is subliminal.

Same company, same personnel, same ethos, just a new name, a telly ad and new vans.

folamh

whisky_galore wrote: »

Same company, same personnel, same ethos, just a new name, a telly ad and new vans.

Advertising doesn't work by playing on people's logical faculties.

whisky_galore

folamh wrote: »

Advertising doesn't work by playing on people's logical faculties.

It's a service provider, not a pair of shoes or a car. Unless they're cheaper or give better service, who actually gives a fcuk?

Wichita Lineman

Apparently all employees are to be called eirheads from now and in fairness they are pretty crap at the communications bit so it probably made sense to someone in there to own up and drop the com.

They probably said we'll keep eir and add whatever we're good at.

That's how its now known as eir.

riclad

Before the web, and , dot com names ,
com is short for telecom ,
eircom makes sense , irish telecom company.
Eir is an awful  name, everyone already knows what eircom means.