Slashdot Mirror


Comcast Training Materials Leaked

WheezyJoe writes: The Verge reports on leaked training manuals from Comcast, which show how selling services is a required part of the job, even for employees doing tech support. The so-called "4S training material" explicitly states that 20 percent of a call center employee's rating for a given call is dependent on effectively selling the customer new Comcast services. "There are pages of materials on 'probing' customers to ferret out upsell opportunities, as well as on batting aside customer objections to being told they need to buy something. 'We can certainly look at other options, but you would lose which you mentioned was important to you,' the guide suggests clumsily saying to an angry customer who doesn't want to buy any more Comcast services." Images of the leaked documents are available on the Verge, making for fun reading.

49 of 251 comments (clear)

  1. McDonallds should sue ... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... for pirating their upsell "do you want fries with that."

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    1. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by thaylin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mc Donalds cashiers are there to sell stuff.. That is different from the people in the back making the food. How fast would they start losing customers if the cooks started coming up and tried to pressure you into buying stuff before they would make the food you already ordered and paid for... Or if you came to the manager with a mistake and instead of fixing the mistake they tried to sell you more stuff...

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    2. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by EmperorArthur · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't it in McD's training manual to upsell as well. Not that I love Comcast or McDonalds, but if this isn't standard operating procedure, then you aren't doing your shareholders right.

      This is more like telling the person in McDonalds that your burger is nothing but two piece of bread and them saying, "Sorry this isn't close to what you ordered, but do you want fries with it?"

      Comcast can only get away with these scummy tactics because most of us don't have a choice. It's Comcast or no TV. More relevant to Slashdot, it's Comcast or dialup. Just think, if they buy Time Warner then almost everyone will enjoy the suffering.

      --
      So lets pretend that we've just completed writing this code, as opposed to having just completed sabotaging it -Altera
    3. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've never had a Mc Donalds manager refuse to let me leave before finishing 20 questions because I changed my mind and decided on Burger King.

      Um sir why are you leaving?
      Are you not happy with our burgers?
      What could we add to your burger to make you stay?
      What if we come to your house at 3:00AM and break your fucking legs?
      Would a knife in mother fucking head change your mind?
      What if we give you a discount on your burger?
      Explain to me again why don't you want this burger?
      I got these cheeseburgers man. Please man... I'll suck yo DICK!

    4. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by schnell · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ugh. Please don't make me sound like I'm defending Comcast, which I loathe.

      But the fact is that every large consumer-oriented business has a part of their playbook that every employee who touches the customer should be a salesperson. Are you the McDonald's cashier? You're selling. Are you the rep in a Verizon store? You're selling. Those are easy. Do you work the fry machine? Then you don't talk to the customer, and you're not selling. That's the difference in your example.

      But pretty much every consumer services megacorp has done the research and learned that every "touch" you have with a customer needs to be a selling opportunity, and you get very good sales results - which seems counterintuitive, but it's true - if you do so. When you call for support, that's a touch and up-sell opportunity even if you were angry when you called in; same when the DSL/cable installer shows up to your house, even if they are late showing up. You may be angry at first, but a shitload of real-world research shows that most consumers are simply unaware of any given company's latest/greatest/whatever, and you might be interested in it once you have vented your frustration with $MEGACORP.

      Again, I have no love for Comcast (I am a Xfinity subscriber in Seattle for TV/Internet and for more than two years I have struggled to read my cable bill and figure it out in a line item fashion) but they are certainly no more evil than almost any other large company in this respect.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    5. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by Gordo_1 · · Score: 2

      Not that most here will care very much, but that's technically a cross-sell. An upsell is when they ask "would you like to biggie size that?" or something along those lines. A cross-sell generally adds something onto your existing purchase, whereas an upsell replaces your purchase with something more expensive.

      I think it's worth understanding these things if only because the deeper your knowledge of these strategies, the better off you are to combat them when they're inevitably used against you.

    6. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by evilviper · · Score: 4, Interesting

      most of us don't have a choice. It's Comcast or no TV.

      TV antennas have worked since the 1940s. With the digital switchover is the 2000s, people even further out can get a digitally-perfect picture in higher quality with less artifacts than any cable or satellite provider offers. And you probably have several times more TV channels available to you than you would expect, possibly several good ones that are not even carried on cable.

