Fonolo Lets You Bypass Company Phone Menus

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fonolo Lets You Bypass Company Phone Menus

Posted by CmdrTaco on Thursday June 23, 2011 @12:45AM from the just-gimme-a-people dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Fonolo, a Toronto based voice 2.0 company, helps you avoid those annoying company phone menus by letting you skip ahead in the company phone system using a process they call 'deep-dialing.' Just search for the company on their website (apparently they have over 500), and you'll see a visual representation of the company's phone system. Then you just select the option you want, put your phone number in, and Fonolo calls the company on your behalf and dials you back when the agent is available — for free. They have a business product that provides this same service (visual dialing), plus virtual queuing and data pass-through." One company creates a phone system designed to encourage you to hang up to save them money. Another creates a phone system designed to make it easy to stay on hold indefinitely. I wonder where this ends.

171 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Comcast has a service that does the same thing by shoehornjob · 2011-06-23 00:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

I think it's called Comcast 4u or something like that. If there's a large que of calls you get the option to have the company call you back when it's your turn. I can't imagine why more companies don't do this.

--
"We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
1. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by j-pimp · 2011-06-23 00:53 · Score: 1
  
  I think it's called Comcast 4u or something like that. If there's a large que of calls you get the option to have the company call you back when it's your turn. I can't imagine why more companies don't do this.
  This will give the companies incentives to do this.A really smart company would let you request a call from their website though.
  
  --
  --- Justin Dearing http://www.justaprogrammer.net/ We're just programmers.
2. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Opportunist · 2011-06-23 00:54 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Because it costs them money and they don't really want to talk to you?
  Let's be honest here, why would a company want you to call their support line? The only reason the line exists at all is to appease you and keep you from canceling the contract. As far as any company is concerned, whether you can use their product or you cannot does only matter insofar as you don't cancel the contract. So you on hold is you not canceling.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
3. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Machtyn · 2011-06-23 00:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You've answered your own question: Why don't more companies do this? Because they want to keep you from canceling the contract. But your point is valid, there may not be a cost benefit between making call backs and losing customers.
4. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 00:59 · Score: 0
  
  A really smart company would let you request a call from their website though.
  Right, because there's no way that would be abused by pranksters.
5. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-06-23 01:01 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Sometimes a good, old-fashioned, letter is what it takes.
  
  Specifically, I've found that sending the relevant CEO a list of my service requests, along with photographs of his family and maps showing the routes that they commonly take during their respective daily routines(just to show that I, too, value my relationship with the $FOOCORP family), really improves responsiveness.
  
  Often, the response is so fast that the service techs arrive before the cops do!
6. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by gomiam · 2011-06-23 01:03 · Score: 1
  
  ...those are not the service techs you are looking for...
7. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by gnapster · 2011-06-23 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  Then have them call me once, now, to enter a code on the call-request web page, and once, later, when there is a representative available. These problems have solutions, and (further) are only problems if they are actually abused.
8. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Abstrackt · 2011-06-23 01:14 · Score: 1
  
  At that point, wouldn't it just be easier to eliminate the middleman and call them yourself to request a callback? Personally, I'd rather only be on the phone once instead of going to their website, getting phoned, entering a code and waiting.
  
  --
  They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
9. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:21 · Score: 0
  
  Right, because there's no way that would be abused by pranksters.
  It would be relatively simple to keep pranksters at bay by asking people to fill in verifiable account information as part of the online request - in most cases, previously existing log-in infrastructure would suffice. Another line of defense would be to require customers to register their account for callback support, with the option to disallow at any time.
10. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Joce640k · 2011-06-23 01:34 · Score: 1
  
  Yet Another Login - yeah, great.
  I would have thought caller ID would be enough. You call them, it logs your number and calls you back.
  If you're hiding your number for some reason then it can record DTMF tones of you typing your number (or whatever...use your imagination). There's no excuse for having people sitting on hold these days.
  
  --
  No sig today...
11. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:44 · Score: 0
  
  If there's a large que of calls you get the option to have the company call you back when it's your turn. I can't imagine why more companies don't do this.
  One, it'll cost them money. Two, if you're calling it's probably a complaint or something that'll also cost them money, and they'd rather you just fuck off.
12. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by shoehornjob · 2011-06-23 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  I don't think those are local cops you've got knocking on your door. More like FBI. I suspect you might not want that kind of attention as they will label you a terrorist. That sort of thing seems to be in vogue these days.
  
  --
  "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
13. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by shaiberger · 2011-06-23 02:00 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Hi there, CEO of Fonolo here.
  Great to see all the enthusiasm!
  > I can't imagine why more companies don't do this.
  That's actually a really interesting question. The idea of letting the customer hang up and then get a call-back when an agent is ready is called "Virtual Queuing" (VQ), and has been around for a long time. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_queuing.
  Why don't we see it more often? It is not for lack of interest, as some of the comments have said. There has been strong interest in VQ for a long time. Waiting on hold is actually lose-lose approach to queuing: Customers get pissed off, and the company wastes money (keeping the lines open). There have been virtual queuing systems available for over a decade. They remain rare, not because companies don't want them but because they require installation at the call center and, in today's call center environment, that's costly and often impossible. Why impossible? Because of the widespread use of outsourced call centers. If you're sending some of your calls to a 3rd party, you can't force them to install any custom equipment. For more on this: http://www.shaiberger.com/2010/10/when-will-we-stop-waiting-on-hold
  Brief plug: Fonolo offers a service that allows companies to add virtual queuing without any changes to their call center. http://fonolo.com/features/virtualqueuing
  - Shai
14. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:15 · Score: 0
  
  Comcast got the idea from their Moscow office.
  In Soviet Komkast, tech support calls YOU.
15. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by TheLink · 2011-06-23 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  The cops might also take all your PCs and phones so you won't need those services...
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
16. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by gnick · 2011-06-23 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  Waiting on hold is actually lose-lose approach to queuing: Customers get pissed off, and the company wastes money (keeping the lines open).
  I suspect that there's some break even point between cost of keeping the line open, an annoyed customer down-grading or cancelling service due to hold time, and money saved by reducing the size of your operator/service pool and potential savings when an annoyed customer gives up without actually tying up an operator OR down-grading/cancelling (maybe not common among the /. crowd, but likely a realistic option).
  
  --
  He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
17. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:47 · Score: 0
  
  Based on my previous use of their products, I'm pretty sure if Comcast created it it's more like Comcast FU.
18. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by jellomizer · 2011-06-23 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  "I can't imagine why more companies don't do this."
  1. Phone systems are expensive.
  2. Most are not using VOIP yet, so they will have to pay for long distance calls back.
  3. Their current system uses "On Hold" as a performance measure.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
19. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:03 · Score: 0
  
  There may be a psychological effect at play in "lose-lose" waiting-on-hold: customers may not trust a company to call them back. The customer service line is only used when a company's products or services have failed to such an extent that complaint seems useful, so the customer is already disinclined to trust the company. If the company says, "We'll call you back when we get around to your call," the customer may suspect that they'll never be called back: virtual queuing, when controlled by the company being called, amounts psychologically to relinquishing control over the grievance and risking being ignored. Fonolo's solution gets around this brilliantly: a third party (Fonolo) handles the virtual queuing, so the customer doesn't feel like he's surrendering control over his complaint process to the company to whom he's complaining.
20. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Archangel+Michael · 2011-06-23 03:10 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for the brief explanation. I want to express my appreciation for a CEO who takes the time to present his/her company to people, even if briefly. Thank you.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
21. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by torqer · 2011-06-23 03:12 · Score: 1
  
