Poor service, on hold for ages, no resolution to problems? You may have a low Customer Score with the company. More companies are using it.

[Mooshi]

BRB making a trip to store to grab more tin foil.

 

No, seriously. I don't get how any of this is of any shock. The saying "the customer is always right" is about as accurate as 4chan is good. Simply put, if you're a bad customer be it always late or the type who fishes for credits, the company thinks less of you.

 

It's why when a customer tells me they'll switch to Sprint, I don't care. Go ahead and switch to poor service with the price to match. Though, it's less complex than some illuminati shit this thread is leaning towards. If you're cool with good tenure, I'll cut you breaks. If you're a dick, I help you less. It isn't rocket science.

[Orangeator]

Wait so are you saying companies reward good customers and don't go the extra mile for those that pay the least and complain the most? What?!?! No way... I never could have ever thought that was possible........

[Semper]

2 hours ago, poochyena said:

Customers can rate companies, so it only makes sense that companies rate customers.

This is entirely true, however there's two issues:

1. The way I rate a company is based almost exclusively on their post-sale customer support. It's one thing to build a product, it's another to believe that your customers should receive what they buy.

It's the reason I'll never buy an ASUS product, ever again.
It's also the reason that I'll never buy a Swiftech product, ever again.
Once again, it is the reason that I regularly return to EVGA,

It's even why I frequently shop with Amazon, and why I believe that Best Buy is just barely treading water.
Others have had different experiences, some different from mine. The information I have, my experiences, are shared so that others can make an informed decision with alternative perspectives.

 

2. If they choose to rate me based upon using their services, in a legally binding contract, and rate me as a "poor" customer, offer lower priority, and generally don't care much if they have my business, I'll gladly take it elsewhere. They're creating their own fault with the way they treat customers. A poor company gives you a faulty product, then doesn't stand behind it, and rates me as a poor customer is on the fast-track to losing customers to competition.

[AntiTrust]

lol at least its not quite as bad as china's social credit system.. yet

 

for those who dont know, china is going to be assessing people for their overall social and business reputation and giving them a score.. lol 

[LinusTech]

It wasnt as sophisticated as this but I know for a fact that while they were being yelled at on the phone, NCIX CSRs would be busy poking around in the customer's history to see if they're a pain in the ass or generallyh a good customer. 

 

And it would absolutely affect whether you could get the rules bent for you. 

[Emberstone]

Probably why HP will never fix my damn computer's wireless card. I've only ever bought one computer from them and complained about it from the first day.

 

(HP Envy X360 13, Ryzen 7 2700U model. I won't have a wireless card on a cold boot; I have to turn it off and turn it back on every time I boot. Since updating the BIOS, rather than a wireless card, I just get a black screen unless I do a hard shutdown and turn it back on.)

[Jito463]

10 hours ago, Teddy07 said:

I am fine with t hat because I would do the same if I had a huge business.

1 hour ago, LinusTech said:

It wasnt as sophisticated as this but I know for a fact that while they were being yelled at on the phone, NCIX CSRs would be busy poking around in the customer's history to see if they're a pain in the *** or generallyh a good customer. 

 

And it would absolutely affect whether you could get the rules bent for you. 

Local businesses have been doing it since businesses first existed.  If you're a good customer, they'll treat you better.  If you're a pain in the keister.....

 

While this method may be a bit more automated (possibly too automated), it's essentially no different than what local businesses already do.

[ARikozuM]

 

20 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

While this method may be a bit more automated (possibly too automated), it's essentially no different than what local businesses already do.

The fact that it is automated is the main issue. 

[Canada EH]

Quote

You may have a low Customer Score with the company. More companies are using it.

That is why I use different names and different tele #'s when returning things to the store, and hardly use debit or credit. Pressure washer, what have you. Plus its better to return the item to a different store if possible.

[sof006]

If companies start doing this I expect a lot of customers to leave and go elsewhere.

[YaBoiWill]

15 hours ago, Mihle said:

So if you do something they consider bad, you get bad customer service, and if you complain that they get bad customer service they get even worse customer service like a downhill spiral?

Negative feedback loop that they're not going to break, it has to be you who breaks the cycle. 

Just move retailer and start with a blank score again 

[TechyBen]

15 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

I read into the 2nd source since the first requires signing into WSJ to read fully.

 

Based on what I've read of the 2nd source, I now feel confident that a company I used to buy from probably used CLV based on my experiences with them.

 

Honestly, I think that CLVs should be regulated just like Credit Scores and consumers should be able to find out their score from each company using it.

Nah, people can just remember you and/or you have a "lemon" of a product/service.

CLV seems really really new, and I've not seen/heard of it in use, but HAVE seen workers/businesses just put notes on customers files like "shouts a lot" or "unrepairable, but no warranty, pass to manufacturer". So yeah, sometimes they are not telling you the whole truth, but it's no conspiracy, just bad customer service, or a roll of the dice on your treatment (I've called companies and had amazing service from one person, then dreadful from the other).

