Sprint phone company kicks customers to the curb

I'm shocked that big corporations are starting to pull crap like this. This is really disgusting.

Anyone with customer service training knows that it is a Customer Service Rep's duty to go out of his way to help & accomodate the customer, and basically kiss the customer's butt to as much of an extent as is possible. It is the corporation's duty to allow for that to happen. Anything less than that is bad customer service. What Sprint did here is an atrocity against customer service.

I hope there is some sort of consumer backlash against this or else eventually things are going to start going down a slippery slope and get to the point where no one knows what customer service is any more. Because corporations will simply stop providing it if consumers let them get away with not providing it.

Is no customer service going to be the next great immorality that big corporations embrace? :idea2:

Sprint phone company kicks customers to the curb

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sprint Nextel defends cutting customers By DAVID TWIDDY, AP Business Writer

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Sprint Nextel Corp. isn't apologizing for its decision to ax customers it determined were calling customer service too often.

The nation's third-largest wireless provider sent letters to about 1,000 subscribers June 29, saying the company's records showed they had made frequent calls for help with questions about billing and other account information.

"While we have worked to resolve your issues and questions to the best of our ability, the number of inquiries you have made to us during this time had led us to determine that we are unable to meet your current wireless needs," the letters said.

The customers were told their service agreements were being terminated, they wouldn't owe anything on their final bill, and the company would waive early termination fees. They also were told to switch to another wireless provider by July 30 if they want to keep their phone number.

In debate on the Internet, Sprint's move has attracted criticism that the company is penalizing consumers for trying to get what they paid for, or that the frequent calls are more a reflection of poor customer service by Sprint itself.

But Sprint officials said Monday this isn't a case of someone being flagged by a computer program, and that an internal review lasting six months to a year focused on the types of problems the callers had and what information they were seeking.

"These accounts have been researched very carefully," Sprint spokeswoman Roni Singleton said. "We feel strongly that the decisions we made, we stand by them. These decisions weren't made lightly."

Singleton said the targeted subscribers each made an average of 40 to 50 calls a month to customer service. She wouldn't say how that compared with the overall number of calls logged by the customer service department in a given month.

Singleton said the review also found that the subscribers often were calling about the same problems over and over after Sprint officials felt they had resolved the issue. She said some callers were repeatedly asking for information from other customers' accounts, which customer service workers aren't allowed to divulge.

"If the average person is calling less than once per month and these people are calling 40 or 50 times more, that takes away from customer service," Singleton said. "Our priority is to improve the customer experience."

Officials at competitors AT&T Wireless and Verizon Wireless said that while they may terminate customers who are abusive toward customer service operators or violate other terms of their service agreements, they don't terminate customers because of customer service calls.

"We have never severed ties with customers in a mass mailing like this," said Verizon spokeswoman Cheryl Bini Armbrecht.

CIBC World Markets analyst Tim Horan said in a research note to investors that he didn't see anything alarming with Sprint's decision.

"Sprint has taken a number of steps to improve the 'quality' of its customer base and we view this measure in the same light," Horan wrote.

Sprint, which has about 54 million subscribers, has been trying to upgrade its customer base, tightening credit requirements and attempting to attract customers who will spend more each month on data services, such as Internet browsing, music downloads and streaming video.

During the most recent quarter, the company said it gained just 600,000 new customers, while AT&T and Verizon gained 1.2 million and 1.7 million, respectively.

Earlier this month, Sprint unveiled a new marketing campaign aimed at highlighting its network speed and capabilities, an attempt to distance itself from earlier marketing campaigns that were criticized as unfocused and confusing.

Makes sense to me. Cutting those people improves customer service for the rest.

Sprint: People would complain less if your service wasn't that bad in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Makes sense to me. Cutting those people improves customer service for the rest.

---

Only until they decide that "the rest" calls customer service too much and start cutting off "the rest" also. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navaros

Only until they decide that "the rest" calls customer service too much and start cutting off "the rest" also. :dizzy2:

---

Well...then those people will switch companies and sprint will go bankrupt. What's the problem again?

The problem is that if this "kick our customers to the curb" thing catches on, there will be no company to switch to because they will all have become equal in providing no customer service.

If you were my customer and you were calling me fifty times a month because you're lonely, or you're a complete nutter, or a belligerant arse with an axe to grind with the rest of huminaty, then I'd cut you off too. Just because you pay me $ 15 a month doesn't mean I have to cater to your every whim, or be your shrink, or have sex with you, or listen to you insisting I ate the soul of your deceased cat last tuesday.

