oopps
ISP - internet service PROTOCOL - wrong!!
3 of 5
I don't think he was trying to mislead people.
He's got a telecoms company, and that company has all the relevant licences. He doesn't specifically have a telephone licence (or whatever it was) because that's not the service he provides - it's not relevant to his product.
His telecoms company is licenced. It's up-and-running - fully certified.
I don't know if he deliberately phrased it cynically to suggest that it was providing other services - maybe! It's possible. But he'd always been quite transparent about precisely what BlueWave does, I don't think he ever intended to go in and say "yep, we have a phone licence." He's quite proud of what he has achieved. Little bit smug, even. And he seems genuinely offended that he was accused of lying.
At worst there could've been a snifter of spin, but I don't think it was malicious at all.
He's got a telecoms company, and that company has all the relevant licences. He doesn't specifically have a telephone licence (or whatever it was) because that's not the service he provides - it's not relevant to his product.
His telecoms company is licenced. It's up-and-running - fully certified.
I don't know if he deliberately phrased it cynically to suggest that it was providing other services - maybe! It's possible. But he'd always been quite transparent about precisely what BlueWave does, I don't think he ever intended to go in and say "yep, we have a phone licence." He's quite proud of what he has achieved. Little bit smug, even. And he seems genuinely offended that he was accused of lying.
At worst there could've been a snifter of spin, but I don't think it was malicious at all.
Oops bit slow on the uptake, just posted on similar points on the "was the rant justified" thread.
Yep the ISP thing was embarassing to watch. Then he started waffling on about "this Protocol" in one of the worst definitions I've ever heard. If you want to act the big man you have to have credibility, this guy had none.
Yep the ISP thing was embarassing to watch. Then he started waffling on about "this Protocol" in one of the worst definitions I've ever heard. If you want to act the big man you have to have credibility, this guy had none.
The point is the phrase 'telecoms operator' is wrong was a deliberately used in a misleading, self-agrandising way to make his company sound more important than it really is.
BE is one of the biggest ISPs in the UK, a million times bigger than Stuart's company, but even Be wouldn't call themselves a 'telecoms operator'.
BT is a telecoms operator, Orange is a telecoms operator, an ISP is not and nether is Stuart's little IT company.
BE is one of the biggest ISPs in the UK, a million times bigger than Stuart's company, but even Be wouldn't call themselves a 'telecoms operator'.
BT is a telecoms operator, Orange is a telecoms operator, an ISP is not and nether is Stuart's little IT company.
Originally Posted by TCD1975:
“And yet on previous series of The Apprentice someone has fabricated a degree and still gone on to win the competition.
I think Stuart is a complete tit but it was a transparent set up job. He was (underservedly) put through last week purely so that he could be shot down in flames this week.”
“And yet on previous series of The Apprentice someone has fabricated a degree and still gone on to win the competition.
I think Stuart is a complete tit but it was a transparent set up job. He was (underservedly) put through last week purely so that he could be shot down in flames this week.”
Yes, thats spot on
Originally Posted by diary_room:
“The point is the phrase 'telecoms operator' is wrong was a deliberately used in a misleading, self-agrandising way to make his company sound more important than it really is.
BE is one of the biggest ISPs in the UK, a million times bigger than Stuart's company, but even Be wouldn't call themselves a 'telecoms operator'.
BT is a telecoms operator, Orange is a telecoms operator, an ISP is not and nether is Stuart's little IT company.”
“The point is the phrase 'telecoms operator' is wrong was a deliberately used in a misleading, self-agrandising way to make his company sound more important than it really is.
BE is one of the biggest ISPs in the UK, a million times bigger than Stuart's company, but even Be wouldn't call themselves a 'telecoms operator'.
BT is a telecoms operator, Orange is a telecoms operator, an ISP is not and nether is Stuart's little IT company.”
Yes but to be fair broadband is a telecommunication service. It's only because people associate the "tele" bit with telephones they think it has to involve a phone but technically BE is a telecommunications operator (although I agree they would refer to themselves as an Internet Service Provider).
You're all wrong.....It's internet service providings 
Incase the joke is lost on some of you, that's what the indian call centre calls it on fonejacker.
Incase the joke is lost on some of you, that's what the indian call centre calls it on fonejacker.
ok, I started this thread, I am going to finish the argument. You cannot provide broadband without a telephone line, therefore he provides a telecoms service, he is regulated by the telecoms regulator and he holds a license.