      Since the 90s, direct broadcast satellite has been an option for the overwhelming majority of people. If you've got any way to put a tiny dish where it'll have a view towards the equator, you can get subscription TV while avoiding your local cable monopoly.

      And today, with high speed DSL and FIOS, you may be able to get more content than you can watch, for under $10/month. Even if you choose not to go this route, the threat of it is likely to keep your cable co in-line and behaving themselves.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    7. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by DrXym · · Score: 3, Informative
      Unless they've changed from my McJob youth, the standard McDonalds policy was to upsell once according to what a customer didn't order or wasn't specific about. If you bought a burger you were asked if you wanted fries. If you asked for meal (without being specific) you were asked if that was a large meal. etc. You were only supposed to ask once and if a person said no that it was it.

      If they took a page from the Comcast book they wouldn't take no for an answer and would methodically break down your objections until you relinquished and bought that large meal. Oh and you'd have a 12 month contract for large meal with a huge penalty fees if you tried to escape from it.

    8. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by DrXym · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If a customer says no thanks then that should mark the end of the sales pitch. There are occasions when good customer service means not selling shit to them AT ALL. For example if someone rings because of a fault and you fix it with profuse apologies then they are a happy customer and likely to be remain loyal. If someone rings and you badger them to switch packages instead of focussing on the problem then the next time you may hear from them is when they call to cancel.

      And if you REALLY piss people off then sooner or later someone is going to recall that excrutiating call with customer retention and post it up on the internet. And then the reputational damage will far exceed any benefit of being incalcitrant with departing customers.

    9. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a time and a place. Even the McD's employee mopping the floor knows better than to ask a customer who says "clean the bathroom, the stench makes me want to vomit" "Would you like to vomit some fries with that?"

      It's one thing if the customer has called to ask a "how can I" sort of question, it's another if they're calling because you are currently failing to provide what they already paid for. All you'll do that way is make them smile as they imagine sledghammering your balls.

      It's far worse if the customer only got angry during the call because your flipbook/flowchart isn't solving the problem. You've just convinced me that I know more about your network than you do and now you want to sell me more based on your "expertise"?!?

      There's a lot of data that suggests you can get a pile of cash robbing people in the park as well, but that doesn't make it right. The only reason the megacorps get away with it is where the competition is equally slimy.

    10. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by ruir · · Score: 2

      Cannot understand pretty much of it. I am in Europe, in a somewhat backwards country, and speeds between 30Mbps - 100Mbps are pretty much prevalent at prices ranging from 18 to 50 Euros.

    11. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by kilodelta · · Score: 2

      In my case I have Cox and they too try to upsell all the time. It's gotten to the point where I'll assertively say "Cut the shit and address the problem". That usually works. I'm almost at the point where I'm going to tell Cox to stuff their TV and Phone services anyhow. All I really need is the net connection.

    12. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by nabsltd · · Score: 2

      TV antennas have worked since the 1940s. With the digital switchover is the 2000s, people even further out can get a digitally-perfect picture in higher quality with less artifacts than any cable or satellite provider offers.

      I have several antennas (pointed at different cities), and so I can say with a lot of knowledge that you are generally wrong. I'm less than 30 miles from one set of towers and about 40 from the other, and I have far fewer dropouts from DirecTV than from antenna. Not that there's a lot on either, but OTA does have more uncorrectable errors over the long haul. For people farther away (but still in the same DMA, and still needing to get their signal from the same towers), it's even worse.

      As for picture quality when there are no errors, DirecTV isn't a noticeable dropoff, now that every OTA station has at least one sub-channel.

      And you probably have several times more TV channels available to you than you would expect, possibly several good ones that are not even carried on cable.

      There are OTA sub-channels not available on satellite, but many of them are available on the local cable provider (Comcast). I do watch some of these channels quite often, and they do offer programs I can't get anywhere else. That said, if I only had OTA, I wouldn't be able to watch most of the shows that I actually like.

    13. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by punkr0x · · Score: 2
      I have no doubt if McDonald's was the only place to get food, they would be much more aggressive about their policies.