[S w a t s o n]

We didn't have a formal version of this at the telecom companies (Bell and T-Mobile) I did customer service for but we could see customer history and customer value (lifetime money spent) and customer credits (how much money we've given them back). The history would be more of a unspoken decision making thing or used to verify promised deals. The value was used by Managers to determine how much of a credit you could get.

[KuJoe]

17 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

What do you think with the ever growing number of companies that uses CLV score?

I think it's genius. As long as it's not used for things like healthcare or other life impacting services (i.e. clean water, power, etc...) then I strongly support this even fully knowing my score will be lower than others. All customers are not equal nor should they be treated equal or the company's performance will be impacted. If you want a company to succeed and thrive then don't limit them by enforcing "in a perfect world" expectations. But at the same time, see my response to your next question.

17 hours ago, GoodBytes said:

Should a law be imposed by the government forcing companies to be able to give preferential treatment to customers?

No way, the government has no business trying to impose how a company is run (as long as the company isn't hurting anybody or becoming a threat to the environment, economy, or community). Let the customers dictate that themselves by voting with their wallets.

[Tech Enthusiast]

17 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

It should be banned IMO. Its just nuts to practically ignore normal costumers in favor of the wealthy....

We are not talking about ignoring here, we are talking about prefering to cater to good customers. And good does not nessessarily mean wealthy either.

 

Think about Amazon for example.

Person A is buying 3 products / month for the past 15 years and is only ever returning defect stuff.

Person B is buying a lipstick every 3 months and is returning every second for not liking the colour.

Person C is buying 10 mice, with the clear intention to return at least 9 after trying them. This person is doing the same for everything they buy.

 

Giving Person A more slack when an issue pops up, should just be natural and not considered "bad practice". And yes, that includes shorter waiting times, better offers, etc.

I wholeheartly agree with companies doing this, as way too many customers try to abuse every service they can get away with. And the people indirectly paying for that are the good costumers that don't try to cheat the system.

 

I am more than happy to consider myself Person A in this example (the stats are actually pretty close to reality) and i definitly noticed the support and service getting better over time. Now, when i call Amazon for whatever reason, they get out of their way to makeing sure i am happy. I can return stuff a year after buying it, i get discounted prices, a week after i bought it for a higher price. If i ever return something i get my money back before it even ships, i get it the moment DHL scans the return label after it leaves my hands. And if said item does not reach Amazon due to DHL screwing up, they don't bother me at all.

 

If this level of service would be done for Person B as well, Amazon would go bancrupt. Even with all the money they have right now. So again, i am very happy they are doing this to make sure good customers are top priority over scammers, abusers and jerks.

[jagdtigger]

55 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

We are not talking about ignoring here, we are talking about prefering to cater to good customers. And good does not nessessarily mean wealthy either.

Standard corporate thinking:

Good customer: spends a lot of money, no/very few complaints

Bad customer: complains a lot or dont spend that much money or not that important

 

Same thing MS does. Home users get beta updates because they arent important and corporate users get the stable versions tested out by home users.

[Tech Enthusiast]

42 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Standard corporate thinking:

Good customer: spends a lot of money, no/very few complaints

Bad customer: complains a lot or dont spend that much money or not that important

Exactly what i agree with. 

That is how it should work. I don't want to suffer worse service, because some jerks try to abuse the system because they think they are the brightest light bulp around.

[jagdtigger]

43 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Exactly what i agree with. 

And that is where you are wrong. Just because someone does not spend that much money it doesnt mean its a bad customer... (same for their subjective excuse a customer being not so important to them)

[Tech Enthusiast]

19 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

And that is where you are wrong. Just because someone does not spend that much money it doesnt mean its a bad customer... (same for their subjective excuse a customer being not so important to them)

Well, no. But a person spending more is a better costumer.

The key point here is not to piss on "normal" customers, but on "poor" customers. And those usually don't include people not spending money, but abusing the system at the cost of good customers.

 

And if you like it or not:

If a company cuts you 10$ slack somehow, you should have spend at least 10$ there, no?

It would be pretty self centered to demand a company spending more money on you, then you spend on them. They need to make a profit somehow. So cutting high volume AND good customers more slack than a crappy customer that returns everything and spends nothing, is just plain obvious. Everything else would be bad for good customers. Just common sense really.

[GoodBytes]

I'll add, that the problem is that it automated.

 

So let's say you have 2 companies for you internet. one is more expensive than the other.

Company A can't give you good service for you area (say, I don't know.. really old lines, so it can't deliver the modern internet speed that you are looking for).

