Ah, Ryanair... donchya lovem?
First of all last week, there was the story about charging a pound to use their inflight toilets. Next, I came across this posting, from a web developer called Jason Roe. He posted on his blog about a bug he'd found in the Ryanair booking system. He then had the joy and pleasure of someone calling themselves "Ryanair staff" posting comments:
"...You didn’t actually discover a bug on bookryanair.You changed some numbers on your own screen tricking yourself into thinking that you could get a free flight, without actually succeeding.
Well known for years, and many others have tried it, ending up paying the full price for the flights after all.All good income for Ryanair..."
and my personal favorite:
"...If you would work in your pathetic life on a such big project in a such busy environment with so little resources, you would know that the most important is to have usual user behavior scenarios working rather than spending time on improbable and harmless things.
We very well know about these anomalies and unless it is not critical we are not going to sacrifice time to this.If you would be a serious programmer you would know these things and would not post any of this on the web if you would think it can cause us troubles, but you would report to us directly.Even you did not discover anything major you are still trying to benefit from this.
If I would be you I would think of consequences this can have..."
Now, apart from the really obvious things that are wrong (threatening a potential customer, being personal and vindictive etc etc), all of this pails into insignificance when it comes their official response to the issue:
http://www.travolution.co.uk/blog/2009/02/ryanair-doesnt-want-anything-t.php
"Stephen McNamara from Ryanair said:"Ryanair can confirm that a Ryanair staff member did engage in a blog discussion."It is Ryanair policy not to waste time and energy corresponding with idiot bloggers and Ryanair can confirm that it won't be happening again."Lunatic bloggers can have the blog sphere all to themselves as our people are far too busy driving down the cost of air travel".
I think those prophetic words of wisdom will come back to haunt, both Mr McNamara, and Ryanair's infamous cavalier attitude to the flying public.
Monday, 2 March 2009
Tuesday, 17 February 2009
Sorry, not been posting here for a while (family reasons).
Anyway, back again now.... and for everyone who believes the user generated content is a good thing, here's a great product review from Amazon.com - the Bic pen!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B000JTOYLS/ref=cm_cr_pr_redirect?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0
Remember, it's not always a good thing to take what complete strangers say as truthful or serious.
Anyway, back again now.... and for everyone who believes the user generated content is a good thing, here's a great product review from Amazon.com - the Bic pen!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B000JTOYLS/ref=cm_cr_pr_redirect?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0
Remember, it's not always a good thing to take what complete strangers say as truthful or serious.
Monday, 3 November 2008
Fly me to the dole office
Oh dear, another hoo ha all about employees posting what some might think is inappropriate content on Facebook. This time Virgin Atlantic and British Airways staff saying mean things about passengers and planes.
(I have to say, I probably agree - a lot of passengers smell and yes, a lot are indeed "chavs". However, if your job is to deal with the general public on a daily basis, this may not come as a complete shock. And if this is a source of complaint, then maybe working in customer service is not an ideal career path. But I digress...)
What I find most interesting is that it's still making the news. Google had 121 sites listed today about the BA and Virgin cases for instance. Surely there have been enough similar instances for both employers and employees to understand how these things work - to know what is appropriate, and what is not; to know what is a reasonable response, and what is draconian.
The BA group on Facebook that seems to cause all the furore is actually a "closed" group, requiring moderated viewing. As it's not for general public consumption, and presumably closed off to non BA employees, does this make it a private work space? Arguably not, but BA's actions have made the whole issue a very public one, so have they managed to achieve at least some of their original objectives of reputational management?
To be honest, if I were BA I'd be a little more concerned with the group titled "STOP BRITISH AIRWAYS SELLING IT'S CABIN CREW!!!", a public group that is a bit of a focal point for Project Columbus, the apparent cabin crew outsourcing project. Or how about "British Airways Surfboard Ban" that currently has over 14,000 members and growing.
And while I'm up here on my soapbox, how about the groups "VIRGIN ATLANTIC HOSTIES", "The girls of Virgin Atlantic! On the ground and up in the skies!" or even "The Boys of Virgin Atlantic". Hoping that Virgin Atlantic HR and legal teams are scouring through the employee handbook about discrimination and fairness....
The point is the line between work and personal is becoming increasingly blurred: arguably it always was. But now, the blurring is much more publicly, and both companies and employees are finding it hard to define clear boundaries, and to handle (inadvertent) transgressions.
Maybe it would have been easier to ask the particular employees to delete their postings, reminding them of their work obligations, rather than fire them and feed the frenzy. Collaborative working through of these grey areas helps both parties define where their responsibilities lie, and should ultimately give a more workable code of conduct that everyone can understand and follow.