      Sure, you can buy just a burger, but the Big Mac combo meal is only $10.99... a single burger will cost you $23.
      Your fries are cold? Well I see here that you ordered the basic meal.. for just $5 more you get the premium meal, which gives you a maximum fry temperature of 160 degrees. Actual temperature may be less depending on time of day and drive-thru congestion.
      Oh you want ketchup? Sure, you can get that in our add-on package, which comes with ketchup, mustard, relish, vinegar and "special sauce," for just $14.99!
      5 minutes after leaving the restaurant, you would get a phone call asking if you would like to come back and order dessert.
      And your only alternative is to have frozen food delivered to you from space. Sure, it takes 2 weeks, and the options are limited, and most of the food you tastes like rubber, and it costs twice as much as McDonald's... but at least you have options!

    14. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by timeOday · · Score: 2
      You just described the problem in more words.

      Yes, there are reasons for things. Even stupid, annoying things.

    15. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by dskoll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I understand upselling. I run a business and can appreciate its effectiveness. However, there's a time and a place for everything, and customers who do not want to be sold anything should always have their wishes respected.

      When I deal with large corporations who try to upsell me, I tell the reps to stop doing that and deal with my question. It usually works. If it doesn't work, I cut them off and ask to speak to the manager. That always works.

    16. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by saleenS281 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your reputation only matter when your customers have an alternative.

    17. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by saleenS281 · · Score: 2

      That's patently false. The digital switch was a knife to the back of anyone using an antenna. I can tell you first hand at our cabin - we got about 20 channels. Since the digital switch, none of them work. When it was analog, you might get a little static every now and then, but at least you'd get SOMETHING. With digital, you either get it, or you don't. There's nothing in between. That means if you were remotely on the edge of the signal before, you're getting nothing now. And I can tell you at least where we're at, the broadcast signal strength they're using for digital is significantly lower than it was before.

    18. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      I once worked on a contract basis for Wells Fargo, a big bank. As a short-term contract employee working on some Perl scripts, I was required to go through certain training videos, which included such things as going up right to the legal edge of spam.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    19. Re:McDonallds should sue ... by BringsApples · · Score: 2

      Not paying for the internet is always an alternative. A friend told me that most of these internet users that do like to be sold to, also like for their equipment to be setup in default mode, whereby there is no wireless security. If my calculations are correct (everyone that's stuck with a shitty ISP, has neighbors that are also stuck), then there should be enough suckers for the mad people to steal service from.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  2. Grabbing Hands by AlecDalek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The grabbing hands, grab all they can...

  3. Just doin' business by slowdeath · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why is this a surprise? Or even 'newsworthy' on slashdot? This is just good business. When I go to a store, any store, they try and sell me more stuff. Ask me if I found everything I need. Have I tried this new brand of drink? When I have a meal in a restaurant they ask me if I want coffee or dessert. If you don't want it, just say no.

    1. Re: Just doin' business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sure, but in those stores, they don't hold credit - damaging overcharges and fees over your head, either. Comcast has your ass in a sling, and wants to keep it there- and will, until you threaten to sue.

      Sound like your local Walmart, still?

    2. Re:Just doin' business by Fulminata · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but the description above indicates that they are trained not to take "no" for an answer.

      It's not good business to irritate your customers, unless it doesn't matter because you have them locked into your service due to a virtual monopoly.

      Looking to find and fill a genuine need for your customer = good.

      Trying to sell them something they obviously aren't there for (such as additional services when they are looking for tech support) = bad.

      Continuing to bother a customer when they tell you that they're not interested = terrible.

    3. Re:Just doin' business by Livius · · Score: 2

      Because sales, particularly if an employee's performance/compensation is based on it, becomes predatory, and is the opposite of jobs described as technical support or customer service.

      Because some people don't understand that no means no.

    4. Re:Just doin' business by thaylin · · Score: 3

      Wait so this is similar because when you go to a store, whose employees sole job to sell you something, it is like when you go to technical support, expecting someone whose sole job is to support your issue? They are 2 distinct types of employees. When I go to a store I expect to be upsold. When I contact customer service for a problem I do not expect to be sold something.

      --
      When you cant win, ad hominem.
    5. Re:Just doin' business by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      This is not good business.

      This is institutionalized harassment. The training materials suggest squeezing the customer, selling them things they don't need, and convincing them they'll lose something of value--manufactured, if necessary--if they don't buy things. The employees have 1/5 of their job performance predicated on sales success. It's pressure on the employees to put pressure on the customer.