  As someone who manages Virtual Queuing equipment and other call center equipment, like PBX's and such, as an outsourcer, I've found that the primary use of Virtual queuing and customer call backs isn't for the benefit of customers at all. Most times this technology is deployed is when the company is providing regulated service. Often the regulators require calls to be answered in a certain amount of time (let's say 3 minutes), and if the Virtual Hold system answers the call immediately and places the call back when they customer would be next in line then company meets their mandate of answering calls within the 3 minute time frame.
  This is great news for the company as they avoid paying penalties in an understaffed call center, as a call that would normally take 30-90 minutes to be answered appears to be answered almost immediately, despite the customer not reaching an agent for an extended period of time.
  For what it's worth, the outsourcer certainly can be required to use 3rd party software as requested by the client. It all depends on what's written in the contract.
22. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:19 · Score: 0
  
  Writing a letter may not be an option. I recently reorderd bank checks. The option to order by mail is no longer offered.
23. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Sulphur · 2011-06-23 03:58 · Score: 1
  
  Yet Another Login - yeah, great.
  I would have thought caller ID would be enough. You call them, it logs your number and calls you back.
  If you're hiding your number for some reason then it can record DTMF tones of you typing your number (or whatever...use your imagination). There's no excuse for having people sitting on hold these days.
  Caller OD is enough.
  FTFY
24. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-06-23 04:04 · Score: 1
  
  Everybody lives somewhere...
25. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by amicusNYCL · 2011-06-23 04:17 · Score: 2
  
  I have a small request. In the summary, your company is referred to as a "voice 2.0" company. Could you guys please refrain from using terms like that? It comes across as a little "douchey". Thanks.
  
  --
  "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
26. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by uglyduckling · 2011-06-23 04:38 · Score: 1
  
  Well, lots of websites do this already, at least in the UK. Sadly it's usually limited to sales rather than support and customer service lines. What I can't understand is why so many companies require customers to wait on hold rather than offering a callback option. The few that do offer that option, in my experience call back some hours later, rather than just a few minutes.
27. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by 0100010001010011 · 2011-06-23 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  Apple does this. You can even schedule a best time to call or ASAP. You fill out all your info. Serial number, description of the problem, etc. And when they call you they've already read it. It's also probably why Apple ranks near the top in terms of customer service.
  If you miss your call more than 2x, they'll let you go log back in and reschedule.
28. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by gnapster · 2011-06-23 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but how many menus will you need to wade through to request that callback? Alternatively, what if you could do either?
  What I realized after I posted is that the code is probably unnecessary. All you would need is a short message saying, "A service call to this number, from ACME IT, was requested using our online form. The estimated wait is two days and thirty-six minutes. To receive a call when a representative is available, press 1. Otherwise, press 2. If you did not request this call and the pranksters are getting to you, press 3. We will blacklist their IPs, no questions asked. Thank you for requesting service from ACME IT."
29. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by shoehornjob · 2011-06-23 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  "I can't imagine why more companies don't do this." 3. Their current system uses "On Hold" as a performance measure.
  Excessive hold times actually count against the call center metrics but this callback program doesn't. If it was used more often by other companies they wouldn' have quite as many pissed off people calling them.
  
  --
  "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
30. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by jellomizer · 2011-06-23 05:10 · Score: 1
  
  True, but with their current systems there isn't a way to measure the time from the call to the response back if it hangs up.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
31. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 06:38 · Score: 0
  
  Hey Shai,
  An android app would be helpful, wouldn't it?
  -Rico
32. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by ShakaUVM · 2011-06-23 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  I wish Travelocity would do this. The last time I was in Europe, and burned through the entire hour of prepaid minutes I'd bought for my disposable phone waiting on hold with the Travelocity "VIP" line. Added two more hours of airtime, than called their normal number and got through in "only" 20 minutes. I wanted to kill the guy on the phone when he finally got to me.
  It also doesn't help that nobody at Travelocity ever has better than a 50/50 grasp of the English language, or that they have static on their "VIP" line, but that's a story for a different time.
  Honestly, it's bad enough that I've been moving my twice-monthly airfare purchases to other services. Travelocity, pay attention.
33. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Vegeta99 · 2011-06-23 08:18 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. I don't know what else to say to get the same point across, tho.
  So, where's NYCL been?
34. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by SethJohnson · 2011-06-23 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  Shai,
  
  Kudos to you for empowering consumers with an app. This is the kind of reason I got a smart phone in the first place. Traditional voice mail was so torturous to me, I stopped listening to mine and changed the greeting to "If you leave a message, I'll never hear it. I'll return your call when I see your number on my caller-ID." When Apple introduced 'visual voicemail,' I bought an iPhone. Your app extends that empowerment to dealing with other people's voicemail / call trees.
  
  Thank you and best wishes,
  
  Seth
  
  --
  $5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
35. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by amicusNYCL · 2011-06-23 09:35 · Score: 1
  
  So, where's NYCL been?
  No clue, I haven't seen him around in a while. The last entry on his blog is from the middle of May.
  
  --
  "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
36. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Vegeta99 · 2011-06-23 10:48 · Score: 1
  
  We need a resident IP lawyer again. IANALIAALSWHIPL (I am not a lawyer, I am a law student who hates intellectual property law), so I vote not me.
37. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 13:37 · Score: 0
  
  Amen.
  What does "voice 2.0" even mean? I hate nonsense marketing buzzwords.
38. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by AmiMoJo · 2011-06-23 22:09 · Score: 1
  
  Just write to them saying you are cancelling effective $date$. Send it registered post. Cancel the direct debit on that day. If they want to argue it the onus is now on them to contact you.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
39. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-24 03:28 · Score: 0
  
  I'll be keeping an eye out for your IPO.
40. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by Vrtigo1 · 2011-06-24 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  Keeping you on hold also costs them money. Think about it - try and name one major company that has a support line that doesn't have a toll free number. I'd imagine the big guys are paying something really tiny, maybe half a cent per minute or something, but if you're on hold for 10 minutes, that's 5 cents. Now multiple that by the other 200 people on hold at the same time and now you're talking a dollar per minute. Assuming you have this same level of calls 24x7, keeping those people on hold costs you about $1500 a day or half a million a year. When you break it down that way, the call back services start to sound pretty darn good.
  
  Obviously the numbers would be more or less depending on call volume, but if you're someone like Comcast, I'm guessing that across the country, you probably have a lot more than 200 people on hold at any given moment.
41. Re:Comcast has a service that does the same thing by RoFLKOPTr · 2011-06-24 23:23 · Score: 1
  
  A really smart company would let you request a call from their website though.
  Amazon does that, and it's awesome. If you're already signed in, you can give them a specific order or item you're calling about or whatever and the agent will already have all your information and all the information of whatever you're calling about in front of them and you don't have to deal with trying to tell them everything over the phone. Saves them time and hassle, saves you time and hassle. It's beautiful.
Please listen by Machtyn · 2011-06-23 00:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Please listen to the menu options as they have recently changed."

Yeah, right! When was the last time you recently changed them? Oh, listen, I haven't called company X in over a year, but their menu system has not recently changed, it's been the same for so many years!
1. Re:Please listen by ByOhTek · 2011-06-23 00:53 · Score: 2
  
  It was recently changed when they added that message. It was then changed when they removed the message, so they had to add it again for accuracy?
  
