
eircom, formerly Telecom Éireann, is the former State telecommunications operator of Ireland. As Telecom Éireann, the company was a state monopoly; as a private company it continues to dominate many telecommunications areas, its main competitor being Esat BT. eircom currently operates the fixed-line telephone network, act as an internet service provider (ISP) ''eircom.net'', and operate a property alarm installation and montioring unit called ''eircom Phonewatch''. An analogue TACS and a digital GSM network operation in Ireland, started as Eircell, was once owned by eircom. It is now run by Vodafone. eircom now has a 44% share of the Irish telecoms market. ==Privatisation== Due to European Union laws requiring the opening up of the Irish telecommunications market, eircom was privatised, a process which began in 1995, and by July 1999 the government had disposed of virtually all of its shareholding [http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/57/2510988.pdf]. eircom was then floated on the Dublin, New York and London stock exchanges on July 8 1999 and small/first-time investors were encouraged by the Irish Government to buy shares. The eircom flotation is considered to have been an example of a stock market bubble - after the initial hype of the flotation died down, the stock price fell rapidly. Many of the 500,000 small investors were angered by the significant financial loss they incurred, blaming the government for not sufficiently warning them of the risks inherent in stock market investment. Mary O'Rourke, as the minister responsible for eircom, lost her seat in the 2002 Irish general election largely because of this public anger over the eircom flotation. ==Competition== While eircom retains a virtual monopoly on fixed line telephony in the State (the only exception being those operated by cable company NTL - Chorus previously offered wireless telephony but failed to renew their licence) it is required to allow carrier pre-selection (CPS). Introduced in Ireland in 2001, CPS allows subscribers to use an alternative provider for all their calls, without the need to dial indirect access codes or numbers, although they still receive a bill from eircom for line rental. However, under a wholesale line rental scheme, it will now be possible for customers, especially business ones, to have a single bill from an alternative provider, rather than continuing to receive one from eircom. ==Criticisms of eircom== Ireland continues to lag behind in terms of broadband availability. As of 2004, eircom's PR division runs near-daily advertisements for broadband connections on national media. It has been suggested that this is more to ensure that politicians, local community groups and the public at large feel that Ireland is being connected, rather than advertise available services (A large part of the population cannot take up the broadband deals). Before eircom announced ADSL it started a telemarketing campaign aimed at customers who spent large amounts of time on dial-up access connections to persuade them to subscribe to ISDN - an old inferior technology. This technology, which is not available in all areas is an alternative, albeit expensive option, in some areas where broadband is not available and ISDN is. eircom, like most ISPs, has been accused of failing to prevent E-mail spam. eircom have introduced a spam/virus filtering service called email protector. However, it is a subscription service of €2 extra per month. eircom's corpoprate structure has been subject to criticism in recent years, with accusations of poor management and overstaffing levelled at it. After the privatisation of eircom, the highly profitable mobile phone division, Eircell, was sold to Vodafone. Some consider this act to be asset stripping by the large investors with interests in eircom. ==Broadband Roll-out== After a slow start broadband subscriber numbers started to pick up in 2004 when eircom cut the price for the basic DSL service and launched an intensive television advertising campaign. eircom predict 100,000 DSL connection by year end 2004 and promise to announce ambitious further growth targets in 2005. They have stated that their strategy is to strongly grow broadband user numbers and re-enter the mobile market. Copying a similar scheme to that used by BT in the UK, they have introduced a trigger scheme for DSL enabling their smaller exchanges based on numbers of users committing to sign-up for service. BT has now discontinued this scheme, and is moving to upgrade all remaining exchanges in the UK to ADSL during 2005, (including Northern Ireland, which has the highest number of exchanges upgraded to broadband in the UK). ==See also== * Communications in Ireland * List of Irish companies ==External links== * [http://www.eircom.ie Official site] * [http://www.eircomtribunal.com eircomTribunal] * [http://www.comwreck.com/blog_20_may12.html eircom Broadband Trickster Programme] Communications companies of Ireland
