Slashdot Mirror
Qwest-MSN Subscription Switching: Unfair?
WallytheWalrus writes: "According to this article from today's Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Minnesota State Commerce Department is investigating the fairness of Qwest DSL subscribers being switched over to MSN (as a part of the two companies' new "friendly strategic alliance"). A group of DSL service competitors have alledged that it's unfair that Qwest subscribers aren't being told of other ISPs available, and that if they do switch to MSN, switching out is overly complex and expensive. Can you smell the legal precdent abrew?"
...Was on QWest DSL and then was summarily switched over to MSN(not much else they could do, or at least QWest made it sound like it). Unfortunately the service just wasn't what they expected (ie. they could never get the software to work with the hardware they had) so they asked to be disconnected and release the DSL line so they could switch to another DSL ISP(which coincidently is local).
That was in October or so where are they now? Without DSL. QWest can't release the line to another ISP because MSN is provisioned for the line. As far as MSN is concerned they aren't paying customers so why spend time helping them.
The main issue is this possible "slamming" but I bet more than one person has been bitten by situations just like this. Anyone got suggestions for my friend to take against QWest and MSN beyond asking the Iowa Attorney General to step in?
I work for an ISP in Seattle. This switch has been hell on customers. Even when they do request another ISP Q west/MSN isn't changing them over and when they do it's taking longer then ever before. I am a very conservative person and I don't care for lawsuits and such but this is certainly a case where the state AG should get involved. To bad WA states AG is such a disgusting person. She'll never go after microsoft.
I gave up on DSL after finding that I had to upgrade my router ($95) and pay an extra $70 startup fee for choosing an ISP other than Microsoft. This is why I chose to go with AT&T Broadband cable (which, sadly, is now in part owned by MS).
The partnership between MS and Qwest is a winning proposition for those companies for two reasons: First, the financial deterrent is high enough for the bulk of people -- for whom hatred of MS is not a lifestyle -- simply to go with the default offering. Second, I suspect that a great many people don't actually know the difference between the provider of the DSL line and the ISP, and so the question of which ISP to use is one likely considered with apprehension and frustration, leading people again simply to accept what Qwest suggests (MS).
Financially, it's not going to be possible to fight the MS/Qwest alliance for the reasons above, which makes the litigation here a last line of defense for competition in the broadband market. Unfortunately, if successful action is to be taken, it will be in the form of another lengthy anti-trust case -- a class action lawsuit on the part of slighted customers won't work, because while Qwest's choice of partners is offensive to some people, the bottom line is that Qwest is still providing the service that people are paying for, and in so doing they are fulfilling their legal obligation to the customer.
The real kicker here is that we know from recent experience how long it takes to establish corrective measures to control Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior, and in the time it takes to do so dozens of small, homegrown ISPs will starve.
http://saveie6.com/
I had my choice and went with DSL.
I don't have a TV and didn't want to pay basic cable rates in addition to the cable modem connect, but I could live with that if cable was my only option.
Cable didn't let me have a static IP here for comparable pricing. Cable is pretty saturated in my neighborhood and speeds are supposedly hammered in the evenings. DSL lets me pick my own ISP as well. It's good, fast and more reliable. Beats me why the market penetration hasn't surpassed the greedy cable com bastards.
I work for an ISP in Qwest territory with about 4000 Qwest DSL customers. I'll start at the beginning.
First we had USWest ISP services in Minnesota, well they fired all of them before merging with Qwest. Now we're only represented by a general salesperson. First clue that they want to stomp the little guy.
I'll skip a few random unsurprising screwups and mention that they limit 1580 connections per DS3 connected to their ATM. The true limit is 2000+. This is either stupidity or an attempt to charge us more. It could quite possibly be either, with their record of incompetence. We pointed out their error and got them to extend the limit, but their databases still show that 1580 limit, we just run at 150%.
Before I get into the recent issues, I'll mention that they just fired their entire techsupport staff and restructured it with a bunch of trained monkeys at tier 1, moderate fools at tier 2, and the people who actually know how DSL works at tier 2.5 and 3. It's impossible to talk to tier 2.5 or 3, internal only, and we have to call them to fix their screwups all the time. They're also firing everyone at Interprise, their ATM gurus and networking guys.
I can find Qwest's reason for this as restructuring to decrease costs. However, they'd be much better off firing the managers who think giving these great people the axe is going to save them any money. I'll stop before I rant.
Please note that MSN is considered a 'Volume ISP', or rather Qwest made up that classification when they struck their deal. Under those terms, the VISP is the 'customer of record' on the DSL line. They pay Qwest for the service and bill the customer. This is not available to anyone who cannot guarantee something like 60,000 users per (some term). In order to move away from the VISP, you have to disconnect your service and pay a reconnection fee. However, to move to MSN, there is no 7-10 day downtime.
Not only do they clearly have a manipulative advantage towards MSN here, but they are so clumsy and bureaucratic that they cost us hundreds of dollars per day.