Meh, I don't even want to think about the amount of completely unreasonable people there must in a client pool of 54 million. :smash:

To me it sounds like Sprint is just trying to get rid of problem customers. It probably comes down to a simple math question:

X = Customer Service hours spent per month * average CS rep hourly wage
Y = customers average monthly bill - operating costs

If X exceeds Y, these customers are costing you money, on a continual basis. If X greatly exceeds Y, they are not worth keeping. Who really needs to make 40-50 customer service calls a month?

Of course Verizon, AT&T, etc. will have a field day on this, but I'm not bothered by this at all. If you owned a store and a "customer" was constantly coming in and asking tons of questions, tying up employees, holding up register lines, and generally being a PITA, how long would you wait before politely telling him to go to your competitor down the street?

I'm with Sasaki, calling a customer service 40-50 times a month(that's more than once per day on average:dizzy2: ) and asking the same stuff again and again AND asking about information for someone else's account is very weird at the least.
If your problem is that complicated that repeatedly calling a service number about it and getting no good answer, you might for example want to go to a store and talk to someone in person, look it up on the net or just admit that cellphones aren't made for you.:sweatdrop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Navaros

The problem is that if this "kick our customers to the curb" thing catches on, there will be no company to switch to because they will all have become equal in providing no customer service.

---

Well, all the troublemakers will be out of a phone, at least until someone starts a company that won't throw them out.

Sorry, but I'm supporting Sprint here.

CR

I have Sprint and was satisified with them until they joined with NexTel. Since then, the quality of service has degraded unbelievably. Phone waits to talk to customer service are absurd, they frequently transfer you all over hell and back which results in longer wait times, and they have screwed up my minutes several times.

I hate them, but my wife insists on staying. At least she likes Apple more than Sprint!


AT&T and iPhone, here we come!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinus Arma

AT&T and iPhone, here we come!

---

Depending on how long you want to keep and how often you want to use it, it may become rather expensive.

It seems as if these Sprint fellows have a dim view of other customers as well.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sprint boots 200 American patriots for using their phones

You're not good enough for our 'best' service, soldiers
By Cade Metz in San Francisco
Published Thursday 19th July 2007 22:17 GMT


Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint accused 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily canceled their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one of these embattled national heroes.

According to our war veteran, who recently posted his story to the forum at SprintUsers.com, the 200 troopers were roaming excessively because Sprint doesn't provide wireless coverage in West Point, home to the U.S. Military Academy.

"Why on earth I can't get coverage at the United States Military Academy, 40 minutes away from New York City is a mystery to me," he says. He also points out that Sprint's coverage map puts West Point in the "best" category.

The 200 were re-deployed to the Academy shortly after a 12-month stint in Iraq, and when they powered up their phones, they couldn't get even a hint of a signal on Sprint's network. Several of the soldiers were already using Sprint's "free roaming" feature, which let them tap into partner networks at no extra charge - so they encouraged the rest to do the same.

Coverage was still pretty poor, but at least they had coverage. "Even with roaming, calls are sketchy at best, and very unreliable," our hero explains, "but we were satisfied to at least be able to call home for a few minutes an evening and let our families know that we were well."

Then Sprint brought the hammer down. At the beginning of July - just as the nation was about to celebrate its Independence Day - the 200 received letters informing them that their Sprint accounts would be canceled because they were roaming too much. Each were told they had until the end of the month to find a new carrier - and many had just upgraded to new Sprint phones.

"Because we recently came back from a deployment to Iraq, many Sprint users bought new phones in order to catch up to the updates in technology that we missed out on over the 12 months we spent out of the country. As we all know, Sprint phones are not interchangeable with other carriers, and these are basically going to be very expensive paper weights for many members of the unit," our hero continues. As luck would have it, he'd just ordered a new Sprint phone, and it arrived on the same day as his Sprint cancellation notice.

The overarching problem is that members of the military are constantly on the go. Excessively roaming is part of the job. The 200 will only be in West Point until mid-August, at which point they're returning to their home base, where Sprint coverage is evidently quite good.

When The Reg contacted Sprint, the company acknowledged that excessive roamers will have their contracts terminated, but claimed it will reinstate service for members of the military. "As part of a general enforcement of the roaming policies that all customers agree to under our terms and conditions, we have contacted some customers about violation of those policies, due to excessive roaming," the company said. "We understand that military customers may have unique circumstances regarding roaming, and we will not discontinue service for those customers. Any military customer contacted by us regarding excessive roaming simply needs to contact us to confirm their military status to have the roaming issue waived and to ensure continued service, and we apologize for any inconvenience."

Interesting, they offer a free roaming service and then kick you if you actually use it.:laugh4:
Reminds me of some older stories where ISPs kicked users for actually using their internet flatrates a lot. It's a good thing they're fighting for customers these days.