A possible new logo for the combined companies

They’ve both tried to shaft their customers in the past year by changing their terms and conditions detrimentally, and now it seems that an Orange/T-Mobile superpower is just days away from birth.

The EU have given them authority to fast-track a merger which could happen as soon as this week, in spite of concerns from the OFT and Ofcom. The merger will give the depressing duo a huge 37% share of the UK mobile market, making them comfortably the biggest operator around.

But if you’re an Orange or T-Mobile customer, what do you think it will mean for you? More competitive pricing for handsets and tariffs? Less choice in the marketplace and therefore worse value for money. A larger customer base for the new company to handle leading to out-and-out chaos and a string of unbelieveable fuck ups? Or no change whatsoever?

And what the hell are they going to call the new company? T-Orange? Orangemobile? The Orange Mob? Surely it can only end in horrible tears…

Some money you may have spent on a retail website in the EU and will lose due to their failure to follow appropriate guidelines, yesterday

Oh dear. The EU has been sneaking about behind the backs of nearly 400 retail websites selling electronic goods, and hasn’t liked what it’s found. More than half are breaking rules put in place to protect consumers, by failing to inform customers they can return a product bought on the internet within seven days; a third were missing relevant contact information.

The sites investigated all sold mobiles, DVD players and games consoles across the European Union. Except for Slovakia, and we all know why that is, don’t we? No? Of the 369 sites that trading standards groups across the continent picked at, 200 were chosen because they were the biggest in the EU and another 100 were checked because they had received previous consumer complaints.

Every website checked in Cyprus and Hungary was found to require further investigation. Only 14 websites in the UK were inspected, and six of them will receive strongly worded letters that’ll no doubt be placed in the floor level filing depositary for safe keeping. The good news is that any of the websites that fail to rectify the problems will face fines and prosecutions. Probably. The list of websites remains private so far, although three countries have made their lists public.

[BBC]

The traditional British light bulb is on the way out for good – thanks to those banana-straightening nincompoops in Brussels.

That’s what we’d be saying if we were the Sun or the increasingly-tabloidy Telegraph, but we’re not. We’re hard-arsed realists, so we’re pleased to learn that fresh stocks of 100 watt bulbs will no longer be on UK shelves from today. Expect the 60 watt bulb to go the same way next, as we all gradually creep towards rampant energy-saving and the saving of countless penguins’ lives.

The move is sure to inspire an outpouring of emotion not seen since the death of Diana, so use the comments box to pay your tributes to the defunct bulb or ‘Old Hundred Watty’ as we used to call them around here.

While you’re about it, check out this posting from HotUKDeals – 75-90% off all light bulbs! Yes! We can stock up on penguin-killing lightbulbs and nothing will ever change ever again. We’re coming to get you Old Hundred Watty!

Oh well. Despite the concept of standing on short-haul flights been largely ridiculed by right-minded people and those that prefer their femurs not to be shattered on landing, it seems the majority of us would prefer to save a few quid instead.

A fortnight ago, Ryanair seized the opportunity to inflame the headlines with talk of proposals to allow passengers to stand on certain routes, in order to cram more human livestock on board. A poll was launched on the Ryanair website asking passengers if they’d consider letting their legs absorb the impact of a poor landing rather than their fatty arses on a cushioned seat.

Ryanair asked the question:

Do you think passengers should have a choice of standing on short flights as they currently do on trains, buses and underground transport?

And being the tight-fisted bunch we are, 60% replied yes. Ryanair claim over 120,000 passengers completed the poll (although it was open to anyone to complete, not just passengers) meaning that over 80,000 people supported standing room on some European flights. Unsurprisingly the number replying yes increased to 66% when asked if they would stand for flights less than one hour in length if it meant paying no fee. If Sky Marshall O’Leary is genuinely considering this, he’s clearly worked out the average residual revenue from passengers flying free still makes it worth his while.

Ryanair Sky-Admiral Stephen McNamara jauntily whistled:

“We are pleased that 60% of participants in our online poll agree that people should be given the choice to travel fare free on short flights by standing if they want to. With 120,000 passengers voting and 80,000 saying they would stand on board Ryanair will continue to explore the concept of ‘fare free standing’ flights with Boeing and the relevant aviation authorities in the US and EU.”

The EU will hopefully see sense and laugh them out of Brussels, realising as most folks do, that trains, buses and underground transport doesn’t travel through the air at several hundred miles an hour and experience turbulence or slamming into tarmac a little too hard.

Ooh, crikey!

2009 is all going right for Esther Rantzen. First, she stepped up to volunteer herself as a sleaze-free independent prospective MP for Luton, railing against the expenses scandal in the House Of Commons. It led to a disturbing performance by her on BBC1’s Question Time where she nakedly displayed as much raw ego and self-regard as the politicians she claims to be against.

Now, the very heartbeat of her old hit show That’s Life is back – we’re talking of course about wonkily-shaped fruit and vegetables. The 20 year-old EU ban on odd-looking plums and carrots that strongly resemble men’s cocks has been lifted in a bid to reduce bureaucracy.