  --
  Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
2. Re:Please listen by netsharc · 2011-06-23 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  I've been trying to get DOCSIS (Data over Cable) Internet, and it has been a freaking pain of dealing idiocy (strangely, it's the first time in my life that I've had to deal with something that involves multiple phone calls). Luckily the robo-lady stops talking whenever I've pressed the correct menu button even though she hasn't finished talking, but one question which tickles me is "We will record your call for [standard bla bla] purposes. Say yes if you agree with this.". So far I've been saying "yes" before she's even asked the question. And each time I chuckle at the thought, what if they change the question to something like "We are now going to take a million dollars from your account, say yes if you agree.".
  OK, that anecdote sounded funnier to me...
  
  --
  What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
3. Re:Please listen by Malc · 2011-06-23 01:05 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Not as bad as the: "we apologise for the delay but we are experiencing higher than usual call volume." Some companies have that message for years, which just means they haven't bothered hiring enough people to answer the phones.
4. Re:Please listen by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:10 · Score: 0
  
  I hate the phone systems that DUPE you by changing the counting order.
  For instance, I want to reach Billing.
  Machine answers,
  If you want sales, press 1
  If you want corporate press 2
  if you want apparel press 3
  if you want billing- (I press 4).
  After reaching the wrong person I go back and wait, and hear this.
  If you want sales, press 1
  If you want corporate press 2
  if you want apparel press 3
  if you want billing press 9
  FUCK YOU!
5. Re:Please listen by just_another_sean · 2011-06-23 01:14 · Score: 1
  
  Help! I'm trapped in a recursive phone message!
  
  --
  Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
6. Re:Please listen by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:19 · Score: 0
  
  Dude, it changed on Thursday. You know, when Microsoft and the Internet warned about the worst virus ever that will totally destroy your computer!
7. Re:Please listen by mcvos · 2011-06-23 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  I usually just ask the wrong person to put me through to the right person.
8. Re:Please listen by Lumpy · 2011-06-23 01:34 · Score: 2
  
  Press 4 to hear a duck quack
  
  --
  Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
9. Re:Please listen by ezzzD55J · 2011-06-23 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Which secret department did you get when you pressed 4 :-) ?
10. Re:Please listen by Sczi · 2011-06-23 01:47 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, believe it or not, Mr.BigBank, your phone system is not so integral to my daily existence that I would memorize it in the first place, so how bout we just skip the BS please. Also, let's go ahead and read that script at about double the speed you're reading it at now, so I don't fall asleep waiting for you to get to my option.
11. Re:Please listen by alostpacket · 2011-06-23 02:02 · Score: 1
  
  One company creates a phone system designed to encourage you to hang up to save them money. Another creates a phone system designed to make it easy to stay on hold indefinitely. I wonder where this ends.
  Dueling banjos
  
  --
  PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
12. Re:Please listen by NatasRevol · 2011-06-23 02:13 · Score: 2
  
  Press 44 to hear an echo of a duck quack.
  
  --
  There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
13. Re:Please listen by Rudeboy777 · 2011-06-23 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  Even worse than that, "higher than usual call volume" is an outright lie. They are experiencing "typical" call volumes, but it still leads to excessive queuing.
  
  --
  From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc
14. Re:Please listen by jellomizer · 2011-06-23 03:01 · Score: 1
  
  The worst is. I am sorry all lines are busy... Click... Dial tone.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
15. Re:Please listen by BrokenHalo · 2011-06-23 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  Sometimes the simpler systems are even worse. Like the bitch who answers your call with "This is Briefcase Holdings Limited, please hold..." than slapping you into a spiel of inane jingles and advertising crap before you can shout "NO!".
  
  There is one advantage to bricks-and-mortar shops: you always have the option of driving there and making someone's life a burden and affliction until you're satisfied.
16. Re:Please listen by Archangel+Michael · 2011-06-23 03:14 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, I call that "lying". And when they lie to me, I feel that lying is expected so I lie to the people I end up talking to, often blatantly. If they call me on it, I mention their lie, and suggest that if they start out by lying that it is only fair that I be allowed to lie back to them.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
17. Re:Please listen by Malc · 2011-06-23 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  Most often those people are just call centre employees. Why give them a hard time about a situation they have control over or no say in changing?
18. Re:Please listen by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:35 · Score: 1
  
  You're still giving them money, aren't you? Why should they care?
19. Re:Please listen by Archangel+Michael · 2011-06-23 03:44 · Score: 2
  
  People who work for liars should know who they work for. And they have a choice, they can quit or request that the message be changed to something more reasonable ...
  
  We're experiencing a high volume of calls right now, and there is a delay in processing your call. We value your business and if you please hold we will get to your call as soon as possible. You are #3 in the queue. You may want to call back during the hours of 6:30 am and 8:30 am EST or between 8:00 pm and 12:00am EST when call volumes are much lower
  That is not a lie. It presents the more information and allows the customer to call back at a time that doesn't have high volumes.
  These companies have metrics, they know call volumes and times. They should value their customers. When companies stop valuing customers, it is a sign that they don't understand their business.
  
  --
  Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
20. Re:Please listen by Chris+Mattern · 2011-06-23 04:11 · Score: 1
  
  Enter http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Classic-WTF-No-Quack.aspx in the URL field to read No Quack.
21. Re:Please listen by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 04:24 · Score: 0
  
  We are experiencing usual penny pinching leading to reduced agents and longer call times.
22. Re:Please listen by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 05:06 · Score: 0
  
  I once called a credit card company to activate a credit card. The scummier companies pretend (liars) you need to wait for the computer, then hit you with advertisements. One time I told the computer to "f* off" and it thanked me for signing up for some credit protection scam. I called back and spoke to a real person and they told me I couldn't cancel something on my wife's card. The fact that I never agreed to the service and that I wasn't allowed to sign up for the service even if I did carried no weight with them, so we cancelled the card. Now, when I active a card and it said to wait, I just hang up if an advertisement starts. So far, my card has always been properly activated.
23. Re:Please listen by ibennetch · 2011-06-25 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, that's flat out obnoxious. I like the one at Continental Airlines: "We are sorry but we are experiencing higher than usual call volume. Please try again later." Then they disconnect you. No chance to ever speak to anyone, which is a shame if, say, they cancel your flight, 200 angry people are lined up at the one woman at the ticket counter, and you're already four hours late for takeoff. Or so I've heard, anyway.
  Along the same lines of your comment, Bank of America has this great feature to "Request a Chat", which would be perfect because I don't want to call (they have bad hours for phone support), and as I'm not an account holder I can't send an email (using their 'secure email' from inside your account)...except chat is never available. It's just there to taunt me. Sheesh.
do people really hate IVR systems? by alen · 2011-06-23 00:53 · Score: 1

the whole point is to route calls to the right CSR's. not have a direct line to your new best friend who really can't stand you calling because you're always trying to get a deal. same like those annoying people who always call the help desk or IT wanting crap without a trouble ticket
1. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Phleg · 2011-06-23 00:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  But they don't. I've not once been sent to somebody who can't help me by dialling "0" repeatedly or repeating "operator" to the voice recognition system. Not to mention, it's infinitely frustrating when they make me waste a half hour dialling in identifying numbers, my address, etc., only for the CSR to ask for the exact same information the second they pick up the phone.
  
  --
  No comment.
2. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by L4t3r4lu5 · 2011-06-23 01:17 · Score: 2
  
  Phone the sales department. You'll find that they have a very short waiting time, often instant. Get them to transfer you.
  
  In the UK, try http://www.saynoto0870.com/ and put in the support number, or company name. Often you can get local call numbers for premium rate lines, or direct office numbers bypassing the switchboard.
  