These two examples are a perfect sample of what we go through on a daily basis:
1:
Qwest.net customer goes to MSN, hates it, wants to switch to us cuz we rock. He still has his original standard DSL equipment, but also has the MSN-only USB funkything they sent him. He has to have his service disconnected, then reorder service with full installation charges to connect to us. He calls MSN (who is the 'customer of record' for his DSL line, see above) to cancel his service. The order makes it into the Qwest billing system, but someone in provisioning didn't do their job and left him connected to MSN. Order in billing system is marked 'completed 12/17/2000' but 'dslam info' which provisioning uses says it's MSN.
Customer calls Qwest to connect to us. Order goes into their system, and when it reaches provisioning, is cancelled saying 'already has dsl'. Note provisioning never reads the billing system orders.
Customer calls us to have us place the order, we tell him we can't because he's still on MSN (the Qhost system won't let us make that order, even with customer's approval). Although he is not using his MSN service, Qwest/MSN's systems are out of sync. So customer calls Qwest and they tell him we're full of it and to 'do our job'.
Next I get a conference call from 'Ann' at the 'Executive Offices' yelling at me. I explain to her that it's their own database that says it's MSN. I call Interprise to verify that he is indeed translated to MSN and they verify it is. I can hear 'Ann' sighing in the background and she clearly could give a rat's ass that this is their fault (let's fire her and save money). I get 'Ann' off the phone and call the customer back.
We contact customer service and order another disconnection, per advice of Interprise. I console the customer and explain everything involved and how it got so screwed up. He's still to this day waiting to connect back up to us.
I passed this along to our full-time Qwest haggler and he tried to work out a solution where they could simply fix their problem in the database, but last I heard nothing happened.
Total my time: 3 hours
Total dsl admin time: 2 hours
Total customer time: 3 months
2:
Qwest.net customer moves to us, doesn't want to touch MSN with a 40 foot pole. They have the old-style CAP (carrier amplitude phase) line, the kind that uses the Cisco 675, 605 or Intel 2100.
Customer calls Qwest to order change of provider, and order is processed. However, when it either never reaches provisioning, or they don't do their job when it hits their desk. Not only did they not retranslate the PVC, they mark the order as completed!
This has happened many dozens of times.
We get a call from the customer, who is still functioning through Qwest.net, and we can't turn them up. We call Interprise and it's fixed in a few minutes. Remember, they're firing those guys.
There is a 'known software bug' per some monkey we talked to once. So fix it already!
OK, that's a lot to read, but think what we go through every single day. Either Qwest needs to pay the salary of our full-time employee whose primary job is dealing with their f***ups, or maybe those quarterly bonuses are meant to buy us off.
There is a reason US/Qworst has been rated the worst service for a decade. The red tape and internal barriers are astounding. We talk to our sales rep weekly. We've sent detailed problem descriptions which get forwarded onto department heads, and we've even talked to the DSL product manager and nothing ever gets done.
Like our DSL admin said once, "I wish Qwest would hire me as a consultant, I could come in and point out every weak point, every problem, and save them tons of money." Oh yeah, and there's a damn good reason we have one single phone line from Qwest, and that's for testing only. The other 3000 or so circuits/channels are through a phone company that treats us like the customer we are.
I was using Qwest for DSL in Minnesota when I signed up, back in June of last year. I did this because the other ISP was VERY vaguely documented (even on their own web site) and Qwest ppl sort of seemed to know nothing about how to do it. Which goes along with the discussion below here, about how most DSL/cable customers really DON'T know what's best for them, just take what's offered right away and leave it at that.
;)
:)
Anyway back with the story, THE day I found out about the whole Qworst/MSN deal, I called their customer service and DEMANDED to be switched, which got me some verbal equivalent of blank stares and a number of supervisor conferences (while I was nicely put on hold, of course). That was scheduled to take 3 days, go down one day and be back up by the next morning.
Well I went down and didn't come back up...not the next day...or the next...after 3 days of this I called Qwest and my new ISP and asked what the hell was wrong. Qwest replied that everything was looking great on their end and all was perfect, while my new ISP said they couldn't see me at all. I had DSL carrier signal but no traffic at all. I called Qwest back and told them things were NOT perfect and fix it dammit! Anyway to make a long story short (too late) the ISP and Qwest went back and forth for ANOTHER week and finally Qwest sent a tech out...who promptly discovered (after about an hour of phone calls) that nobody had bothered to check my modem config and realized that Qwest used PPP and the new ISP used bridging to ATM. 2 1/2 more hours on the phone allows this guy to reconfigure the modem by HAND and things start working again. By now he's been on overtime 1 1/2 hours and doesn't want to see me ever again
Moral of the story: Choose the local ISP first. Since I moved there I've been extremely happy with their service, support, and uptime. Actually better than qworst's uptime by a long shot. Still not up to the quality I had from Speakeasy when I was on them in Boston but hey, these guys are local.
Anyway that's my story
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"