I've just deleted a section here entitled "eircom's profiteering", in which it was confidently asserted that eircom did nothing about spam as a way of getting more dialup minutes and boosting profits. This is biased and misleading, as is a lot of this article. I personally opposed the privatisation of eircom, but how can one repeatedly refer to this event as a "fiasco" in an objective article? It was not good for people who lost money in the end, but that is what speculating on the stock exchange can involve. The proceeds from the initial sale were invested in the national pension fund for the beefit of all irish workers. Before the privatisation the company was a semi-state, with a large stake in the company held by Telia and KPN. Prevarication by the owners of this stake, and the crash in the telecoms sector led to the negative outcome in terms of share price when the company was bought be a private entity in 2002. The company was floated again in 2004, yielding a large return to its private investors. :It is very improper to delete a whole paragraph and then classify the remainder as ''disputed'' - what parts in the reminder of the article are disputed or are you disputing your own changes? the remainder is quite factual and to the point - moreover if you believe that the article is "biased and misleading", then please feel free to Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages - again it must be said that the remainder, very little of which has been edited, is neither advocacy nor propaganda referring to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. It is well known, in Ireland, that Eircom has not embraced the same spirit that Telecom Eireann had which transformed Irish telecommunications in the late 1980s and early 1990s - open any Irish newspaper which does not have significant advertising revenue from Eircom and see the lack of investment, initiative and forward looking. User:Djegan 14:39, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC) :: I have reverted the "eircom's profiteering" which was removed - whilst I did not write it I do not believe it is misleading and should be edited for correction rather than deletion - a large section of the material is quite correct, certainly the first paragraph. Ireland is at least 5 years behind Europe in terms of broadband availabilty and Eircom as that national telecommunications company must bear some responsibility. Former state compananies, both Ireland and abroad, often find it difficult to accept market conditions. User:Djegan == Response to bias allegations == As the original author of the admittedly rather nasty piece, I've attempted to edit it for tone. Djegen is right however, the actual content is true. I have edited to point out the bits that are simply "assumptions" - but they are rather valid assumptions/allegations, based on "Eircom wants to make money". As a dominant company, with a virtual monopoly, they do not play fair to acheive the profit. This is not made up. I hope the piece is a bit more careful, and if you have problems with it, then do please edit - but it should not be removed en-masse. User:Zoney 20:50, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC) I'm new to wiki, so apologies for wholesale paragraph removal. What I can't understand is innacurate statements such as "The majority of Eircom's revenue now comes from dial-up internet charges." being included in something that claims to be factual and neutral. Can you substantiate this claim? Where did you get it from? :No - I don't have specific sources, it's something I've seen in the media though - and I find it quite believable - the 5 minute minimum call duration makes them a packet now. Don't forget, if you sign up with IOL, UTV, anyone, mostly it is Eircom who get the dial-up phone rates. (Even yet, few people go for the option of Eircom line rental and Esat/whoever call charges - although I believe one does only get one bill now with that arrangement). By and large, Eircom still have a monopoly on the actual phone service connecting people to the Internet (even if they are not the only ISP). It perhaps isn't clear that I'm not referring to them making the majority of their money from the ISP role - it's from the telco role - i.e. call charges for dial-up. But yes - a source is needed - I'll get around to looking for one at some stage. User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 13:58, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) :Welcome to wikipedia, it goes without saying that Eircom is uncompetitive, is Wikipedia about citing every source - could one ever critise a large corporation or government this way? To illustrate, remember "Eircom hi-speed", this is/was a rather disingenuous attempt by Eircom to introduce a "high speed" ISDN product. This product was heavily marketed to the public at a time when most Western Countries were at an advanced stage of introducing ASDL, a fairly superior product, and in many of these countries ISDN has long been considered an obsolete technology. Similarly dial-up ISP services ''are'' more expensive than similar services offered in other countries, and are often limited in terms of online hours - their is a limited number of providers of flat rate tariffs. Eircom as a significant market force and must bear some responsibility, like ma bell had to. User:Djegan 17:50, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) ::Oh yes. (rubs hands with glee). I forgot to mention the nonsense over the whole ISDN/ADSL affair. Actually, there is a place for ISDN (it's quite a step up from ordinary phone lines). After the years spent promoting ISDN - if someone who bought it now switches to broadband - guess what - Eircom rip out the ISDN and put in a bog standard phone line! Now, for those non-techies out there - ISDN is a different way to use your phone line. It's digital - even for voice. There is a special error-correction