  --
  Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
3. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:18 · Score: 0
  
  I was told by a college IT teacher that dialing 9999999 repeatedly will most often get you a person to answer. It doesn't work everywhere, and I've also found dialing 00000 repleatedly works almost as well.
  I also find it frustrating that I take the time to enter my account number and am asked for it again by a real person. I always ask at this point why I was asked to enter it in the first place, or if they don't already have that information forwarded to them on their screen. I think they sometimes just ask us to be annoying. Maybe not. Maybe the company has a communication system that only does part of its job.
4. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  Talking to the goddamn robot voice is degrading, and will continue to be degrading until it can pass the Turing test.
5. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:25 · Score: 0
  
  That would get you someone to talk to in the UK. 999 is national emergency services, similar to 911 in the states.
6. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Inda · 2011-06-23 01:26 · Score: 2
  
  I have a colleague who puts these calls on loudspeaker. He happily keys in his credit card number, bank account number, DoB and all the rest. I've even heard him spell out his address to the operator.
  
  Should I warn him or just kept recording?
  
  --
  This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
7. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  it's infinitely frustrating when they make me waste a half hour dialling in identifying numbers, my address, etc., only for the CSR to ask for the exact same information the second they pick up the phone.
  I just tell the person I've called that I've already inputted that data and that I won't input it again. They get frustrated and eventually I speak to a manager about the fact that I won't input the data again but their phone representative won't help me further. Eventually the manager finds the data or says that I can bypass the security questions which is quite often why their re-asking for the data.
8. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:38 · Score: 0
  
  90% of IVR scripting sucks ass. How many times have you entered your acct #, only to have the rep you finally get to ask you for it again?
  This is either because these 90%ers don't want to spend the money it takes to do it right, or they simply don't care.
  IMO, this is a massive failure of government to regulate business. Customer service standards should be law.
9. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:39 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, they really do, because "the whole" point, in many cases, is clearly to frustrate the caller to the point where he goes away stops being a problem that must be dealt with. Seriously. The way some companies handle their "valued customers" calls, which "..are very important to us..." can be explained no other way. Most phone companies would be exhibit A.
10. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Voyager529 · 2011-06-23 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  ...and I'd be perfectly fine with that - *IF* it actually worked that way. See, the voice recognition menu systems I generally deal with have absolutely no AI behind them - they are usually worse than the "Press 1 for billing, 2 for sales, 3 for support..." stuff, because they SAY they can understand you, but invariably point you to the wrong place.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAnB-Xz9J1U (start at 0:32, then again at 3:20)
  See, a voice driven interface in which a specific set of commands is required is just a command line. Don't believe me? Call T-Mobile customer care and say "unlock my phone". I did this recently, since I wanted a SIM unlock for a phone that was out of contract and out of warranty. The first time I said it, it replied, "alright, problems with calls. So, briefly tell me what you're calling about." "I want to unlock my phone". "I'm sorry, I didn't get that, Let's try again." "Unlock my phone". "Sorry, can we give it another try?" "Unlock. My. Phone." After a few more rounds of this, the system finally decided to forward me to "a representative who could help". Fine. It sent me to general support, who then sent me to tier 1 support, who then had to forward me to a specialist.
  I don't blame T-Mo for this, because this is just the norm. In fact, that call, end to end, took me about 15 minutes. A friend of mine was on the phone with a general representative over at Verizon for over an hour and a half trying to get the bluetooth to work with her car stereo before the rep admitted that she wasn't really a tech support rep! Certainly that's not exactly a good case study for voice driven menu systems.
  I'm down for automating forwarding a customer to the correct department so they can get help. However, it seems to me that the mood that anyone calling a support line would inherently be in doesn't lend itself to making the customer feel supported by a computer who requires an argument, when a half decent receptionist could route calls better.
11. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by ezzzD55J · 2011-06-23 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  one of my coworkers was inordinately proud that her boyfriend was a stripper/escort, and somebody lost a tooth in a brawl in the employee break room.
  
  Those two things sound pretty cool actually ;-)
12. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:33 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, that's what we need. More stupid laws for stupid business practices. Oh no, you have to wait! The horrors!
13. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by TheCRAIGGERS · 2011-06-23 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  You should inform him that people who use loudspeakers in that way are douchebags.
  Then you should use his info to buy a boxes of dildoes, live cockroaches, and maybe some other weird things you can order online.
14. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Fnord666 · 2011-06-23 02:59 · Score: 2
  
  I also find it frustrating that I take the time to enter my account number and am asked for it again by a real person. I always ask at this point why I was asked to enter it in the first place, or if they don't already have that information forwarded to them on their screen. I think they sometimes just ask us to be annoying. Maybe not. Maybe the company has a communication system that only does part of its job.
  Entering this data is so that your call can be placed properly in the queue. Some customers have priority status and when they enter their number, they go to the front of the queue or even to a "high value customer CSR". The information is typically not passed to the CSR's system when the call is finally dispatched.
  
  --
  'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
15. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by ColdWetDog · 2011-06-23 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  Talking to the goddamn robot voice is degrading, and will continue to be degrading until it can pass the Turing test.
  Funny, that's exactly what the robot voice thinks about YOU.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
16. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Nethemas+the+Great · 2011-06-23 03:23 · Score: 2
  
  As I see it there are two types of IVR systems. Those systems that efficiently route you to a person or an automated task, and there are those systems that hide the CSRs way at the back and force you to wade through endless lists of "is this your issue?" menu options, with the hopes that somewhere buried within there will be an automated answer so they don't have to pay a CSR to handle your call. I hate the later, and I doubt I'm alone.
  
  --
  Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
17. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by drinkypoo · 2011-06-23 03:28 · Score: 2
  
  Sears is between incompetence and evil. We bought an air conditioner from a Sears store. I bought it a little late in the season and used it for one season. The following season I went to hook it up a few weeks earlier. It's good I did, because it failed to work. I'd actually taken the unit out of the window and stored it inside for the winter, so it had been ideally protected.
  Sears sent a tech out a few days later without any parts. After decomposing the unit he decided the fault was in the control board. We had to wait for the parts to be shipped to our address and then schedule a tech revisit. Meanwhile we went through several days of temperatures over 100 degrees. Sears sent the wrong part. Then they sent another board, the right one, which didn't fix the problem with another tech visit.
  All this had gone on so long that we were now past the warranty period of one year, but of course I had called them within the month. So we called back on the advice of the technician to get the unit replaced because he had failed to achieve anything, and they told us they couldn't help us because it had been longer than a year and our information had been purged from their system. As you can imagine this was not what we wanted to hear. My lady then spent three hours on the phone yelling at various people before we could get a replacement lined up.
  Naturally Sears had "discontinued" our model, and although they had an identical model with a new model number they "couldn't" manage to get it into the store. As a result, we ended up with yet another unit. In order to get it we had to take the old unit to the store, pick out the new unit, go home, and come back in 24 hours after the swap was approved. The only unit they had in the store was a substantially different shape, so I had to make a new window block for the remainder, and it is also significantly less efficient. Not only does it say it draws more power, but our bill went up noticeably.
  On top of that, this unit made a horrible squeaking noise when it ran. As it turned out, it is a miserable piece of shit. Its innards consist mostly of three pieces of styrofoam which are free to rub against each other and squeak like mexican takeout coming home on a bumpy road. Two of them are taped together, but so sloppy that they squeak anyway. I decased the unit and put them together with wood glue, then added more foam tape where the styrofoam was rubbing the case enclosure, and now it sounds normal.
  My last run-in with Sears was over a primer bulb for a weedwhacker. I went in to the parts depot and asked about it and was told that it would be over twenty dollars for the part, plus shipping. Though Sears has their own interstate trucking network, they wanted me to overpay for USPS to ship a sub-one-ounce part. I ended up at a place called Powered Outdoor Equipment which sold me the original (branded) Walbro part for five bucks, in stock.
  Fuck Sears and all they stand for.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
18. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by idontgno · 2011-06-23 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  Cuz nothing says "You're a douchebag" like involuntarily receiving pedo porn in the mail. Lots of it. Ordered on your douchebag credit card.
  Enjoy using the speaker phone while trying to make your one phone call, loser.
  
