Telecom New Zealand to be renamed Spark

Forums › Spark New Zealand › Telecom New Zealand to be renamed Spark

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 23

1937 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

# 993314 24-Feb-2014 13:41

Bung: How would you pronounce it without sounding like that PBX company?

You just open you mouth like this:

mattwnz

15023 posts

Uber Geek

# 993338 24-Feb-2014 14:02

Buzz Bumble:
KiwiNZ:
out of curiosity, you seem a tad heated about the cost, are you a shareholder of the group?

Nope, but at the end of the day the likelihood is that Telecom will use it (and paying the twi who made the decision a big fat bonus) as an excuse to raise prices again - it's always the customer who ends up paying.

And on the topic of the costs involved, in the letterbox today we got a pointless, full colour, glossy postcard telling us that Telecom NZ will be changing their name mid-year, but "nothing will change" (plans, etc. all stay the same).

They're also going to have to redo the signage on all their "free" wif-fi hotspots.

Better start collecting "Telecom NZ" labelled bits and pieces to sell on TradeMe in 15 years time. ;-)

I suspect that the reason they didn't change the logo too, was because it is a watermark on much of their branded hardware out in the wild. So currently all they need to do is stick the new name over the top of the old one. To change all of the branding would cost a lot more. So it is a compromise solution, which means they are stuck with an old logo that looks odd with the new bold in your face font.

Sideface

5151 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 993339 24-Feb-2014 14:04

Bung: How would you pronounce it without sounding like that PBX company?

"The Company Formerly Known As Telecom"

Sideface

MikeB4

14031 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 993356 24-Feb-2014 14:35

Buzz Bumble:
KiwiNZ:
out of curiosity, you seem a tad heated about the cost, are you a shareholder of the group?

Nope, but at the end of the day the likelihood is that Telecom will use it (and paying the twi who made the decision a big fat bonus) as an excuse to raise prices again - it's always the customer who ends up paying.

And on the topic of the costs involved, in the letterbox today we got a pointless, full colour, glossy postcard telling us that Telecom NZ will be changing their name mid-year, but "nothing will change" (plans, etc. all stay the same).

They're also going to have to redo the signage on all their "free" wif-fi hotspots.

Better start collecting "Telecom NZ" labelled bits and pieces to sell on TradeMe in 15 years time. ;-)

As a shareholder maybe I should suggest there be a charge on the Free WiFi hotspots.

I very much doubt the $20Million will impact on pricing

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Using empathy takes no energy and can gain so much. Try it.

trig42

Banana?
4803 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

# 993359 24-Feb-2014 14:37

I have no problem with it.

I am sure an extensive Cost-Benefit Analysis was done.

How many customers do Telecom have? Half a million? More? If they can get $4 extra a month out of them on average (and I'd pay $10-$15 a month for a decent streaming service like Netflix) they will have repaid their rebrand within the year.

Their current offerings are competitive, their service is good, their network is good (IMHO and experience).

I just hope their new offerings are good and well thought through (in other words, I hope they have been working on them for a couple of years already).

Spark up!

ilovemusic

1222 posts

Uber Geek

# 993427 24-Feb-2014 16:19

2 people support this post

has anyone noticed that SPARK backwards is KRAPS

Buzz Bumble

332 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

# 993550 24-Feb-2014 19:02

How about:

- "* - the company formally known as Telecom NZ".

- "Splat".

- "Dead bug".

- "Knitter's mess".

;-)

Of course, a quick Google search turns up a lot of "Spark" names already in New Zealand for various things, so they can't even trademark it (at least not without the messy splat symbol attached).

MikeB4

14031 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 993554 24-Feb-2014 19:11

Buzz Bumble: How about:

- "* - the company formally known as Telecom NZ".

- "Splat".

- "Dead bug".

- "Knitter's mess".

;-)

Of course, a quick Google search turns up a lot of "Spark" names already in New Zealand for various things, so they can't even trademark it (at least not without the messy splat symbol attached).

Edit: not bittng anymore

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Using empathy takes no energy and can gain so much. Try it.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
64215 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

# 993555 24-Feb-2014 19:12

One person supports this post

Please no shots at each other in this thread anymore.

My technology disclosure | Digital Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Data Insights, Business Intelligence and Advanced Analytics

Cbfd

306 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 993556 24-Feb-2014 19:13

I think its good tbh - finally people will get the idea that chorus and telecom/spark arent related anymore

Journeyman

587 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 993755 24-Feb-2014 23:36

Journeyman: I think rebranding to Spark is a bit crap, but I think ShowmeTV is worse. TVNZ's marketing for TV2 for all of last year was celebrities saying "Show me drama... Show me comedy... Show me TV2".
Also, ShowTV might be a bit upset.

Really should have called it SparkTV.

Called it!
Telecom's new TV venture name 'confusing'

Two New Zealand companies with similar names to Telecom's newly announced internet television venture, ShowmeTV, say resulting consumer confusion will have "massive implications" on the growth of their businesses.

The directors of Show TV, a direct-to-consumer advertiser, and ShowMe, an online retailer, say neither brand has any involvement with the telecommunications provider's new online television business, which is expected to debut in the next few months.

*snigger*

Buzz Bumble

332 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

# 993866 25-Feb-2014 09:23

They should have simply called it TelecomTV ... or maybe just "Over-priced-and-Dead-in-Three-Years". ;-)

Realistically they shouldn't be doing TV at all. It's almost as silly as when ihug was buying Sky Cinemas. :-\ Companies should stick to the actual business they're meant to be in and not greedily try to "rule the world" / "do everything".

qyiet

454 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

# 993895 25-Feb-2014 09:51

ahmad: Why didn't they just rebrand themselves as *?

Heh.. that would have made finding them in search engines "fun"

Warning: reality may differ from above post

MikeB4

14031 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

# 993932 25-Feb-2014 10:22

Buzz Bumble: They should have simply called it TelecomTV ... or maybe just "Over-priced-and-Dead-in-Three-Years". ;-)

Realistically they shouldn't be doing TV at all. It's almost as silly as when ihug was buying Sky Cinemas. :-\ Companies should stick to the actual business they're meant to be in and not greedily try to "rule the world" / "do everything".

I cannot see a problem, Streaming TV services using their Broadband products is logical, probably why Vodafone is doing it. Diversification is good in business it avoids having all ones eggs in one basket.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Using empathy takes no energy and can gain so much. Try it.

Jarsky

136 posts

Master Geek

# 994008 25-Feb-2014 11:45

One person supports this post

Buzz Bumble: Realistically they shouldn't be doing TV at all. It's almost as silly as when ihug was buying Sky Cinemas. :-\ Companies should stick to the actual business they're meant to be in and not greedily try to "rule the world" / "do everything".

So Apple should never have got into phones/entertainment?
Virgin should never have got into mobile/communication?
Google should have stuck with being a search engine?
Amazon should just stick to selling books?

I dont agree that a company should be restricted to any one sector, if there are opportunities to collaborate in other industries or expand their business.

These days communications are vital to delivering entertainment services, wether that be via satellite, fibre, etc...Why shouldn't they try to capitalise on the profits in the content & service, rather than just the small chunk they're making on providing the connection?

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 23