Stuart made no false claim on his cv.
Stuart made no false claim on his cv.
Originally Posted by Nathan:
“ok, I started this thread, I am going to finish the argument. You cannot provide broadband without a telephone line, therefore he provides a telecoms service, he is regulated by the telecoms regulator and he holds a license.
Stuart made no false claim on his cv.”
“ok, I started this thread, I am going to finish the argument. You cannot provide broadband without a telephone line, therefore he provides a telecoms service, he is regulated by the telecoms regulator and he holds a license.
Stuart made no false claim on his cv.”
No I'm afraid I don't agree. 'Telecoms operator' does not mean you operate in the field of telecommunications. If that was the case, a receptionist could call themselves a 'telecoms operator' because they answer the phone.
No, the reason Bordan and LS got annoyed is because it is a business term for major infrastructure companies like BT and Orange etc. that own and run the very fabric of telecoms. The licencing and obligations are totally different. Therefore Stuart was using misleading terminology in classic 'CV BS' style.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?clien...coms+operators
It may not have been worse than other cases of bigging up your CV but it was factually inaccurate.
As I said above, even a massive ISP like Be cannot go around calling themselves a 'telecoms operator'. Even they are not big enough to do that.
Stuarts company sells broadband. He uses the services of a telcoms operator - he isn't one himself.
Originally Posted by diary_room:
“No I'm afraid I don't agree. 'Telecoms operator' does not mean you operate in the field of telecommunications. If that was the case, a receptionist could call themselves a 'telecoms operator' because they answer the phone.”
“No I'm afraid I don't agree. 'Telecoms operator' does not mean you operate in the field of telecommunications. If that was the case, a receptionist could call themselves a 'telecoms operator' because they answer the phone.”
The argument here seems to be between what is factually correct and adhering to common conventions.
It is a simple fact that Baggs has a licence that allows him to operate as a company supplying telecom products. Thus there was no factual error on his CV.
However, there is a convention that 'telecoms company' is usually applied to companies that own telecoms infrastructure, so it could be argued that he was 'bigging up' what he did. A far lesser offence (if you consider it an offence at all) than outright lies.
All of this is pretty much a red herring, of course, because there is no way this wasn't checked before he was selected as one of the final 16.
Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart
The Brand is in the house.
Oh god here we go.....
I have a question Stuart: On reflection what's your opinion now of Bordan's interview with you, as your fate seemed to have been sealed by it? But as many have pointed out on here, his own statements weren't exactly 100% technically accurate.
Oh god here we go.....
I have a question Stuart: On reflection what's your opinion now of Bordan's interview with you, as your fate seemed to have been sealed by it? But as many have pointed out on here, his own statements weren't exactly 100% technically accurate.
(only watched show last night) My OH said I probably didnt know what I was talking about when it came to the whole ISP thing, and he said it was pobably a buisness term I wasnt aware of!!
Rude!!
Rude!!
Originally Posted by StuartBaggs:
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
I love you.
Originally Posted by NeilyM:
“In 27 years in the IT industry, I have never heard of the term "Internet Service Protocol". Google the term "Internet Service Protocol" - it doesn't exist.
To me, it's unimaginable that anyone so deeply involved with provision of hardware for networks wouldn't know what ISP stands for - it's such a common term.”
“In 27 years in the IT industry, I have never heard of the term "Internet Service Protocol". Google the term "Internet Service Protocol" - it doesn't exist.
To me, it's unimaginable that anyone so deeply involved with provision of hardware for networks wouldn't know what ISP stands for - it's such a common term.”
Me neither. I'm surprised it survived the edit really, to anyone who knows (which you would think would be all of his staff), he made a right idiot of himself.
I expect he's your typical corporate a*se-kisser who doesn't have the first idea about his own industry, he just knows the right a*ses to kiss.
Originally Posted by StuartBaggs:
“Hi Guys.”
“Hi Guys.”
Welcome.
Stuart, you must've spotted his massive cock-up at the time. Didn't you want to pull him up on it?
Originally Posted by StuartBaggs:
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
Please spill - were you in on the dramatic 'great-for-TV' interview/firing debacle?
For the record, you were in my top 3 along with Joanna.