  --
  Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
19. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:51 · Score: 0
  My favorite is when something like this happens:
  "Thank you for calling Foo Bank. We appreciate your business. If you have a question about your account, press 1."
  "I see you have a question about your account. Is this a personal account or business account?"
  "Personal account. If your question is about a recent check or deposit, press 1; if your question is about a recent debit card transaction, press 2; if you are calling about a lost or stolen card, press 3; for all other inquires, press 4."
  "We are routing your call to the appropriate operator, but first we need some more information. If your want to obtain copies of a cancelled check, press 1; otherwise, if you want to order new deposit slips or checks, press 2."
  It's a dead end. Nothing to select that fits my case. Pressing zero gives the, "I'm sorry, that's not a valid selection" message.
  That's when you start placing cheese slices into their ATMs.
20. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:59 · Score: 0
  
  Well, your one single anecdote has convinced me! I am going to throw away all the fine Craftsman tools with lifetime warranties I purchased there. Never mind the fact I have replaced several of the tools with nary a hassle or even a question asked about how they broke. Never mind that when they didn't have one of the replacement tools in stock, they sent one of their employees to another store to pick it up and bring it to me, at no additional cost to me. Never mind that their customer service has always been rock solid, and their parts replacement center (while sometimes costly) can always get the right part, and usually has it in stock if it is a common part. Never mind that after a year, you got a brand new replacement air conditioner when yours was past warranty. Maybe it is just the Sears you are going to that sucks. Or maybe you are an asshole, and they noted that in your file so all of your dealing with them has been unpleasant. All I can say is my experiences with Sears have been nothing but absolutely positive.
21. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by flibbidyfloo · 2011-06-23 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  But they don't. I've not once been sent to somebody who can't help me by dialling "0" repeatedly or repeating "operator" to the voice recognition system.
  
  I have called systems that, when you keep pressing "0" or anything else not on the presented menu, respond by saying "I'm sorry you're having trouble. Please call back at another time" and then hangs up on you.
  Don't hate the system, hate the designer :)
22. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 05:08 · Score: 0
  
  I truly hate IVR systems to the point of refusing to speak a word. If there's a menu system I'm happy to use it since at least I know what I am choosing.
  Until there's some AI behind these systems that can correctly parse "oh, hey, I'm calling about ticket number 2-7-4-thirtythree-triple zero-7-7-3 and I spoke with andy last time" I don't want to bother with them. I did not call to pretend to have a conversation with a simpleton computer no matter how "polite" it tries to be.
  Usually I'm not happy when calling in the first place and these systems just make it worse.
  Also saying "go fsck yourself" should get me to the same place as "operator".
  And I completely agree that asking me for something you already made me type into the phone is ridiculous.
23. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by drinkypoo · 2011-06-23 05:52 · Score: 1
  
  Well, your one single anecdote has convinced me! I am going to throw away all the fine Craftsman tools with lifetime warranties I purchased there.
  
  It's interesting that you mention tools with lifetime warranties. Let's talk about them for a moment. First, Sears has introduced a new shit line of tools which does not have a lifetime warranty; while the discerning among us know that only Craftsman tools have this warranty, this is borderline deceptive since the only reason anyone buys their tools is that they do have this warranty. Here's another point; their basic socket wrenches are sloppy garbage designed for minimum cost. For the same price you can get the ones with the finer ratchet, which last longer; they don't carry them in the store, but you can order in. In order to get them replaced, of course, you will have to make two visits.
  
  Never mind that after a year, you got a brand new replacement air conditioner when yours was past warranty.
  Reading comprehension failure: I began the warranty claim before the year ended, as explicitly outlined in my comment. I shouldn't really continue with your comment since you've proven yourself to be a self-serving (or Sears-shilling) douchenozzle, but I shall regardless.
  
  Maybe it is just the Sears you are going to that sucks.
  The prior anecdotes are from two different stores, but we're also talking about Sears Corporate when we're talking about warranty claims and claiming to have lost all our info automatically after a year and thus being theoretically unable to complete an ongoing warranty claim.
  
  All I can say is my experiences with Sears have been nothing but absolutely positive.
  But since you won't even log in, you prove that you're not worth listening to.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
24. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  With voice recognition systems, dropping several consecutive expletives tends to get you forwarded to a representative much more quickly.
25. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by AmiMoJo · 2011-06-23 22:47 · Score: 1
  
  It sounds like you need some strong consumer protection laws. In the EU all electrical items carry a statutory 2 year warranty for a start. The warranty is with the shop too, so they can't just say "call the manufacturer".
  In the UK we also have the Sale of Goods Act which states that a product should "last a reasonable length of time". What is reasonable depends on the item, but for things like TVs and computers 5 years is the minimum. If your appliance fails after a couple of years the vendor has to either replace it or can compensate you to an amount based on the value of the item and how long you have had it. Say your laptop dies after three years, the usual lifetime is five or six years so the compensation would be 40-50% of the price you paid.
  If you paid with a credit card you are doubly protected because any item over Â£100 has the same legal status as if the bank had sold it to you. In other words even if the retailer goes bust or is being an arse about you can always get a refund from your bank directly, who will then clobber the retailer on your behalf.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
26. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by black+soap · 2011-06-24 00:55 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.krazyglue.com/products/product.aspx?pc=KG582 Handy 4-packs of single-use tubes, with a convenient carrying case. There's really no excuse to be unprepared.
27. Re:do people really hate IVR systems? by drinkypoo · 2011-06-24 01:25 · Score: 1
  
  It sounds like you need some strong consumer protection laws. In the EU all electrical items carry a statutory 2 year warranty for a start. The warranty is with the shop too, so they can't just say "call the manufacturer".
  I live in California so LEGALLY that is the case here, too. Indeed, in California you may take a broken item under warranty to ANY OUTLET WHICH SELLS THE SAME ITEM and get a replacement... by law. Whether an individual store complies is another issue. And if it's not worth going to court, then you're basically fucked, because nobody will come and take care of it for you otherwise. Indeed, they were legally obligated to replace or refund me the day I walked into their store with a problem. I wanted an AC unit and thought it would not take quite so long and quite so much hassle.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Decreasing inter-message delay by bill_mcgonigle · 2011-06-23 00:54 · Score: 1

I ran into a new variation on the 'getting you to hang up' theme the other day. The on-hold experience was the typical repetition of the phone tech's message barking, "we're so happy to have you as a customer, please hang on," followed by a period of Muzak. The new wrinkle is the length of the Muzak period decreased over time, until about 16 minutes in, it was a staccato alternation of the "we love you" message with a couple seconds of Muzak, and then back. First time they've gotten me to hang up, I'm usually more stubborn than that.

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I hate Shaw.ca by grub · 2011-06-23 00:54 · Score: 3, Informative

I called shaw.ca about my business account. After waiting for over 20 minutes a call center drone answered. Gave all my info then he asked for my business PIN. Huh? So he said he'd mail it to me and it would arrive within 5 minutes. "Can you wait for me to get it?" "NO, so, sorry, we're not allowed to wait." "So I have to wait 5 minutes then wait another 20 on hold at Shaw?"

I guess he didn't like that because the PIN never did arrive. Fuckers, I HATE SHAW.