      This is actually illegal. High-pressure sales tactics will get people taken out in handcuffs by the FTC OIG.

  4. I have worked at a few ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is totally normal for ISPs. up-selling, attempts to retain customers at any cost. At comcast it was pressed on our call center tech support guys fairly hard but moreso on customer service reps in the billing/accounts department. at AT&T there was literally a whole department called "the save team" who got financial incentives to retain customers. if you called to cancel, you would be put on the line with the save team. they could get credit for a save if they could transfer a customer back to technical support "oh, our tech guys can fix that problem for you and your service will be fine, plus i gave you a month credit" (or something to that affect). and then the tech staff would get this transferred call about how their printer didnt work. completely unrelated, and after being bounced around and on hold, then being told "uhhh. we cant help you with that", they got right pissed and demanded to cancel again. the save team rep, already got a notch on their saved belt but the customer still quit. it was a corrupt system right to the core :)

    1. Re:I have worked at a few ISPs by blue+trane · · Score: 2

      Great example of the perverse incentives of capitalism. Selling provides a higher return than investing in technical innovation.

    2. Re:I have worked at a few ISPs by sheetsda · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "...attempts to retain customers at any cost."

      I use this to my advantage.

      1. A competing trash service sent me a flier offering the same service at about 60% of the price I was paying. The current service matched the price for 1 year. Even if they're not making a dime on me they're dividing their fuel cost one more way.

      2. Last month I called Time Warner and told them I wanted them to match the introductory price of competing internet service (~75% of regular price for 1 year). They did. This is the second time I've had my price lowered to an introductory rate without being a new customer.

      When these prices run out I'll call again and get the rate lowered again. Or I'll cancel and go to the competitor. Either way, these add up to about $360 saved this year for two 15-minute phone calls. Pretty good $/hr.

    3. Re:I have worked at a few ISPs by blue+trane · · Score: 2

      The idea of an ongoing struggle between results-oriented managers and technical visionaries is not new. Economist and sociologist Thorstein Veblen noted it in his 1904 book The Theory of Business Enterprise.1 Eighty-some years later, John Kenneth Galbraith cited Veblen's view to describe a dynamic still at work in a more modern economy:

      "The businessmen, for good or ill, keep the talents and tendencies of the scientists and engineers under control and suppress them as necessary in order to maintain prices and maximize profits. From this view of the business firm, in turn, comes an obvious conclusion: somehow release those who are technically and imaginatively proficient from the restraints imposed by the business system and there will be unprecedented productivity and wealth in the economy."

      From Bridging the Gap Between Stewards and Creators.

    4. Re:I have worked at a few ISPs by rainmaestro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Must be nice to have competitors. One ISP in my area that provides anything beyond DSL speeds. Bundled utilities that you can't split: water, sewer, stormwater, waste pickup and recycling all in one bill. Even if you go with WM privately, you still pay for county collection as part of your utility bill. Same for recycling.

    5. Re:I have worked at a few ISPs by schnell · · Score: 2

      example would be bell labs.. then the business got greedy and killed innovation.

      The Slashdot crowd can't have their cake and eat it too. "Classic" Bell Labs did a tremendous amount of innovative research that transformed the telecommunications and computer industries. But they did it precisely because they were a regulated monopoly that had no competitors and fat, government-regulated margins. In essence, the old AT&T spent lavishly on Bell Labs projects that in many cases they not only didn't make money on but were actually forbidden (like UNIX) to make money on because they had no need to be competitive.

      But on the flip side, everyone here seems to agree that monopolies are bad and competition is good. Which, for consumers and shareholders, I agree is ideal. But if you're looking for someone to subsidize basic research with little or no investment return potential, don't look to a competitive company to do it. Even Google's "research" is almost always connected to a profit-making initiative, although whether they actually bring it to market is a much different question.

