theshark8777
07-06-2007, 11:01 PM
One of the most frequent complaints levied against wireless provider Sprint is the lengthy waits experienced when calling into its customer service department. Sprint is taking a strong stance and making a major change to solve the problem, though perhaps not in the way you might be expecting. The company has decided to cancel the accounts of subscribers who it feels call customer service too frequently. According to BetaNews, letters were sent out on June 29 to 'problem' subscribers notifying them of the termination of their service, which goes into effect at the end of this month. It's not known how many customers received Sprint's Dear John letter, which read, "The number of inquiries you have made to us during this time has led us to determine that we are unable to meet your current wireless needs."
This move mirrors similar practices by companies like financial services firm ING Direct, which frequently "fires" customers who put too many demands on the company's purposefully limited customer service facilities. However, this is a core aspect of ING Direct: delivering low fees and high returns on investments at the cost of "no frills" account access. Sprint, on the other hand, doesn't exactly offer prices any lower than the competition, nor any other advantages. And, given the fact that Sprint is currently bleeding customers (220,000 lost in the first quarter of 2007), it seems odd the company wouldn't be accommodating to anyone willing to sign one of its contracts.
And here's something else to ponder: If Sprint can charge you a $200 fee for terminating a contract early, why can't you charge Sprint for doing the same?
This move mirrors similar practices by companies like financial services firm ING Direct, which frequently "fires" customers who put too many demands on the company's purposefully limited customer service facilities. However, this is a core aspect of ING Direct: delivering low fees and high returns on investments at the cost of "no frills" account access. Sprint, on the other hand, doesn't exactly offer prices any lower than the competition, nor any other advantages. And, given the fact that Sprint is currently bleeding customers (220,000 lost in the first quarter of 2007), it seems odd the company wouldn't be accommodating to anyone willing to sign one of its contracts.
And here's something else to ponder: If Sprint can charge you a $200 fee for terminating a contract early, why can't you charge Sprint for doing the same?