--
Trolling is a art,
1. Re:I hate Shaw.ca by Mashiki · 2011-06-23 02:58 · Score: 2
  
  Shaw, Rogers, Telus. What do they have in common? They're all Canuck companies that suck beaver balls.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
2. Re:I hate Shaw.ca by Vrtigo1 · 2011-06-24 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  Your problem is you didn't think on your feet and come up with some reason why you couldn't get your PIN. My e-mail is down! There are a lot of companies that try crap like this to get you off the phone, you just have to be a dick to them and actually make them do their jobs. If they insist they have to mail you the PIN, tell them your server is down, you won't be able to get the PIN until at least tomorrow and you have an emergency that will cause you to cancel your account if you can't talk to someone about it RTF now.
Well, shit. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2011-06-23 00:55 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure that this is, second only to the one where earth is entirely reduced to a sphere of computronium surrounding the NYSE and hosting assorted expert-systems trading ever-more-baroque financial instruments with one another in obedience to the profit maximizing imperatives of programmers long dead, one of the more plausible scenarios for world-destroying-robot-apocalypse.

Corporate phone-menu-trees already contain a burning hatred for all mankind. Anything that encourages an unbounded increase in their complexity and sophistication is just begging for a skynet scenario accompanied by soothing, affectively flat, female voices and horribly insipid 'music'.
1. Re:Well, shit. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 05:54 · Score: 0
  
  Mod parent +5 funny please.
For free? by Daetrin · 2011-06-23 00:56 · Score: 1

So how do they make any money off of this? Is it all ads on their website? Or do they throw in a short commercial before they connect your call? I'm pretty sure the companies whose phone "security" they're bypassing aren't paying them for the privilege.

--
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
1. Re:For free? by JasterBobaMereel · 2011-06-23 01:02 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect the answer is ... "Fonolo places the call on your behalf, .." and charges at their rate not your normal rate ....
  
  --
  Puteulanus fenestra mortis
2. Re:For free? by shaiberger · 2011-06-23 02:10 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Hi there, CEO of Fonolo here.
  Our consumer service is offered completely for free.
  We make money from our enterprise product which you can read about at http://fonolo.com/
  Why do we offer the free service?
  1) It promotes what we're doing (especially when we get slashdotted!)
  2) It showcases our technology (the engine that runs the consumer service is also at the heart of the enterprise product)
  3) It lets us try new features and learn about the best way to improve the call center experience.
  4) We wanted it for ourselves!
  - Shai
3. Re:For free? by locallyunscene · 2011-06-23 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  Hi there, CEO of Fonolo here.
  I can't help, but hear Cave Johnson's voice in my head when I read that.
For Canadian ISPs by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:00 · Score: 0

That this service came out in Canada first is no surprise to me. Calling any corp here is painful at best.
1. Re:For Canadian ISPs by lul_wat · 2011-06-23 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  Try calling a Canadian government number.. it's an endless maze of options with no real people
  
  --
  Divide a cake by zero. Is it still a cake?
2. Re:For Canadian ISPs by TheLink · 2011-06-23 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  Soon both sides would just be AIs talking to each other.
  
  And they might even be more intelligent than the humans they replaced :).
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
3. Re:For Canadian ISPs by black+soap · 2011-06-24 00:53 · Score: 1
  
  So, pretty much like the stock market?
Voice 2.0? by cdrudge · 2011-06-23 01:05 · Score: 4, Funny

What the hell is a "voice 2.0 company"? Do I need to pay some type of a voice maintenance package to upgrade to voice 2.0? Where there any point releases to patch my voice 1.0 company that fixed bugs or maybe had some trivial new feature?
With 135 years between releases 1.0 and 2.0, they probably should speed up the release cycle some. Hopefully they don't pull a Mozilla and come out with voice 3.0 in three months and immediately EOL voice 2.0.
1. Re:Voice 2.0? by snspdaarf · 2011-06-23 01:11 · Score: 2
  
  Paul uses Voice 1.0, but Leto II uses Voice 2.0
  
  --
  Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
2. Re:Voice 2.0? by jensend · 2011-06-23 02:11 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you do need a Voice Maintenance Package to upgrade to Voice 2.0 (tm). Please send in your old larynx packed in ice, $10.99 for shipping and handling, and 13 box tops from specially-marked boxes of Captain Crunch to receive your Voice 2.0 Upgrade.
3. Re:Voice 2.0? by Bardwick · 2011-06-23 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget to upgrade your dot-net framework or you'll have upgrade issues.
4. Re:Voice 2.0? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 13:02 · Score: 0
  
  It's like the alien in Independence Day manipulating the scientist's throat to speak. Voice from another person's dead body.
I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by Nimey · 2011-06-23 01:05 · Score: 1

because this is the first time I've heard that term and it sounds like marketing wank, therefore this is a slashvertisement.

--
Hail Eris, full of mischief...

E pluribus sanguinem
1. Re:I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by immakiku · 2011-06-23 01:23 · Score: 1
  
  No kidding. The iPhone app the article mentions is rated 2 stars on the app store. Tons of complaints that it doesn't do what it is described to do.
2. Re:I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by mcvos · 2011-06-23 01:29 · Score: 1
  
  Voice 2.0 definitely sounds stupid. "Phones may be over a century old, but we need to make it sound hip and edgy, like the Web!"
  Sounds like an awesome service, though. At least if they only call me once BigCompany actually picks up the phone. Because the endless waiting is usually the worst. So in what countries do they offer this? My fear is the US only.
3. Re:I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:23 · Score: 0
  
  Seeing as how it's a Toronto based company, I doubt it is US only.
4. Re:I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by mcvos · 2011-06-23 03:21 · Score: 1
  
  I looked at their site, and it's Canada + continental US. But they're looking into expanding to other countries, so that's good news.
5. Re:I stopped reading at "Voice 2.0" by Abstrackt · 2011-06-23 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  So in what countries do they offer this? My fear is the US only.
  They're a Canadian-based company so at the very least, it's available here as well. Quickly skimming their site, it looks like it is (or will be) available in many countries.
  
  --
  They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
What about companies that charge? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:06 · Score: 0

The article is lacking in some details, for example how do they deal with questionable practices like companies that charge you a per minute charge even when you are going through their phone tree or are on hold (like Microsoft customer support)?
Meh by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:11 · Score: 0

All they do is use the "shibboleet" backdoor.
http://xkcd.com/806/
Should be an IP PBX standard by DigiShaman · 2011-06-23 01:16 · Score: 1

Fonolo is providing an interesting service. By why not skip the middleman and make visual directory dialing part of the VOIP standard? Is it not already? It would save so much time and frustration by dialing with any smartphone and instantly be provided with a directory tree, hosted by an IP PBX.

--
Life is not for the lazy.
1. Re:Should be an IP PBX standard by Lifyre · 2011-06-23 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  The difference here at least is it looks like they navigate the phone system and stay on hold for you as opposed to directly dialing an agent. The visual directory as part of VOIP may be nice especially in an enterprise environment where they're not trying to screen people into hanging up.
  
  --
  I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
Easy Solution by Greyfox · 2011-06-23 01:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

Asterisk Reverse Hold! You call them up and then put them on hold through your Asterisk system. It parks the call and plays a loop telling them not to hang up and to dial a number when you come off hold. Then it makes your phone ring and connects the call. Genius! And if they want to leave you on hold for a month, that's fine. At least as long as you come in through their 800 number...