Originally Posted by Jepson:
“However, there is a convention that 'telecoms company' is usually applied to companies that own telecoms infrastructure”
“However, there is a convention that 'telecoms company' is usually applied to companies that own telecoms infrastructure”
I agree with this as a convention. Yet it is important to remember that time and tech. moves on. In the Internet age I could probably become a telecoms operator with 3 servers in the gargage and some virtual resale agreements. Oh, and a license
Even taking the telecoms infrastructure angle, a lot can be done with wireless these days if the terrain is right. A telecoms infrastructure using wireless heavily is still a telecoms infrastructure. Somewhere like the IOM sounds like the perfect place for such a venture to thrive and I'm narked I didn't think of it first. 32 miles end to end, that sounds like a honeypot for a modern tech. telco. I would be quite happy that he does have an infrastructure, and wireless networks still need wired bits somwehere to join things together.
Originally Posted by diary_room:
“As I said above, even a massive ISP like Be cannot go around calling themselves a 'telecoms operator'. Even they are not big enough to do that.”
“As I said above, even a massive ISP like Be cannot go around calling themselves a 'telecoms operator'. Even they are not big enough to do that.”
Yes they can. BE is officially categorised as a telecommunications company by Companies House. Besides, these days BE is merely a marketing brand for one of the world's biggest telecoms operators.
Anyway, being a 'telecoms operator' has nothing to do with size.
Originally Posted by StuartBaggs:
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
“Hi Guys
To clarify a few points for everyone. We hold a licence under the Telecomunications Act on the isle of man. We offer much more than Internet services. I would ask people to read the about us section on our website, we also have telephone numbering issued to us directly by Ofcom.
If in doubt, ask Ofcom who owns the directory enquiries number 118 675.
I hope this helps.
Stuart”
I don't doubt for a minute that you were stitched up at the last minute by SA's so-called professionals.....or even as deep as the MI5 for all we know
Anyway, you made the show for me and are probably going to be the only one memorable this series despite the robotic monotic winner that is finally chosen.
Originally Posted by diary_room:
“As I said above, even a massive ISP like Be cannot go around calling themselves a 'telecoms operator'. Even they are not big enough to do that.”
“As I said above, even a massive ISP like Be cannot go around calling themselves a 'telecoms operator'. Even they are not big enough to do that.”
'Be' aren't actually that big unless you take into consideration the O2 users on their network, and then it is far better to refer to it by their parent companies name, Telefónica, who are a broadband and telecommunications company.
Stuart qualified the size of his company by saying it had a 3 million turnover, that more clearly sets it apart from Telefónica with their €13.533 billion turnover in 2009, than any misapplication of licensing nomenclature.
Fine - if Stuart Baggs comes to you claiming his company is a telecoms operator, and you accept that then good for you. I'm not going to stop you.
I made some huge claims on The Apprentice, and they all checked out with the exception of one sticking point.
I maintain, and have had confirmed by several sources that as per my CV my company is "fully licensed".
The argument over wether or not being an ISP makes you a telecoms provider is a red herring as we don't just do Internet.
We own and operate fixed line telecoms services as well, for instance we also own a directory enquiries number 118 675 (which will be data filled and live Q2 2011), as well as geographic numbering for use with our VoIP services.
As has also been pointed out, we are referenced several times within an Isle of Man Government report http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/governmen...inalreport.pdf
I think / hope it is now widely excepted that the reason I was fired is complete bullshit. Wether or not I will ever receive an apology is another matter.
Don't get me wrong, it was my time to go (in fact the week before would have been about right), but the reason they found wasn't a reason at all. My CV checked out and they had to push a small point home and blow it out of all proportion. A point that is in fact, totally incorrect in the first place.
I hope that people will see I have been the victim here rather than the perpetrator.
s
I maintain, and have had confirmed by several sources that as per my CV my company is "fully licensed".
The argument over wether or not being an ISP makes you a telecoms provider is a red herring as we don't just do Internet.
We own and operate fixed line telecoms services as well, for instance we also own a directory enquiries number 118 675 (which will be data filled and live Q2 2011), as well as geographic numbering for use with our VoIP services.
As has also been pointed out, we are referenced several times within an Isle of Man Government report http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/governmen...inalreport.pdf
I think / hope it is now widely excepted that the reason I was fired is complete bullshit. Wether or not I will ever receive an apology is another matter.
Don't get me wrong, it was my time to go (in fact the week before would have been about right), but the reason they found wasn't a reason at all. My CV checked out and they had to push a small point home and blow it out of all proportion. A point that is in fact, totally incorrect in the first place.
I hope that people will see I have been the victim here rather than the perpetrator.
s
3 of 5