channel also. So, in more sensible countries, like Germany, DSL is often provided across ISDN lines (offering much better Quality of Service, higher speeds, etc.). Note I say DSL - DSL is the generic term - the "A" in our ADSL stands for "Analogue". It's painful that they don't at least offer both services. Ennis, the "Information Age Town" (remember?) was all kitted out, the WHOLE TOWN, with ISDN. Guess what happens if you sign up for ADSL there? Yep, they rip out the ISDN and put in the inferior standard analogue line. ARGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!! User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 18:15, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) Actually, it stands for Asymetric. And always has. "DSL" over ISDN isn't DSL, as such. DSL can only be implemented over PSTN (analogue phones). "DSL" over ISDN is closer to E1 standards. :The point is that it's preferable, it's a retrograde step to remove ISDN and replace with PSTN. Thanks for pointing out the error about the acronym though! User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 13:13, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC) == More problems with Eircom == I actually want to add more complaints about Eircom. Here's one. Line quality. An astounding rumour I have heard (I'd like it substantiated, as it seems likely) is that when ComReg was set up and QoS levels set for Eircom - they removed all dial-up obligations!!! Apparently Eircom previously had to ensure that the line quality was at least good enough for a measly (9600baud?) connection. Now, all they have to provide is sufficient quality for voice. :AFAIK they didn't remove the obligation for internet traffic, they just reduced it. They reduced it to 0. It's still technically there, but it's pointless. ;) ____ User:Ebelular 00:53, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC) The following is not rumour. Lots of lines around the country are degrading, to such a level that dial-up is only acheivable at speeds way below 56k. In fact, some subscribers have difficulty connecting at all!!! We have this situation at home. Another person I know has the same problem in a rural area in Co. Cork. Again, the worse the line quality is, the more money Eircom make. Every failed connection attempt is another phone call - oh - and didn't they raise the minimum call duration to 5 mins? So 3 times attempting to connect on dialup = 15 minutes call time. Lovely. So yes - I will be adding this issue - once I can coherently address it. Feel free to comment - or add your own experiences with a company that makes BT look like angels. (Not that Eircom haven't been taking lessons - the broadband trigger facade is a carbon-copy - except BT didn't have the audacity to set them at IMPOSSIBLE levels - just improbable levels). User:Zoney 20:58, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC) == Is this article still POV? == I don't see any need for the NPOV header here anymore - the article has been toned down a lot since it was slapped on, or so it seems. User:Kiand 01:55, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) :Agreed - the original proposer has given very little input since proposal User:Djegan 20:34, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Outrightly improper additions == I will be first to say that it's hard to write about Eircom in a neutral (read "nice") fashion. I mean, essentially :''by bloodsucking their customers by having them in a stranglehold. Also, they're a shower of thieving greedy bastards.'' is entirely accurate. However, common sense should dictate we refrain from such obviously improper additions. There's still the problem that the more (entirely true and factual) details we include, and the more the article is expanded, the worse Eircom looks. I mean, there is NO possible way the broadband trickery can be presented in a good or neutral light. They are outright LYING to the whole Irish public, the government, and their shareholders. I certainly hope the next EU survey shows us bottom of the 25 for broadband (of course, we are already in the bottom ten in the latest such survey, even including the new members!!!) Any suggestions? User:Zoney ♣ User talk:Zoney 21:11, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC) == This article is still really POV == I mean, they may well be profiteering bastards, but half of this article is a rant on their prices, quality, customer service, etc... really not neutral. --User:Ce garcon 05:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) :It's hard to write about them in a neutral way, as just about EVERY fact is stacked against them. There's no POV about it. They are a bunch of profiteering blood-sucking pigs. I did remove the language that was written in that fashion - but the facts show it regardless. :Along with the ineptitude of the Irish Government and Comreg they are responsible for Ireland having the third lowest broadband takeup in the EU25. Although that was in an EU survey about a month or two ago, so we are probably last now. :They continue not to repair the one in four faulty lines connected to broadband-enabled exchanges (urban areas only) and the quality of the non-broadband enabled areas' (mostly rural) lines is most certainly worse. Unfortunately it is now the case that Eircom only have to provide basic voice service - so even if dialup doesn't work - too bad. :There are all manner of relevant facts