Well, enough from me. Am off to recommend "RIO SUCKS FOR BANNING FACEBOOK!" to all my colleagues.
(I have to say, I probably agree - a lot of passengers smell and yes, a lot are indeed "chavs". However, if your job is to deal with the general public on a daily basis, this may not come as a complete shock. And if this is a source of complaint, then maybe working in customer service is not an ideal career path. But I digress...)
What I find most interesting is that it's still making the news. Google had 121 sites listed today about the BA and Virgin cases for instance. Surely there have been enough similar instances for both employers and employees to understand how these things work - to know what is appropriate, and what is not; to know what is a reasonable response, and what is draconian.
The BA group on Facebook that seems to cause all the furore is actually a "closed" group, requiring moderated viewing. As it's not for general public consumption, and presumably closed off to non BA employees, does this make it a private work space? Arguably not, but BA's actions have made the whole issue a very public one, so have they managed to achieve at least some of their original objectives of reputational management?
To be honest, if I were BA I'd be a little more concerned with the group titled "STOP BRITISH AIRWAYS SELLING IT'S CABIN CREW!!!", a public group that is a bit of a focal point for Project Columbus, the apparent cabin crew outsourcing project. Or how about "British Airways Surfboard Ban" that currently has over 14,000 members and growing.
And while I'm up here on my soapbox, how about the groups "VIRGIN ATLANTIC HOSTIES", "The girls of Virgin Atlantic! On the ground and up in the skies!" or even "The Boys of Virgin Atlantic". Hoping that Virgin Atlantic HR and legal teams are scouring through the employee handbook about discrimination and fairness....
The point is the line between work and personal is becoming increasingly blurred: arguably it always was. But now, the blurring is much more publicly, and both companies and employees are finding it hard to define clear boundaries, and to handle (inadvertent) transgressions.
Maybe it would have been easier to ask the particular employees to delete their postings, reminding them of their work obligations, rather than fire them and feed the frenzy. Collaborative working through of these grey areas helps both parties define where their responsibilities lie, and should ultimately give a more workable code of conduct that everyone can understand and follow.
Well, enough from me. Am off to recommend "RIO SUCKS FOR BANNING FACEBOOK!" to all my colleagues.
Friday, 10 October 2008
Widget Expo
I was one of the speakers (graveyard slot! *hmph*) earlier this month at Widget Web Expo London, where I whittered on about widgets and gadgets in an enterprise, corporate world.
The most interesting thing (apart from my pearly words of widsom, natch) was the direction that many of the delegates thought the internet would be taking, in particular that widgets were something new that would change the way we all interacted.
Hmm...
We were using this techology at Rio Tinto years ago, through our Plumtree Portal implementation. Plumtree was reliant on "portlets" for users to build intranet communities, which visitors could then view in situ, or tear off and add to their own customised pages.
Sound familiar?
Well, unfortunately it didn't change the way users interacted with the company intranet. In many ways it was a barrier, and over time the portal fell out of use, although to be fair I think the concept was unfamiliar to people, and our implementation could have been more robust.
We've now replaced Plumtree, and our new portal platform is proving much more successful.
And just to prove that things never really go out of fashion, we're looking at ways of integrating widget technologies into our new portal.
As they say, wait around long enough, stuff just comes back into fashion.
The most interesting thing (apart from my pearly words of widsom, natch) was the direction that many of the delegates thought the internet would be taking, in particular that widgets were something new that would change the way we all interacted.
Hmm...
We were using this techology at Rio Tinto years ago, through our Plumtree Portal implementation. Plumtree was reliant on "portlets" for users to build intranet communities, which visitors could then view in situ, or tear off and add to their own customised pages.
Sound familiar?
Well, unfortunately it didn't change the way users interacted with the company intranet. In many ways it was a barrier, and over time the portal fell out of use, although to be fair I think the concept was unfamiliar to people, and our implementation could have been more robust.
We've now replaced Plumtree, and our new portal platform is proving much more successful.
And just to prove that things never really go out of fashion, we're looking at ways of integrating widget technologies into our new portal.
As they say, wait around long enough, stuff just comes back into fashion.
Wednesday, 13 August 2008
Our peers get updated
Interesting to see that our peers BHP Billiton* and Anglo American both recently refresh their public websites. And even more interesting was how they've gone for a similar, more "web 2.0" look and feel. Well, you know what I mean.... some chroming on the menus, some fades on solid backgrounds, lots of big hi res photos.
Both have also gone for the "feature story" splash approach, trying to grab visitor attention on something interesting.
Hmmm nice big hi res photos on the home page you say? Prominent feature content? Wonder where that came from.
* just in case you didn't know, and it's important that I tell you, BHP Billiton recently made a preconditional offer for Rio Tinto.