--
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
1. Re:Easy Solution by Rennt · 2011-06-23 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah right. "Please hold the line for an important call." Really? I'm sure if it was that important an actual human will ring me next time ---call terminated---
2. Re:Easy Solution by realityimpaired · 2011-06-23 02:07 · Score: 1
  
  And having worked in tech. support, answering the phones, with a queue, if somebody tried that crap with me, I would release the call and take somebody else who actually waited to speak to me. When I actually had to worry about call metrics and such, that kind of call was perfect: no human on the other end of the line, 5 second call to lower my average and let me actually take the time to help people.
3. Re:Easy Solution by TheLink · 2011-06-23 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  Well then the recorded/AI message just has to be a bit more intelligent.
  
  And I daresay it doesn't have to be very intelligent or coherent given the "minimum grade of caller" that most call centers are not supposed to drop ;).
  
  e.g. "Hello!, oops, sorry dropped my... *garbled*... OK, now where was ... oh not again... *garbled*... Now as I was saying... " .
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
4. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:43 · Score: 0
  
  You're forgetting that the average call center employee has less common sense than a bag of hammers. If you tried this then they'll probably think it's just some new menu in their own call system, or that their call system "did something weird".
5. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 03:53 · Score: 1
  
  So in other words, you think your time as a nobody tech support peon is more valuable than that of the customer that pays your salary?
  What a fucking dickhead.
6. Re:Easy Solution by Chris+Mattern · 2011-06-23 04:19 · Score: 1
  
  I will tell you right now that if I get a phone call and get told to hold I will hang up immediately. Yes, it's happened, and yes, that's what I did.
7. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 04:33 · Score: 0
  
  I'm working tech support now- would do the same.
8. Re:Easy Solution by realityimpaired · 2011-06-23 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  No, I think the time of the people who actually *took* the time to speak to support is more valuable than the people who couldn't be bothered to wait a few minutes. Persumably you're only doing this if there's a queue, and if I have to wait a minute for it to ring back and for you to answer, and that's assuming you actually do answer at that time, it's worse service for everybody else who's waiting in queue. I'm doing a *service* to everybody else if I hang up on a robodialler like that. If your time is so precious that you can't wait on the phone, then send a fucking e-mail, or use chat support online. That's what they're there for. Or here's a thought, if you're *really* that fucking important, have your secretary call in. If you don't have a secretary or PA to call in for you, then you aren't that important.
9. Re:Easy Solution by praxis · 2011-06-23 06:35 · Score: 2
  
  You honestly can't wait 15 seconds to speak to someone that didn't want to listen to your muzak for 30 minutes, but yet you expect them to wait the 30 minutes? They're sitting blocked for those 30 minutes, while you are servicing other callers. It's a wasteful system. Solutions that take one member of pool A (customers) and one member of pool B (support) and put them in a non-blocking queue until one of each is ready and then connects them shortly are ideal solutions. Had the company you work for had the same goals in mind, they'd have implemented that system. They hadn't, so the caller is being smart and making a make-shift version of it. Apparently though, you prefer the status quo (blocking the customer in favor of keeping your latency metric low for yourself).
  15 seconds and you could make the world a better place. I'm sorry you drank the coolaid, though I know why you did (performance reviews).
10. Re:Easy Solution by praxis · 2011-06-23 06:38 · Score: 1
  
  But you expect the customers to hold blocked for 30+ minutes in leiu of yourself waiting 15 seconds? No one is asking you to wait 30 minutes until they have the time, but isn't it just plain nice to give someone a few seconds to pick up the phone the got tired of holding? Whether the system is automated or manual shouldn't matter.
11. Re:Easy Solution by realityimpaired · 2011-06-23 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, the company I worked for did have such a system. It also had a mean time to answer the phone in queue of less than 2 minutes. If somebody can't wait that, they can bloody well call back when they can.
  There are also other methods to communicate with support, which I have mentionned before. Using a callback system like that blocks other customers. You tell me which is more dickish: assuming you're more important than all of the other customers, or taking action to remind you that you aren't.
12. Re:Easy Solution by praxis · 2011-06-23 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  Taking action to remind me that I am not. (Not sure why you assumed I was the original poster).
  The reason is that they are spending 15 seconds of your time to be able to parallelize themselves while they wait on your blocking call. Anything more, and I agree they've abused the system, are wasting your time, and should be sent to the back of the queue. But not permitting them the 15 seconds to respond in order to punish them and having wasted their 30 minutes is more dick-like because you feel like your 15 seconds is more important than their 30 minutes. All they are asserting by putting an automated hold system on their line is that they are afk and are awaiting notification that the other end is no longer afk as well. Even someone at the phone might take 5 seconds to realize that the voice speaking to them is a human and not a we love you recording or something. What is your threashold? 7 seconds?
  "Your call is important to us. (10 second pause) Please hold on the line an our next agent will be right with you. (15 second pause) Your call will be answered in the order that it was recieved. (4 second pause) Hello (6 second pause to realize the last message was legit) *click*.
13. Re:Easy Solution by Greyfox · 2011-06-23 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  Actually having worked tech support myself, I didn't give two shits how the customer got to me as long as I answered the company mandated number of calls a day. Of course, having worked tech support I know that tech support is as worthless as tits on a bull, so I never call them. My options are to find a fix on the internet or never do business with the company again. Or both.
  If everyone had my attitude, there would be no employed tech support representatives.
  
  --
  I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Fonolo.. Toronto.. Trololo by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:25 · Score: 0

Brain explodes.
Legality of recording the call? by beschra · 2011-06-23 01:26 · Score: 1

From TFA, this handy tool has an option to record the calls. Seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

--
It is unwise to ascribe motive
1. Re:Legality of recording the call? by thsths · 2011-06-23 01:48 · Score: 1
  
  If the called party records the call, I don't think they can really argue if the caller does the same.
2. Re:Legality of recording the call? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:00 · Score: 0
  
  "This call may be recorded for quality control purposes" is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, they're saying "we might record this call", on the other hand they could also be taken as saying "you're allowed to record this call".
3. Re:Legality of recording the call? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 02:04 · Score: 0
  
  No worries.. they give you explicit permission at the start of most calls:
  "For quality assurance, This call may be recorded or monitored.."
  Thanks!
4. Re:Legality of recording the call? by Swave+An+deBwoner · 2011-06-23 06:26 · Score: 1
  
  +1 Funny!
That will cause delays by bazmail · 2011-06-23 01:29 · Score: 1

That f*cks up the CRM caller id/customer record lookup that is automatically kicked off when an agent answers as its that canadian companies caller id that will show up. The agents will have to do a manual lookup and ask more questions to verify the customer identity.
1. Re:That will cause delays by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 01:32 · Score: 0
  
  Which they ASK and do anyway.
  How many times have you called in. Punched in a bunch of numbers. Just to have the operator say 'what are the numbers'....
2. Re:That will cause delays by protactin · 2011-06-23 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, I'm sure they have never have thought of that problem...
  Or, if you just read their website, it says that the company gets the customer's CLI as normal.
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-23 01:38 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Phone Wars Are On by thsths · 2011-06-23 01:47 · Score: 1

At least that's what it looks like to me. Of course some companies have a complicated menu and a (long) hold loop on a premium rate number, and that's where any technical solution will fail. $20 just to listen to some hold music? Unfortunately that is no longer inconceivable, it is actually quite common.
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-23 01:48 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion
I like the idea but by Anon-Admin · 2011-06-23 01:50 · Score: 1

My local Phone company formerly known as SBC has a system where it answers the phone and asks you to enter your account number, the last 4 of your social, your phone number, the house or street number, then state your last name. After which it gives you a menu, press 1 for etc. etc. However, when it says "Please hold for the next available representative" It clicks a few times then transfers you to a busy signal. You are forced to hang up and call back and answer all the questions again. When I got hold of someone at the phone company they told me that a new study was done that showed that people felt uncomfortable when calling the phone company and getting a busy signal. Thus they created the system so that no one would get a busy signal when they call in. I wonder how the Fonolo system would handle having to enter all the user identifying data.
1. Re:I like the idea but by TheLink · 2011-06-23 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know about other people but I'd prefer a busy signal until something or preferably someone is ready to answer my call.
  
