There seems to be a LOT of guessing with this issue - guessing how many people Sprint's cancelled, guessing why Sprint cancelled them, guessing about the definition of requesting 'too much' customer service, and then there's all the assuming (eg, nobody on *this* list would ever request too much customer service). Finally, the notion that untrained or poorly trained employees, along with generally bad service and products, is something most people should just shut up about strikes me as wrong. Most people put up with the clerk at the register who doesn't know what they're doing or isn't paying attention, so the 'few people' who complain probably represent a lot more people than you would think (yes, that's a guess).
There are numerous indications that Sprint's service is sub-standard; that only a few people are calling them to the carpet on this doesn't make them the problem - it means Sprint is simply too lazy to fix the issues they're bringing to their attention. Mike Lax From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craig Froehle Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 12:07 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Treo] Sprint canning users who complain too much On 7/9/07, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:treo2%40jasons.us> > wrote: > To go back to Craig's restaurant analogy from last week: If several > restaurant customers complain repeatedly about something is it better to > kick the customers out or figure out if their complaint is legit and fix > it? Sprint has, what, 50 million customers (I looked it up...it's about that)? 1000 of that is 0.002%. Going back to my restaurant analogy (since you seem to enjoy it so much), I'd have to have 150,000 regular patrons in order for just 3 (the minimum number to qualify for "several") to repeatedly complain about something. So, yes, I don't have a problem losing 3 undesirable customers if it helps me improve my service level to the other 149,997, and I'm certainly not going to spend resources improving my cash register speed or pie portion size to satisfy this tiny minority of complainers. > Maybe it does make sense to drop these 1000 customers My _guess_ is that these customers are calling primarily about billing issues (i.e., requests for extensions, excuses for not paying, wanting to get charges removed, etc.), not technical issues that Sprint can actually fix. It's unlikely that anyone here on this mailing list acts the way that Sprint's _worst_ customers act, and perhaps can't even imagine someone behaving so antisocially/irresponsibly (I know...my research involves customer service and I've spent a fair bit of time inside call centers), so even though we don't know the specifics of who is being cancelled and why, I have little problem believing they were as much to blame as Sprint, if not more so. > but without more > information we don't know if the bad PR is worth it. Apparently Sprint's > management thinks so, but considering my past experience with Sprint I > would bet they could have handled this better. I'm sure you're right. But then Sprint doesn't do a whole lot right when it comes to customer service. _ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
