Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:4695cf80$0$24432$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:


> Sprint was happy to sign
> them up and never gave them a customer service call limit.

True, but they signed them up expecting to act somewhat close to a normal
industry customer. Nobody would expect a customer that calls 40 times more
than average. More than ten times a day (on average), month after month?
My take is that they are these folks a favor- they are obviously too stupid
to own a cell phone if they need that much help.


> If they
> want to terminate them after the contract is up, and/or stop them from
> renewing,
>
> fine, but they didn't break any rules- CS is 24/7 and free according
> to all the brochures.

And costs the business about a dollar a minute. So, I see three options for
Sprint:

1. Continue to take the loss month after month and lose millions of
dollars a month.

2. Keep the customers and simply pass the costs of serving them to every
other subscriber through price increases.

3. Get rid of the dead weight.

Only one of the three options has any benefit to the customer base.


> I better way to handle the "problem" would've been to flag the
> accounts so when they called CS about an often lodged complaint, the
> reps could just explain "we've already tried to satisfy your needs on
> this particular issue and were unable to. In the interests of
> customer service we'd like to offer you the ability to end your
> contractual commitment without any penalty should you choose to..."
>
> If CS "stonewalled" these 2000 customers with the above script, they'd
> get the message and cancel on their own.
>
>

And they still lose money taking the time to explain that.

>
>