  I feel more uncomfortable waiting for ages while hearing "your call is important to us", and eventually getting dropped with "sorry all <whatever> are busy".
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-23 02:11 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion
Cloudy by KnownIssues · 2011-06-23 02:44 · Score: 1

Fonolo's cloud-based visual dialing solutions
This might be the most egergious use of "cloud" I've seen yet.
How Original by Seumas · 2011-06-23 02:49 · Score: 2

I've been using lucyphone.com to do this for a couple years, now.
1. Re:How Original by vrmlguy · 2011-06-23 09:55 · Score: 2
  
  Mod parent up! I downloaded the Lucyphone app on my iPhone, and it's a life saver. Like Fonolo, Lucyphone is free; I suspect they make money by providing some service to the companies you call. As someone one said, if you aren't the person paying for something, then you're the thing someone else *is* paying for.
  One minor quibble: Lucyphone needs you to navigate the phone tree, but once you get the message asking you to wait for the next available operator, you just hit the button and go about your normal business. There's only been a couple of times that the rep hung up on Lucy before I could get on the line, and you can be sure I let the company know about it.
  
  --
  Nothing for 6-digit uids?
Non-Dial Map? by TaoPhoenix · 2011-06-23 02:57 · Score: 1

Can we also get visual maps without actually dialing? Verizon frisbees you all over their phone tree with their legendary "I'll get someone who can help you" (either dumps customer back into one of the queues or gets a department that doesn't actually handle your question.)
With a visual map it might show you what to say to the next wrong rep in the chain.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
1. Re:Non-Dial Map? by shaiberger · 2011-06-23 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, If you register for the service (free), you can look at the full phone map for any of the companies in our database.
  - Shai
  (Fonolo CEO)
Sitting in the menu costs them, too by damn_registrars · 2011-06-23 03:00 · Score: 1

You're still using the company's phone time when you're sitting in their menu. Someone should design a system that takes the most obfuscated path through the menu possible, just so that the call costs more money to the company you're calling. Perhaps set it up to spend 5 or more minutes going back and forth needlessly through menus, just to drive up their costs so that they aren't saving money with the menu system anymore?

It isn't that far from what I've done to some unwelcomed telemarketers. If they leave me a voicemail with a callback number, I'll call that number anytime I find a payphone, and waste their time as much as possible just to drive up their costs.

--
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Re:wrong person by TaoPhoenix · 2011-06-23 03:13 · Score: 1

There are only 144 right people in all of Verizon. The other 10,000 reps are wrong and they put you through to each other. I was on the phone for THREE HOURS trying to set up a dry loop DSL that doesn't have voice.

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Simple solution to annoying phone menus by jimicus · 2011-06-23 03:15 · Score: 2

I have discovered a remarkably effective solution to annoying phone menus.
I can type up a reasonably professional looking letter in about 5-8 minutes. 10 if it's a complicated issue. It takes me another 3-4 minutes to walk to the letterbox and 3-4 minutes to walk back.
While I am doing this, I do not have to sit listening to Greensleeves played by a six year old with a stylophone.
IOW, I can get a letter written, printed, stamped and posted in less time than I'm likely to spend on hold with many of these organisations with complicated phone systems. And with considerably fewer grey hairs.
It's unusual to have to deal with something so urgently that it can't wait a few days, and most companies will put a reasonably smart team on to answering letters - frequently people with more pull, certainly people who are more likely to give you an intelligent answer or route your letter to someone who can. Email doesn't seem to have the same effect.
I can't quite believe I'm saying this in these days where we can send enormous quantities of information to the other side of the world in a matter of seconds, but letter writing is the way forward.
Where does it end? by johnny+cashed · 2011-06-23 03:15 · Score: 1

Hopefully it ends with better customer service. If someone is making a solution for crappy voice menu systems, it is because enough people hate them.

Better ways of dealing with the customer is where it should end.
Skip Menus to Agent by Lord_Jeremy · 2011-06-23 03:48 · Score: 1

For what it's worth, for just about every automated menu system (every one I've ever used, certainly), pressing 0 a few times will transfer you to a general customer server agent. You probably will still have to queue for that, but in my experience the wait is a LOT shorter (not to mention you avoid navigating the annoying menus).
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-23 03:50 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion
Obviously by hesaigo999ca · 2011-06-23 04:41 · Score: 1

>One company creates a phone system designed to encourage you to hang up to save them money. Another creates a phone system designed to make it easy to stay on hold indefinitely. I wonder where this ends
Well when I hear that cell phone companies do it on purpose to keep adding just a little more message to someone's voicebox so you can drop a message to your friend, you have to go through all sorts of vocal commands that stop you from leaving a message "very quickly", as everyone would be using this instead....they up the antee by forcing payments on minutes rounding off to the nearest minute etc....
I guess I am glad to see this come out, in order to save so much time from waiting to get to the proper channel, that is if you already know which is the proper channel to begin with, as well, if they do not charge you and call you back, i wonder how much time it takes for them to tell you the other side is ready for you...
as i guess this costs minutes too....
I wonder if it has an hold on hold assignment so that you do not have to wait on hold for anyone, as well, is the fact that you could take this to the next level, and
Fonolo is hosting Webinar today! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-23 05:26 · Score: 0

I found this on their website... thought some of you may be interested.
Register today for “How smart phones will drive the future of the call center experience”
June 23 @ 2pm
Space is limited.
Reserve your Webinar seat now at:
https://www3.gotomeeting.com/register/622487566
You wonder where this ends? by ClickOnThis · 2011-06-23 05:58 · Score: 2

From the summary:

One company creates a phone system designed to encourage you to hang up to save them money. Another creates a phone system designed to make it easy to stay on hold indefinitely. I wonder where this ends.
Well, I suppose it ends with a company that creates a computer system that actually does the talking for you. Both ends of the conversation hire the company and then ... Skynet?

--
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Seems useless by gottabeme · 2011-06-23 11:33 · Score: 1

The only options available for AT&T and Comcast (two high-profile examples) were Main Menu and the 800 number itself, and the Comcast ones were disabled, too.

--
"Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
1. Re:Seems useless by Tacvek · 2011-06-25 09:53 · Score: 1
  
  These both require you to enter a number and the remaining menus change depending on the number you have entered, so unfortunately the way their service works, there is no way to continue, since they cannot predict the rest of the menu. Most other companies do not require such a number so early in the process, so you can at least jump directly to that stage, and often can jump directly to a representative.
  
  --
  Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
Comment removed by account_deleted · 2011-06-24 01:12 · Score: 1

Comment removed based on user account deletion
Better customer service = Repeat business by JJN22 · 2011-06-27 01:16 · Score: 1

It is easy to be cynical about corporate motivations in putting & keeping you on hold, but frankly it is in their best interest to keep you as happy as possible, especially in markets for products that are easily replacable. Some companies are employing strategies to look for customer unhappiness by monitoring social media, looking for unhappy customers. Most customers that leave a company don't call to complain first, they just leave. Check out this link: http://www.buzzient.com./ This is a software that connects a contact center to multiple social media and initiates contact. Imagine if you posted something on Twitter about how Bank of America sucks because they screwed up your deposit...and bingo, someone from the bank e-mails you offering a solution (or free asprin & sympathy).