      So long story short - the old Bell Labs only made sense as a luxury that could be afforded by a monopoly that had cash to burn. If you want competition, you don't get businesses that can throw cash into a burn pit for the benefit of science.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
  5. Re:Just don't deal with Americans by Travis+Mansbridge · · Score: 2

    That's just the thing, the customers have no choice. As they maneuver to buyout Time Warner, Comcast themselves state plainly, "Comcast and TWC do not compete against each other in any area"

  6. Rediculous, but nothing new by scoticus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I worked tech support for Time Warner about 5 years ago. We were not 'required' to sell, but we were most certainly pushed to. We were reminded constantly, and people who did sell a lot were praised while the rest of us got the 'why aren't you more like this guy?' treatment. Our calls were randomly selected for review, and if there wasn't 'sufficient' effort put into selling, we were criticized heavily. In these reviews, it seems selling was weighted more heavily than whether we actually solved the issue properly or according to procedure, since nobody really gave you guff for failing to satisfy a customer's tech needs as long as you didn't piss them off. You would think that sending onsite techs out to jobs that could have been solved over the phone would get you in trouble. But as long as you sell, sell, sell, you got a gold freakin star. You ever wonder why you are on hold for so long? Because techs are trying to sell shit after they fix the customer's problem instead of hanging up the damn phone and taking the next call. Multiply that by 30+ calls per tech, 3 or so minutes per call, and you see what a giant waste of time that is. I left that horrible job after six months. I spoke with one of my old coworkers who lasted a little longer than I did, and he said nearly half of the 'veteran' techs left shortly after I had, some of them quite spectacularly. ID badges were thrown, "fuck this sales bullshit" was heard often. These bloody companies have dedicated sales staff, why load down techs with this shit?

  7. Is there an counter to this? by paiute · · Score: 2

    Does anyone have a script a customer can stick to when dealing with Comcast?

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Is there an counter to this? by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Informative

      Does anyone have a script a customer can stick to when dealing with Comcast?

      I used to work in and run call centers for years. (don't anymore, but I manage software that's used in them in some ways) They want to make money off you. You want them to do what you want? Cost them money. The following works every time, I do it myself.
      The key is to:
      A: Do not be reasonable or polite, they count on that. Remember you're in the midst of a con. The person you're talking to is reading a scripted con, that they relies on you being polite and normal. Being not polite and not normal ruins the process.
      B: Do not get upset or use poor language, that's a free ticket to hang up on you. Passive aggressive is the key here.
      C: Waste as much of their time as possible.
      D: Never let them put you on hold. That gives them a mental break, this is a test of endurance. They've been it for hours, you're fresh and can eat chips and drink soda while you ruin their day.

      For example, if you want to disconnect.
      Comcast: Thanks for calling in... long nonsense fill speech later... How can I help you?
      You: I would like to disconnect my service effective immediately, if you waste my time and/or do anything other than disconnect me immediately, I will request a supervisor, I will accept nothing less than a supervisor, I will not allow you to put me on hold, and I will make this call miserable for the both of us until my service has been satisfactorily disconnected.
      *at this point 90% of agents will just do it and take the hit on their stats to not deal with you, but if they wont, read on*
      Comcast: I'm sorry to hear that sir, but I will have to transfer you to our disconnect department...
      You: *cut them off* Please get your supervisor, do not put me on hold. Thank you.
      Comcast: But my supervisor can't...
      You:You're wasting both of our time, call your supervisor over, I'd like to speak to them immediately. Inform them that if THEY can't disconnect my service, I'll be asking for their manager as well. This will continue until my service is disconnected, I will not be put on hold.

      I doubt the supervisor will even get on the phone. Continue down this path, ask for higher and higher level supervisors. There is a chance you will run into a hardass. Don't worry, take down his name, hang up, call back, get someone else. You're shooting for the weakest link. You will find it, they will get sick of talking to you. You'll ruin their stats for the night and they will eventually just say "Screw it" and give you what you want. Their stats are the only measure by which they keep their jobs. You're a loss either way by acting like this so eventually they'll take the hit on the Sale/disco instead of letting you screw up their call times or keep the manager from browsing Slashdot. Remember, the person you're talking to doesn't hate you, doesnt like doing what they are doing and doesn't care if you buy anything. They are required to keep their average call times under X minuites, to make Y sales per month, to have under Z disconnects. Make it clear which stats they are not going to be able to save on this call and which ones they could make up for them on... namely, this could be a very short call and they could stop talking to you, who's clearly unhinged sooner.

