Millions of malformed US telephone numbers

There’s now millions of US telephone numbers written as +1 (0) xxx xxx xxxx if you search in Google for [tel “+1 (0)” usa] with the quotes and spaces typed exactly as shown.

That’s completely crazy, because the US does not use an initial zero trunk code at all!

It has happened because very many people in Europe, and especially the UK, automatically add an unwanted (0) directly after the +XX country code, without thinking.

They now do it for all international numbers, from any country, without any thought as to why they do it, and without checking whether the country in question uses a trunk code.

The millions of malformed US telephone numbers shown in this example Google search are mostly to be found on non-US websites.

http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=tel+%22%2B1+%280%29%22+usa

Posted in Numbering, Websites | Leave a comment

Seriously, you cannot really be this stupid?

Cardiff telephone numbers changed over to the 029 area code in April 2000. At that time, local numbers changed from 6 to 8 digits, by prefixing the digits ’20’ onto the beginning of the local number.

From then on, local dialling in Cardiff has used eight digit numbers. Simply omit the 029 area code when calling any Cardiff number from anywhere within Cardiff.

However, many of the residents seem not to have noticed these changes, and post their numbers in a variety of incorrect formats such as 0292 0xx xxxx or 02920 xxxxxx.

For the 0292 0xx xxxx format, they are seemingly unaware that they are saying their local number begins with a 0, which for UK local numbers is not possible.

The 02920 xxxxxx format is equally incorrect, because should you decide to dial only the final 6 digits, as hinted by the spacing, the call will not be connected.

Once the 20xx xxxx range of local numbers ran out, new numbers were issued from the 21xx xxxx block, followed more recently by new numbers in the 22xx xxxx range. All use the same 029 area code.

Misdialling now occurs when people dial 029 21xx xxxx as 029 20xx xxxx.

It also occurs when people dial 029 20xx xxxx as 02920 20xx xxxx.

You wouldn’t think people could be that stupid, would you?

However, one local company has now committed that exact same error to a large and prominent sign:

Would you do business with such complete and utter morons?

Posted in Numbering | Leave a comment

Savi Trading – not at all web savvy

Let’s say you’re a small financial company based in London, and one day someone has this bright idea to set up a company account on Twitter.

Let’s assume it was also decided to post all messages using the API, and that all messages come from a database of pre-written marketing blurb.

Let’s also assume that no human from the company ever manually logs into the company Twitter account, and therefore no-one ever checks the account for replies from the outside world.

Now let’s add in a configuration screw up, where all company messages viewed via Twitter’s website show up as white text on a white background.

Is this a recipe for success?

No!

Is it likely to be fixed?

No. It’s already been like that for more than a year.

And what of the 1400 followers?

Do none of those ever view via the website, or are they all fakes?

If any of the followers were real humans, surely they would have told the company about their error?

Then again, maybe they have, but as no-one from the company ever checks for replies, those warnings have gone unheeded and the errors remain unfixed.

http://twitter.com/SaviTrading

So folks, here you can see a Fail in Social Media 101.

Posted in Websites | Leave a comment

Canned Responses

If you’re going to send out canned responses and try to pass them off as being from a real person, don’t send the mail from an address like:

canned-responses@corp.thecompanyname.com

Just sayin.

Posted in Junk mail | Leave a comment

countrycodes.com – Dial F for Fail

If you have a site which supposedly contains a list of UK telephone area codes, it’s important to not have typos like these:

Blackbum, Brent Knoli, Dumbartor, Gilford, Runcom, Sevenosks, Stocke -on-tren, Suthend-on-sea, Tauton

else it begins to look like a botched job – especially when there’s at least twenty other entries with the wrong digits shown:

Cardiff hasn’t been 1222 for a decade; Bangor (NI) has never been 2891; Gosport and Havant changed from 1705 to 23 a decade ago, there is no London (inner) and London (outer) demarcation; and Newry also changed from 1693 to 28 more than a decade ago.

Yes, that’s you over at: http://www.countrycodes.com/areacodes/call_unitedkingdom.htm

Posted in Numbering, Websites | Leave a comment

Fake 0203 area code for Burberry

Listen up.

It’s now fifteen years since Coventry stopped using the 0203 area code. Coventry changed to 01203 in 1995, and then to 024 in 2000.

It is ten years since London changed from having 0171 and 0181 codes to the single 020 area code, which it still uses.

It’s five years since London eight digit local numbers beginning with the digit three started to be issued.

So, can someone explain why Burberry write all their contact numbers
http://www.burberry.eu/fcp/content/InfoContact/information using an area code that no longer exists?

There is no 0203 area code within the UK; in particular London has never used the 0203 area code.

Is there anyone with a clue running the show at Burberry?

It appears not.

Posted in Numbering, Websites | Leave a comment

Chloe have no clue.

If you ever find yourself in the position that you might want to buy something from a Chloe boutique, you’d naturally look to their website for the details of their nearest emporium.

Should you do this, by looking at their “Find a Boutique” page http://www.chloe.com/#/contact/en , you might be shocked to discover you have to send an email and they write back with details of your nearest boutique.

That’s taking exclusivity to a whole new level. Who the fek thought of that?

Posted in Numbering, Websites | Leave a comment