Both have also gone for the "feature story" splash approach, trying to grab visitor attention on something interesting.
Hmmm nice big hi res photos on the home page you say? Prominent feature content? Wonder where that came from.
* just in case you didn't know, and it's important that I tell you, BHP Billiton recently made a preconditional offer for Rio Tinto.
Friday, 8 August 2008
Dear "One born every minute Co.,Ltd"
Working in a company that's spread around the world, with thousands of domain names under our control, we're not immune to the occassional registration spammer from some internet cafe in the Far East.
Most of them in the same format...
Dear [insert any old name here],
We received a formal application from a company who is called AoMeiXin Investment Co.,Ltd are applying to register "[insert domain we've picked up using a whois bot]" as their domain name and Internet keyword in China and also in Asia on August 6, 2008. During our auditing procedure we find out that the alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd has no trade mark, brand nor patent even similar to that word. As authorized anti-cybersquatting organization we hereby suspect the alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd to be a domain grabber. Hence we need you confirmation for two things,
First of all, whether this alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd is your business partner or distributor in China.
Secondly, whether you are interested in registering these domains. (The alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd will be entitled to obtain a domain not needed by original trademark owner.)
If you are not in charge of this please transfer this email to appropriate dept.
This is a letter for confirmation. If the mentioned third party is your business partner or distributor in China please DO NOT reply. We will automatically confirm application from your business partner after this audit procedure.
Bst Rgs
Mark Li
Registration Commissioner
Tel: +0086-10-82771675-602 +0086-10-82772510-602
Fax: +0086-10-82771640
Email: mark@bj-hkzc.com.cn
Http://www.bj-hk.com
The most annoying thing about these people is that they just seem to use the same email template, modify a few bits and pieces, and send it out ad nauseam. They all even share same grammatical and spelling mistakes. Personally, I find it slightly offensive that they think I'd be stupid enough not to notice....
Some fun stuff here about this http://successfulsoftware.net/2008/04/19/chinese-domain-scam/ In fact, there's lots of fun stuff on all sorts of forums on the interweb - just Google it.
I've been getting 2 or 3 a week now from our business around the Group, and our legal teams have drafted up a rather pithy email response which we send out. See, lawyers *do* have a reason to be on this earth after all.
Most of them in the same format...
Dear [insert any old name here],
We received a formal application from a company who is called AoMeiXin Investment Co.,Ltd are applying to register "[insert domain we've picked up using a whois bot]" as their domain name and Internet keyword in China and also in Asia on August 6, 2008. During our auditing procedure we find out that the alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd has no trade mark, brand nor patent even similar to that word. As authorized anti-cybersquatting organization we hereby suspect the alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd to be a domain grabber. Hence we need you confirmation for two things,
First of all, whether this alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd is your business partner or distributor in China.
Secondly, whether you are interested in registering these domains. (The alleged Meiao Investment Co.,Ltd will be entitled to obtain a domain not needed by original trademark owner.)
If you are not in charge of this please transfer this email to appropriate dept.
This is a letter for confirmation. If the mentioned third party is your business partner or distributor in China please DO NOT reply. We will automatically confirm application from your business partner after this audit procedure.
Bst Rgs
Mark Li
Registration Commissioner
Tel: +0086-10-82771675-602 +0086-10-82772510-602
Fax: +0086-10-82771640
Email: mark@bj-hkzc.com.cn
Http://www.bj-hk.com
The most annoying thing about these people is that they just seem to use the same email template, modify a few bits and pieces, and send it out ad nauseam. They all even share same grammatical and spelling mistakes. Personally, I find it slightly offensive that they think I'd be stupid enough not to notice....
Some fun stuff here about this http://successfulsoftware.net/2008/04/19/chinese-domain-scam/ In fact, there's lots of fun stuff on all sorts of forums on the interweb - just Google it.
I've been getting 2 or 3 a week now from our business around the Group, and our legal teams have drafted up a rather pithy email response which we send out. See, lawyers *do* have a reason to be on this earth after all.
Wednesday, 18 June 2008
Tag. You're it
Branding is prominent in the comms team at the moment here are work. We're all busy implementing our new visual identity, and there's a load of people doing work in internal engagement and so on.
Interesting to come across this site - Brandtags.net - which allows people to tag various well known consumer brands with the values and attributes they think are most appropriate.
Some very interesting things going on - check out SAP for instance. We're loving that one of the main brand associations is "??" Go figure.
(and no, we're not on there, so don't try)
Interesting to come across this site - Brandtags.net - which allows people to tag various well known consumer brands with the values and attributes they think are most appropriate.
Some very interesting things going on - check out SAP for instance. We're loving that one of the main brand associations is "??" Go figure.
(and no, we're not on there, so don't try)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)