that don't reflect well on Eircom. For example - their monopoly on the ISP access no.s (even if with another telco for phone line, and a non-Eircom ISP, one's ISP access rates are dictated by Eircom). :Their latest tomfoolery is to charge other telcos €1.50 p.m. for 999 calls. There's agreement that it's fair enough charging other telcos for the service, but €1.50 per minute is absurdly high. :I could go on ad-nauseum, and have actually restrained myself from flooding the article with more facts about Eircom (as I realise there is a presentation problem in the article). But do not be under any illusions that we can hide the truth under the guise of NPOV. To do so is not neutral. :User:Zoney ♣ User talk:Zoney 11:29, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) : NPOV is fine but that is not the same as having to give reasons or excuses for someone or somethings shortcomings or failures, or to paint something with a totally false persona. Wikipedia does not have to be an apologist for the smallest or greatest crimes in history - tell it as it is, if you think its misleading expand and explain as to why. Too often raising pov issues is just a hidden agenda to promote somthing. : User:Djegan 13:06, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Lower case "e" == eircom's corporate branding would have it that the company name is always spelled with a lower case "e". Should we honour this in the article title and throughout? --User:Ryano 17:03, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) : You have a good point - might be worth mentioning in the article - their is a policy on this Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)? User:Djegan 18:20, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) == possible way forward on the pov problem == This article is ''very'' pov - criticism is implicit, if not explicit, in almost every sentence. Contributors should have a look at the Microsoft article. I think this does a good job giving a npov account of a much-vilified corporation. Criticisms are reported (not levelled) only in the section devoted to them, and only criticisms which have been well - documented are accounted - not whatever annoys any given contributor. There is material here for a decent eircom article, so we should try to match that with good, unbiased writing ::I agree that this article must be npov'ed as it has perhaps become somewhat of a soundboard against the company. User:Djegan 18:10, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Eircom:
Eircom
Eircom
Eircom_First_Division
Eircom_Football_League_of_Ireland
Eircom_League
Eircom_Premier_League
Eircom
eircom, formerly Telecom Éireann, is the former State telecommunications operator of Ireland. As Telecom Éireann, the company was a state monopoly; as a private company it continues to dominate many telecommunications areas, its main competitor being Esat BT. eircom currently operates the fixed-line telephone network, act as an internet service provider (ISP) ''eircom.net'', and operate a property alarm installation and montioring unit called ''eircom Phonewatch''. An analogue TACS and a digital GSM network operation in Ireland, started as Eircell, was once owned by eircom. It is now run by Vodafone. eircom now has a 44% share of the Irish telecoms market. ==Privatisation== Due to European Union laws requiring the opening up of the Irish telecommunications market, eircom was privatised, a process which began in 1995, and by July 1999 the government had disposed of virtually all of its shareholding [http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/57/2510988.pdf]. eircom was then floated on the Dublin, New York and London stock exchanges on July 8 1999 and small/first-time investors were encouraged by the Irish Government to buy shares. The eircom flotation is considered to have been an example of a stock market bubble - after the initial hype of the flotation died down, the stock price fell rapidly. Many of the 500,000 small investors were angered by the significant financial loss they incurred, blaming the government for not sufficiently warning them of the risks inherent in stock market investment. Mary O'Rourke, as the minister responsible for eircom, lost her seat in the 2002 Irish general election largely because of this public anger over the eircom flotation. ==Competition== While eircom retains a virtual monopoly on fixed line telephony in the State (the only exception being those operated by cable company NTL - Chorus previously offered wireless telephony but failed to renew their licence) it is required to allow carrier pre-selection (CPS). Introduced in Ireland in 2001, CPS allows subscribers to use an alternative provider for all their calls, without the need to dial indirect access codes or numbers, although they still receive a bill from eircom for line rental. However, under a wholesale line rental scheme, it will now be possible for customers, especially business ones, to have a single bill from an alternative provider, rather than continuing to receive one from eircom. ==Criticisms of eircom== Ireland continues to lag behind in terms of broadband availability. As of 2004, eircom's PR division runs near-daily advertisements for broadband connections on national media. It has been suggested that this is more to ensure that politicians, local community groups and the public at large feel that Ireland is being connected, rather than advertise available