To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 13:30:03 -0400 Subject: [WSFA] Re: cell phones From: ronkean at juno.com Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 09:54:47 -0400 Liza Kessler <LKessler at lharris.com> writes: > I had the second worst customer service experience of my life with > Sprint PCS. They are extremely attentive when you go in to buy a plan > and/or > phone. Have trouble with the phone, and you are more than likely to > be treated like a not-too-bright 8 year old. I was so outraged by the > condescending humiliation-tactics used by their staff that I filed a > complaint with the Better Business Bureau, and paid the $150 > termination of > service fee. I've had a more fortunate experience with Sprint customer service. Back when they were using Ericsson GSM phones, before they switched to a CDMA system (before they became Sprint 'PCS'), I had an intermittent in the battery such that the phone would power down when the battery was pressed against the phone at a certain spot. I went in to the store and demonstrated this by connecting the bad battery to the phone and showing that it cut off when pressed in a certain way, then subsequently connecting a good battery (which I had with me) and showing it did not cut off when pressed in the same manner. Thus the problem was with the one bad battery, not the phone itself. They readily gave me a new battery in exchange for the bad one, and did not even ask for my name, account number, nor sales receipt. Businesses often use a canned 'by-the-book' troubleshooting procedure which is designed to identify and isolate the problem when the procedure is run by non-technical customer service people. The procedure assumes little or no technical knowledge or even common sense on the part of the employees or the customers, so it might seem condescending as applied. Verizon is that way with its DSL service - customers with DSL problems sometimes have to be 'escalated' through layers of increasingly schooled support people until the problem is solved. It took me two weeks and hours on the phone with technical support to get my DSL problem resolved that way, but when it was finally corrected, by switching my home phone line to another cable pair, the connection has since been nearly trouble-free, and I have not had to call DSL technical support in nearly a year. Last October, my Qualcomm 2700 Sprint PCS phone was run over by a car and damaged (the display screen, at least, was partly broken), though remarkably it still 'worked' in the sense that it could still make and receive calls. I bought a used replacement phone (same model) from a private party, then called Sprint customer service to get my service switched over to the new phone. The procedure took only a couple of minutes, and there was no charge for that. Also, I found out that Sprint PCS has 'unpublished' pricing plans which may be better for some people than the published plans. Last summer, I had considered switching from Sprint PCS to Nextel, which would provide a lot more minutes for not much more money than my Sprint plan, though my preference would have been to pay even less money for minimal minutes, but I already had the lowest monthly cost Sprint plan. I went to the Sprint store to find out how much they would pay me for my used phone and charger (they would pay nothing, it turned out), but they did direct me to go into a glass booth there with a 'red phone' direct line to customer service, so I could call and arrange to cancel the service. When I explained my concerns to customer service, they offered to cut my monthly charge in half, and more than double my minutes, under a 'new' plan. I took the deal. Just now, when I checked the Sprint PCS website, I found the plan I was offered is less than one third the monthly cost of the plan now listed there with the lowest monthly charge. More generally, it is a good idea for cell phone users to check their provider's website every so often for new plans. Old customers tend to be left on old plans, even when newer ones become available which provide more minutes for less money, or much more minutes for the same money. Providers offer a frequently changing welter of plans and 'specials' which are designed to extract the maximum amount of revenue possible by making each customer pick the plan best tailored to their intended usage. If grocery stores did the same thing, they would vary the price you pay for a loaf of bread in accordance with the number of loaves you agreed to pay for per month, whether or not you actually pick up all of your bread allocation for the month, and whether or not you actually eat all the bread you contract for. If you needed to buy more bread than was allocated for the month, the extra bread would be super-expensive, $5 per loaf. Cell service providers have high fixed costs, while the marginal cost per minute of airtime for them is nearly zero. They must try to sell as many minutes as they can, but at the same time try to control usage so that it falls within the capacity of the system at peak usage times. That is part of the explanation for the weird pricing plans. > Some of you may know that I was stuck in Riverside, > California, September 11, and wound up driving back home. By the time all of the bills were in, I had over $900 in roaming charges. (I had NOT understood > the roaming charges fine print. Read that extra extra carefully.) When I > called to explain what happened, and that there was no way I could pay that > much any time soon, they worked with me, eventually knocking about half > that off my bill. Still a big ugly phone bill, but given that I had made all > those calls, I thought it was generous of them. > It is indeed important to understand 'roaming' charges in a situation like that. Some providers/plans make no distinction between local use and out-of-area roaming, and long distance calling. Misunderstood roaming charges which hit heavily on an innocent user can often be negotiated on a one-time basis, because the providers know that situations like that often result in unhappy customers who may abandon the service and leave the large unexpected bill unpaid. In the long run, it is better for a provider to keep a happy customer as opposed to making the customer an unhappy former customer. Ron Kean . ________________________________________________________________