    2. Re:Is there an counter to this? by timholman · · Score: 5, Informative

      For example, if you want to disconnect.
      Comcast: Thanks for calling in... long nonsense fill speech later... How can I help you?
      You: I would like to disconnect my service effective immediately, if you waste my time and/or do anything other than disconnect me immediately, I will request a supervisor, I will accept nothing less than a supervisor, I will not allow you to put me on hold, and I will make this call miserable for the both of us until my service has been satisfactorily disconnected.
      *at this point 90% of agents will just do it and take the hit on their stats to not deal with you, but if they wont, read on*
      Comcast: I'm sorry to hear that sir, but I will have to transfer you to our disconnect department...
      You: *cut them off* Please get your supervisor, do not put me on hold. Thank you.
      Comcast: But my supervisor can't...
      You:You're wasting both of our time, call your supervisor over, I'd like to speak to them immediately. Inform them that if THEY can't disconnect my service, I'll be asking for their manager as well. This will continue until my service is disconnected, I will not be put on hold.

      This is way too much effort, unless you happen to enjoy yanking some chains over the phone.

      Here's how you quit Comcast:

      (1) Disconnect every piece of Comcast equipment in your home.
      (2) Load it in a box, and put the box in your car.
      (3) Drive to the nearest Comcast customer center.
      (4) Dump the box on the counter and tell the rep: "I wish to terminate my service immediately."

      No one will argue with you. You have completely bypassed Comcast's customer retention process by doing this. Pay the amount due on your bill, get a receipt with a complete list of the equipment you've turned in, then go home.

    3. Re:Is there an counter to this? by spiritplumber · · Score: 2
      I go for the "befuddled foreigner" approach.

      "Please cut service. I no pay."

      "Please cut service. I no pay."

      "Please cut service. I no pay."

      "Please cut service. I no pay."

      "Thanks you. Glory to Artsozka!"

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    4. Re:Is there an counter to this? by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      When going in, you don't know whether politeness or rudeness will work, really. However, if you start polite, and get nowhere, you can get rude. If you start rude, and get nowhere, you're not going to have much luck getting polite.

      I have moral and social reasons to start polite, too, but I think the tactical advantages are convincing on their own.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Re:Leaches by blue+trane · · Score: 2

    Why does capitalism reward leaches so lucratively?

  9. Re:Just don't deal with Americans by preaction · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm assuming this is a joke, because a lot of people cannot afford to just up and move because they don't like what a utility company is doing.

  10. Tech Support.... by SlowCanuck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work for Fedex tech support - we were supposed to: - Have the call answered by the second ring - Not up sell anything - Be polite and courteous at all times - Troubleshoot anything that is wrong with the computer - the job started back in the day before all software had TCP/IP, and we had to dial in, Oh and Win95 was supported. - All our calls were to be logged and notes made for helping the next guy if they ever called in again. In the same building we had AT&T WorldNet, they had to: - Not answer unless the customer was on hold for at least 1/2 and hour - Priority was given to new customers setting up - When they closed for the night - all calls were left in Que and answered in the morning, if still there. For some reason AT&T always had openings?!?

  11. Re:Just don't deal with Americans by msauve · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course it's a joke. Because it's nowhere close to a free market - all utilities use public "rights"-of-way to make a profit. That legitimately exposes them to regulation. If a real free market is desired, then they would all have to negotiate rights-of-way with every property owner along their routes. And that includes the public (government), from which the price is regulation.

    Even under a system similar to that in place (access in exchange for regulation), unless those rights-of-way are made available to all providers, there is no free market competition. There is no "free market" unless all competitors can compete in every market (location).

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  12. Not suprised by Munchr · · Score: 2

    I'm not surprised at this, it is par for the course for many telephone support agents. I used to do telephone support for Hewlett Packard, until they let me go because I couldn't meet the sales quotas. Not because customers disliked me, not because I couldn't fix customers pc's, but because I couldn't meet a goal of $80.00-$100.00 average revenue per call. Most companies treat their support departments as a revenue drain, since the price of support is no longer built into the purchase price of the item sold in the race to reach the cheapest prices to gain market share. In the case of Comcast, it's pure profit since they overcharge on the services anyway.

  13. Very normal by Orgasmatron · · Score: 2

    And has been for decades. Every customer contact is a sales opportunity. EVERY contact.

    After the dot com bust (the first one), I had bills to pay, so I ended up in a call center for the local cable company. It wasn't quite the low point of my life, but it was in the running.

    The call center was brand new, and the high speed data side was briefly allowed to operate normally, but soon company politics pushed out the (technical) director, and replaced him with a MBA (and EEOC-bingo winner).