services (A large part of the population cannot take up the broadband deals). Before eircom announced ADSL it started a telemarketing campaign aimed at customers who spent large amounts of time on dial-up access connections to persuade them to subscribe to ISDN - an old inferior technology. This technology, which is not available in all areas is an alternative, albeit expensive option, in some areas where broadband is not available and ISDN is. eircom, like most ISPs, has been accused of failing to prevent E-mail spam. eircom have introduced a spam/virus filtering service called email protector. However, it is a subscription service of €2 extra per month. eircom's corpoprate structure has been subject to criticism in recent years, with accusations of poor management and overstaffing levelled at it. After the privatisation of eircom, the highly profitable mobile phone division, Eircell, was sold to Vodafone. Some consider this act to be asset stripping by the large investors with interests in eircom. ==Broadband Roll-out== After a slow start broadband subscriber numbers started to pick up in 2004 when eircom cut the price for the basic DSL service and launched an intensive television advertising campaign. eircom predict 100,000 DSL connection by year end 2004 and promise to announce ambitious further growth targets in 2005. They have stated that their strategy is to strongly grow broadband user numbers and re-enter the mobile market. Copying a similar scheme to that used by BT in the UK, they have introduced a trigger scheme for DSL enabling their smaller exchanges based on numbers of users committing to sign-up for service. BT has now discontinued this scheme, and is moving to upgrade all remaining exchanges in the UK to ADSL during 2005, (including Northern Ireland, which has the highest number of exchanges upgraded to broadband in the UK). ==See also== * Communications in Ireland * List of Irish companies ==External links== * [http://www.eircom.ie Official site] * [http://www.eircomtribunal.com eircomTribunal] * [http://www.comwreck.com/blog_20_may12.html eircom Broadband Trickster Programme] Communications companies of Ireland
Eircom
I've just deleted a section here entitled "eircom's profiteering", in which it was confidently asserted that eircom did nothing about spam as a way of getting more dialup minutes and boosting profits. This is biased and misleading, as is a lot of this article. I personally opposed the privatisation of eircom, but how can one repeatedly refer to this event as a "fiasco" in an objective article? It was not good for people who lost money in the end, but that is what speculating on the stock exchange can involve. The proceeds from the initial sale were invested in the national pension fund for the beefit of all irish workers. Before the privatisation the company was a semi-state, with a large stake in the company held by Telia and KPN. Prevarication by the owners of this stake, and the crash in the telecoms sector led to the negative outcome in terms of share price when the company was bought be a private entity in 2002. The company was floated again in 2004, yielding a large return to its private investors. :It is very improper to delete a whole paragraph and then classify the remainder as ''disputed'' - what parts in the reminder of the article are disputed or are you disputing your own changes? the remainder is quite factual and to the point - moreover if you believe that the article is "biased and misleading", then please feel free to Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages - again it must be said that the remainder, very little of which has been edited, is neither advocacy nor propaganda referring to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. It is well known, in Ireland, that Eircom has not embraced the same spirit that Telecom Eireann had which transformed Irish telecommunications in the late 1980s and early 1990s - open any Irish newspaper which does not have significant advertising revenue from Eircom and see the lack of investment, initiative and forward looking. User:Djegan 14:39, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC) :: I have reverted the "eircom's profiteering" which was removed - whilst I did not write it I do not believe it is misleading and should be edited for correction rather than deletion - a large section of the material is quite correct, certainly the first paragraph. Ireland is at least 5 years behind Europe in terms of broadband availabilty and Eircom as that national telecommunications company must bear some responsibility. Former state compananies, both Ireland and abroad, often find it difficult to accept market conditions. User:Djegan == Response to bias allegations == As the original author of the admittedly rather nasty piece, I've attempted to edit it for tone. Djegen is right however, the actual content is true. I have edited to point out the bits that are simply "assumptions" - but they are rather valid assumptions/allegations, based on "Eircom wants to make money". As a dominant company, with a virtual monopoly, they do not play fair to acheive the profit. This is not made up. I hope the piece is a bit more careful, and if you have problems with it, then do please edit - but it should not be removed en-masse. User:Zoney 20:50, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC) I'm new to wiki, so apologies for wholesale paragraph removal. What I can't