Amazingly, in a world where children die of starvation, around 20% of produce is rejected by shops across the EU for failing to meet the current requirements. Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel made one of he most blindingly obvious statements of all time when she said: “It makes no sense to throw perfectly good products away, just because they are the ‘wrong’ size and shape”

No longer living under the jackbooted tyranny of bonkers EU law are apricots, artichokes, asparagus, aubergines, avocados, beans, Brussels sprouts, carrots, cauliflowers, cherries, courgettes, cucumbers, cultivated mushrooms, garlic, hazelnuts in shell, headed cabbage, leeks, melons, onions, peas, plums, ribbed celery, spinach, walnuts in shell, water melons and witloof/chicory. Witloof there, whatever the fuck that is.

1980's Esther Rantzen. Sexy Thatcher.

BUT… the rules still apply to the most popular types of produce, namely: apples, citrus fruit, kiwi fruit, lettuces, peaches and nectarines, pears, strawberries, sweet peppers, table grapes and tomatoes. They make up 75% of EU fruit and vegetable sales, and any wonky examples will have to be stickered with something like “product intended for processing” in a way of placating shoppers who may have been spooked by their appearances.

But now that we’ve learned to live without these freaks of nature, will you be comfortable going back to buying them, or will you shun them as though they are scarcely-edible versions of the Elephant Man? Let us know.

Esther Rantzen was unavailable for comment as we went to press. Because we haven’t got her phone number. What we do have though, is a potato that resembles how we imagine one of her boobs would look like. Happy days!

Like a good, energy-conscious citizen you’ll doubt pay attention to the energy efficiency labelling when buying white goods. Trouble is that nobody’s bothered to update them in a decade and the current ratings are massively out of date. That’s all about to change though following a new EU ruling which appears to be in no way a pointless bureaucratic pain in the arse.

The new labelling scheme will mean the introduction of new classes beyond the currently most efficient A-grade, such as A-20% (20% more efficient than the current A standard), A-40% (40% more efficient than the current A standard) or A-60% (60% more… well, you can guess the rest).

The new ruling will also see minimum energy efficiency standards and labelling for televisions, meaning that the least efficient televisions will be removed from the EU market and mandatory labelling introduced from mid-2010.

Together the measures are expected to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the UK by around 2 million tonnes per annum, and create energy savings for consumers of around £150 million per annum. Not each, obviously.

[eGovMonitor]

So the good news is that Europe is about to start enjoying the use of mobile phones on flights across the continent. The bad news is that it’s courtesy of Ryanair, and as plenty of people have discovered, very little is ever provided as a courtesy.

More than 20 planes flying on routes out of Dublin will be offering mobile, text and email functionality, which Ryanair is hoping to roll out across all routes by late 2010. Passengers will make and receive voice calls at non-European Union international roaming rates of £1.50 to £3 a minute; texts will cost 40 pence and e-mails using phones and other devices will cost as much as £2 per message. No, your eyes aren’t broken. They may as well go the full hog and burgle your home while you’re on the flight.

Why non-EU international roaming rates? Aren’t Dublin and Ryanair’s other destinations within the EU? The EU international roaming tariffs agreed in 2007 state a maximum price of 32p per minute ex VAT for roamed calls originating and terminating in the EU. So how is Ryanair getting away with it?

Notes on EU international roaming reveal that the EU tariffs “deal with the issue of roaming on terrestrial networks… the definitions therefore do not apply, even though it is in many respects similar to a roamed service”. They continue by saying that “in a market economy, prices for communication services should first of all be determined by market forces… the Commission therefore finds it preferable to give commercial forces the chance to work”.

So Ryanair can charge what it likes while no precedent is set, in order to ascertain what customers are willing to pay. However, “it is clear that take-up would be best served if mobile network operators pursue from the beginning a transparent pricing policy and avoid prices which would be considered excessive by consumers or even represent shock bills.”

What isn’t clear in this instance is who will rake in the majority of the profits; Ryanair or the operators. Regardless, there’s absolutely no doubt that at up to £3 a minute for a call, the prices will be considered excessive by most passengers. The question is how transparent will Ryanair make its pricing policy? We want your help to find out. If you travel on a Ryanair route covered by the scheme over the coming days, let us know exactly how the price tariffs are being advertised. Are there large signs on the backs of seats? A quarter-page tucked away in the back of the duty-free magazine? How are customers being made aware of the tariffs? If you can, take a photo and send it to bitterwallet@gmail.com.

They straightened our bananas, they robbed us of our imperial measurements, they’ve set more directives then there are hairs on a shaggy dog. And now the EU has set in motion a series of events that will allow the police to hack into your PC without permission. It’s called remote searching, and such a search can be granted should the plod believe it “necessary to prevent or detect serious crime”.

European Union’s council of ministers in Brussels has given the thumbs up to the warrantless intrusive surveillance of private property, allowing foreign police forces to ask British bobbies to hack into someone’s UK computer on their behalf.

Rather understandably, plenty of folk including opposition MPs and civil liberties groups are upset about the decision, because in contrast to the legal safeguards for searching a suspect’s home, police undertaking a remote search don’t need to apply to a magistrates’ court for a warrant.

The plans are still under development, and they’re only likely to snoop if you’re being very, very naughty. That’s not the point though, is it?

* PCs as in personal computers; Police Constables are free to poke around one another – they’re consenting adults, after all

[The Times]