    We were all trained to sell, instructed to sell on every call, and evaluated on selling. This was policy from day one, but widely ignored in my department until the MBA took over.

    I earned a reputation for solving problems. Incompetent or uncaring employees would fail to fix things over and over again, pissing off customers. After months of continuing problems, they would call to yell. Usually, they'd end up getting more excuses and empty promises. Sometimes they'd get me (or one of a handful of other fixers).

    I'd mute my microphone until they were done venting, then I'd figure out what the hell was wrong, and get it fixed, often with a generous service credit to appease them for the months that we'd dicked them around.

    Over a few months, I solved hundreds of problems (some going back for many months or years), probably prevented at least a couple of suicides (monopoly, it was us or nothing) and maybe a mass shooting or two (yes, some of them really were that angry).

    One thing I know for sure is that none of those problem calls wanted a fucking sales pitch. "Mr. Smith, now that I've fixed the problem that has prevented you from using the service that you've been paying for these last six months, and you've put your guns away, can I upsell you into a premium package?" Yeah, right. Maybe they'd be interested in an upgrade in a few months, after we'd re-established a bit of trust, but not right away.

    One of my randomly selected evaluation calls happened to be one of my problem calls. The recording followed the call through our system, so it started with 20 minutes of him yelling at one of the sales girls, then her calling me in tears asking to transfer the call, then him yelling at me, then me figuring out the problem and fixing it, then him thanking me, almost in tears himself.

    I had an awesome score on that call, but still failed the review because selling was mandatory. I told my supervisor that he'd better screen my review calls from then on because I had no intention of following the policy. He could either run interference for me and keep me around until one of my interviews panned out, or he could write me up for my second and third strikes as they came up.

    I was gone before my next review came up, so I have no idea what he decided.

    I kept in touch with some friends, and still lived in their service area. The call center went downhill from there. They switched to a voice attendant, so even the people that were happy when they dialed their phones were pissed off by the time they managed to talk to a human. I know I always was. (At first they had a backdoor, swearing three times would get you to a human quickly, but word got out and they disabled that feature.)

    Moving to a non-monopoly town (three[!] fiber lines in my yard! 75 meg up/down for cheap!) was the wisest move of my internet life.

    --
    See that "Preview" button?
  14. Almost all tech support requires upselling by iCEBaLM · · Score: 2

    I've worked in the telephone tech support business for 10 years. I have performed tech support for fortune 500 companies you would instantly recognize.

    towards the half-way point of my stint, upselling became a *required* part of the job, a metric on which your performance was measured.

    First incentives were put in place to weed out those who didn't upsell: shift bids started being held every 90 days instead of "as the business needs dictated" with top sellers given first picks. This caused those who didn't sell to get terrible shifts, requiring many to quit due to life obligations.

    Then those who failed to sell were given bad reviews, causing them to lose out on annual salary increases.

    When I left poor sellers were being written up, put on notice, and eventually terminated.

    Note, that positions these people were initially hired for were inbound technical support jobs with no mention of selling anything. These people would be manning the technical support lines for major corporations that you have heard of, and no one calling any of them would expect to be given any kind of sales pitch.

  15. Re:Just don't deal with Americans by jbmartin6 · · Score: 2

    No, those rights are not available to other providers, that is part of the problem. Typically the local governments grant a monopoly to one provider and keeps out all others, in exchange for some consideration from the cable operators. This is one reason why Comcast and Time Warner don't directly compete in any areas.

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  16. Re:Just don't deal with Americans by jratcliffe · · Score: 2

    Except in a VERY few instances (essentially, housing developments), there are no exclusive franchises or right of way agreements in the US. They're (again, with a very small number of exceptions) prohibited by law (see 47 U.S.C. 253(a)). Comcast and Time Warner cable don't compete with each other because, again, it's a terrible business model. The standalone operators (RCN being the best example) who have tried it have almost universally gone bankrupt in the process. The only ones who have done it/are doing it (i.e. Verizon with FiOS, Google with Google Fiber) are either (a) not making a return on their investment (i.e. if they were a standalone business, they'd have gone bankrupt), or (b) have been able to negotiate very attractive terms without things like citywide buildout requirements, allowing them to cherry-pick areas where the service can be profitable.