understand is innacurate statements such as "The majority of Eircom's revenue now comes from dial-up internet charges." being included in something that claims to be factual and neutral. Can you substantiate this claim? Where did you get it from? :No - I don't have specific sources, it's something I've seen in the media though - and I find it quite believable - the 5 minute minimum call duration makes them a packet now. Don't forget, if you sign up with IOL, UTV, anyone, mostly it is Eircom who get the dial-up phone rates. (Even yet, few people go for the option of Eircom line rental and Esat/whoever call charges - although I believe one does only get one bill now with that arrangement). By and large, Eircom still have a monopoly on the actual phone service connecting people to the Internet (even if they are not the only ISP). It perhaps isn't clear that I'm not referring to them making the majority of their money from the ISP role - it's from the telco role - i.e. call charges for dial-up. But yes - a source is needed - I'll get around to looking for one at some stage. User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 13:58, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) :Welcome to wikipedia, it goes without saying that Eircom is uncompetitive, is Wikipedia about citing every source - could one ever critise a large corporation or government this way? To illustrate, remember "Eircom hi-speed", this is/was a rather disingenuous attempt by Eircom to introduce a "high speed" ISDN product. This product was heavily marketed to the public at a time when most Western Countries were at an advanced stage of introducing ASDL, a fairly superior product, and in many of these countries ISDN has long been considered an obsolete technology. Similarly dial-up ISP services ''are'' more expensive than similar services offered in other countries, and are often limited in terms of online hours - their is a limited number of providers of flat rate tariffs. Eircom as a significant market force and must bear some responsibility, like ma bell had to. User:Djegan 17:50, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) ::Oh yes. (rubs hands with glee). I forgot to mention the nonsense over the whole ISDN/ADSL affair. Actually, there is a place for ISDN (it's quite a step up from ordinary phone lines). After the years spent promoting ISDN - if someone who bought it now switches to broadband - guess what - Eircom rip out the ISDN and put in a bog standard phone line! Now, for those non-techies out there - ISDN is a different way to use your phone line. It's digital - even for voice. There is a special error-correction channel also. So, in more sensible countries, like Germany, DSL is often provided across ISDN lines (offering much better Quality of Service, higher speeds, etc.). Note I say DSL - DSL is the generic term - the "A" in our ADSL stands for "Analogue". It's painful that they don't at least offer both services. Ennis, the "Information Age Town" (remember?) was all kitted out, the WHOLE TOWN, with ISDN. Guess what happens if you sign up for ADSL there? Yep, they rip out the ISDN and put in the inferior standard analogue line. ARGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!! User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 18:15, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) Actually, it stands for Asymetric. And always has. "DSL" over ISDN isn't DSL, as such. DSL can only be implemented over PSTN (analogue phones). "DSL" over ISDN is closer to E1 standards. :The point is that it's preferable, it's a retrograde step to remove ISDN and replace with PSTN. Thanks for pointing out the error about the acronym though! User:Zoney ███ User talk:Zoney 13:13, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC) == More problems with Eircom == I actually want to add more complaints about Eircom. Here's one. Line quality. An astounding rumour I have heard (I'd like it substantiated, as it seems likely) is that when ComReg was set up and QoS levels set for Eircom - they removed all dial-up obligations!!! Apparently Eircom previously had to ensure that the line quality was at least good enough for a measly (9600baud?) connection. Now, all they have to provide is sufficient quality for voice. :AFAIK they didn't remove the obligation for internet traffic, they just reduced it. They reduced it to 0. It's still technically there, but it's pointless. ;) ____ User:Ebelular 00:53, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC) The following is not rumour. Lots of lines around the country are degrading, to such a level that dial-up is only acheivable at speeds way below 56k. In fact, some subscribers have difficulty connecting at all!!! We have this situation at home. Another person I know has the same problem in a rural area in Co. Cork. Again, the worse the line quality is, the more money Eircom make. Every failed connection attempt is another phone call - oh - and didn't they raise the minimum call duration to 5 mins? So 3 times attempting to connect on dialup = 15 minutes call time. Lovely. So yes - I will be adding this issue - once I can coherently address it. Feel free to comment - or add your own experiences with a company that makes BT look like angels. (Not that Eircom haven't been taking lessons - the broadband trigger facade is a carbon-copy - except BT didn't have the audacity to set them at IMPOSSIBLE levels - just improbable levels). User:Zoney 