mikeinnc wrote on Mar 13^th, 2006 at 3:06am:

I support your objection to premium rate numbers but actually this is NOT a waste of public money as, self-evidently, the call cost will fall on the originator not Red Ken.

A more interesting question will be whether overseas callers - just the sort of chap who could be interested - can actually reach an 0871 code from outside UK?

Quote today from Farci:-

Quote:


Well, your two statements really make my objection to this absolute stupidity clearer. It is not the cost of the call in this case - although I do think it is still an imposition on a potential candidate - that I find so objectionable. As you so rightly confirm, it is the doubt that many of the potential candidates who may actually be very well qualified for this position won't be able to call!! How stupid is that?

As I said in my initial post, I was reading this in the USA. I would assume that (a) the magazine is widely read internationally, and (b) that is the reason the full page advertisment was placed here. So how stupid is it to then put a number that we know cannot reliably be reached from overseas?

trevord wrote on Mar 13^th, 2006 at 5:34pm:


In fact 50% of ECONOMIST readers are in USA and only 15% in UK http://printmediakit.economist.com/Circulation.10.0.html. The ad is correctly targetted at individuals who seek employment worldwide.

All of this means the effectiveness of this ad has been reduced due to sloppy work by the recruitment agency in an attempt to recoup some cash.

Awaiting with interest to know if the number can be called from USA...

farci wrote on Mar 14^th, 2006 at 8:39am:

I stand corrected. 
But I also agree with Andy9, that if the number can fairly readily be called from the USA, then this isn't a major issue - except that it illustrates sloppy thinking by the Mayor's office (no surprise there then  ), and more critically that people just don't realise that there can be difficulty in calling these numbers from abroad and that they are very readily used without thinking as a direct replacement for a geo number.

Yes, I agree - for someone who is likely to want to apply for a position like this, the cost of the call is probably immaterial. However, as I pointed out, a quick and dirty scan of other UK positions advertised showed that this was the ONLY one that had a 087x contact number. However I entirely agree with the sentiments expressed - it shows a sloppy and disinterested approach to detail. If I was interested (which I am certainly not!   ) and I was to call and find I could not get through, what would that say to me?

There were, of course, email and postal addresses shown on the advertisment. However, for a position like this, I think I would first want to call and discuss it with someone - especially if I were applying from overseas. So why take the chance for the pence they are likely to save and publish a number that may be unobtainable from overseas. It just seems a pathetic thing to do!

We do know that these NT numbers are often not available from overseas as a number of international telcos have been badly stung by them. It appears that my provider (VoIP) does include them under the misnomer 'UK - mobile 448 - 0.2136c/min'.  This compares to 'UK - Other 44 - 0.0218c/min'. There is actually a huge list of numbers at the expensive rate - all the mobile numbers, 08x numbers, 07x numbers etc - in fact everything except 44207 and 44208.

Quote:


I was merely saying that the list of UK numbers on my provider's web page only has three "normal" priced examples - 44, 4407 and 44208. I didn't write the list - I am just repeating what is on there. All the other numbers - and there are many, many of them - that start 44xxx are priced at a single "mobile" (premium) rate.

This is a US provider. I don't expect they really care where a call ends up - they just want to indicate what their customers will pay based on the dialled code. Whether the codes are or are not 0207 or 0208 is immaterial. That is the way they are shown on the list.

If you want to see the list, look at www.viatalk.com. If you don't like it, complain to them - but don't shoot the messenger!