20:58, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC) == Is this article still POV? == I don't see any need for the NPOV header here anymore - the article has been toned down a lot since it was slapped on, or so it seems. User:Kiand 01:55, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) :Agreed - the original proposer has given very little input since proposal User:Djegan 20:34, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC) == Outrightly improper additions == I will be first to say that it's hard to write about Eircom in a neutral (read "nice") fashion. I mean, essentially :''by bloodsucking their customers by having them in a stranglehold. Also, they're a shower of thieving greedy bastards.'' is entirely accurate. However, common sense should dictate we refrain from such obviously improper additions. There's still the problem that the more (entirely true and factual) details we include, and the more the article is expanded, the worse Eircom looks. I mean, there is NO possible way the broadband trickery can be presented in a good or neutral light. They are outright LYING to the whole Irish public, the government, and their shareholders. I certainly hope the next EU survey shows us bottom of the 25 for broadband (of course, we are already in the bottom ten in the latest such survey, even including the new members!!!) Any suggestions? User:Zoney ♣ User talk:Zoney 21:11, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC) == This article is still really POV == I mean, they may well be profiteering bastards, but half of this article is a rant on their prices, quality, customer service, etc... really not neutral. --User:Ce garcon 05:13, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) :It's hard to write about them in a neutral way, as just about EVERY fact is stacked against them. There's no POV about it. They are a bunch of profiteering blood-sucking pigs. I did remove the language that was written in that fashion - but the facts show it regardless. :Along with the ineptitude of the Irish Government and Comreg they are responsible for Ireland having the third lowest broadband takeup in the EU25. Although that was in an EU survey about a month or two ago, so we are probably last now. :They continue not to repair the one in four faulty lines connected to broadband-enabled exchanges (urban areas only) and the quality of the non-broadband enabled areas' (mostly rural) lines is most certainly worse. Unfortunately it is now the case that Eircom only have to provide basic voice service - so even if dialup doesn't work - too bad. :There are all manner of relevant facts that don't reflect well on Eircom. For example - their monopoly on the ISP access no.s (even if with another telco for phone line, and a non-Eircom ISP, one's ISP access rates are dictated by Eircom). :Their latest tomfoolery is to charge other telcos €1.50 p.m. for 999 calls. There's agreement that it's fair enough charging other telcos for the service, but €1.50 per minute is absurdly high. :I could go on ad-nauseum, and have actually restrained myself from flooding the article with more facts about Eircom (as I realise there is a presentation problem in the article). But do not be under any illusions that we can hide the truth under the guise of NPOV. To do so is not neutral. :User:Zoney ♣ User talk:Zoney 11:29, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) : NPOV is fine but that is not the same as having to give reasons or excuses for someone or somethings shortcomings or failures, or to paint something with a totally false persona. Wikipedia does not have to be an apologist for the smallest or greatest crimes in history - tell it as it is, if you think its misleading expand and explain as to why. Too often raising pov issues is just a hidden agenda to promote somthing. : User:Djegan 13:06, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Lower case "e" == eircom's corporate branding would have it that the company name is always spelled with a lower case "e". Should we honour this in the article title and throughout? --User:Ryano 17:03, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) : You have a good point - might be worth mentioning in the article - their is a policy on this Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions)? User:Djegan 18:20, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) == possible way forward on the pov problem == This article is ''very'' pov - criticism is implicit, if not explicit, in almost every sentence. Contributors should have a look at the Microsoft article. I think this does a good job giving a npov account of a much-vilified corporation. Criticisms are reported (not levelled) only in the section devoted to them, and only criticisms which have been well - documented are accounted - not whatever annoys any given contributor. There is material here for a decent eircom article, so we should try to match that with good, unbiased writing ::I agree that this article must be npov'ed as it has perhaps become somewhat of a soundboard against the company. User:Djegan 18:10, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
E
EA | EB | EC | ED | EF | EG | EH | EI | EJ | EK | EL | EM | EN | EO | EP | ER | ES | ET | EU | EW | EX | EY | EZ |Words begining with Eircom:
Eircom
Eircom
Eircom_First_Division
Eircom_Football_League_of_Ireland
Eircom_League
Eircom_Premier_League
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