So you go with Company B, but Company B is a bit out of your budget. So you can only afford their basic plan. You can't take extras, you can't take anything as a result. Internet works great for you with this company, but then they shortly increases their pricing for everyone, so you call and complain to have it, at least back down to the old rate...And maybe do that again a few month later when they continue to increase the rate as the plan was to reach this new price for the company and just wanted to do it in steps. But you like a lot the company and highly recommend it to people. But regardless, because you called, you have low score now... is it fair? Especially that the price ins't lead the company to billions more in profits? So now you are stuck with horrible score, and one day a tree falls and cut the line, and now, the company fixes their premium customers first, and you need to wait over a month to get that line fixed., not to mention the hours of waiting on the phone.

[Thaldor]

Well nothing new here, as long as it's not presumably done it's fine, but apaprently it's growing like a the tipping culture and and when they see your phone number it's already decided that you are a turd.

 

It's like companies today don't know what kind of thing a customer service is. Tipping is a great example, like why the hell some restaurant owner thinks that I will be a customer in the future if I get bad service just because I don't pay extra or seem like a guy who pays extra? Like I couldn't walk 100m more to their competitors restaurant which probably has just as good food and the service can only improve. IF we had tipping culture where waiters get paid by the tips here in Finland, there probably wouldn't be a single waiter anywhere because we are ready to line up for hours to get a free plastic bucket we probably are far more than capable to serve ourselves in the restaurant rather than pay something over the check for the serving.

 

Of course you give returning customers even better service or customers who have had some problems in the past, because you really want them to come in the future again and you want to reward them for coming back. The problem is the first time customers, they shouldn't have any kind of reason to stay loyal to the company and so if they get bad service it's more likely that next time they choose the competitor, because service can only improve. And usually there is a competitor to every service and product.

 

It's not one or two times I have returned and demanded my moneys back because I had some problem with a product and their customer service was bad and usually that has been a company from a certain country that promotes freedom and possibilities, so I have just taken their word and used my freedom and possibilities to take my money elsewhere or worked a way that I don't need their help (like uPlay and adding some DLC to a game you already have while that DLC also includes the game you already have with it, don't bother trying, just make a new account otherwise you are going to wait for days for customer service to manage how you can only add that DLC).

[jagdtigger]

15 minutes ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

crappy customer that returns everything and spends nothing

Read my comment again, this is about corps cutting support for those too who do not spend that much(even if they have minimal complaints). @GoodBytes's writing is pretty much what i meant. Plus there is the PR side, even if they spend little they can cause serious damage if they start turning away ppl from said company(and no amount of ad can fix that).

[GoodBytes]

12 hours ago, LinusTech said:

It wasnt as sophisticated as this but I know for a fact that while they were being yelled at on the phone, NCIX CSRs would be busy poking around in the customer's history to see if they're a pain in the ass or generallyh a good customer. 

 

And it would absolutely affect whether you could get the rules bent for you. 

Sadly, this does not apply to retail stores.. in fact it is the contrary, from experience working there as summer jobs many years ago.

 

I discovered that when you have a nice, and good, customer that has a genuine issue, the rules are enforced on them.

But if you have a bad customer that does big scenes and drama, rules are more than bent, and they get extras too for the inconvenience.

 

I have seen from returns done after return period, where our good customers are rejected because they are 1 days after the set date, while bad customers can be almost double the return date, gets full money back, not even a store credit.

 

I have seen customer return their laptop within the return period because of a crack plastic hinge, and our told that, too bad, it is your fault. You can't return it, damage has been broken, and to see with the company warranty service (if they just packages it up the system and returned it without saying a thing, they would have gotten full refunds), even though technically the customer can return it for whatever reason, as per law if I am not mistaken. While customers that have a  shattered screen and a dent on the corner, indicating a drop, lying about it by saying "I just opened the lid, and poof it cracked" like we are idiots, and makes this big scenes, only to have the manager step in, given full refund despite even being out of the return period, PLUS are given 20$ gift card of the store for the inconvenience, and a stack of blank re-writable DVDs for some reason.

 

Honestly, I have given a full refund with the good customer, and call the police for the bad customer... but anyways. Worst part is that the above example is not the first time I see this, and not at the only retail store, even going to a retail store as a customer I saw this type of thing happen. Very sad. It just encourages this behavior.

[Jito463]

42 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Company A can't give you good service for you area (say, I don't know.. really old lines, so it can't deliver the modern internet speed that you are looking for).

So you go with Company B, but Company B is a bit out of your budget. So you can only afford their basic plan. You can't take extras, you can't take anything as a result. Internet works great for you with this company, but then they shortly increases their pricing for everyone, so you call and complain to have it, at least back down to the old rate...And maybe do that again a few month later when they continue to increase the rate as the plan was to reach this new price for the company and just wanted to do it in steps. But you like a lot the company and highly recommend it to people. But regardless, because you called, you have low score now... is it fair? Especially that the price ins't lead the company to billions more in profits? So now you are stuck with horrible score, and one day a tree falls and cut the line, and now, the company fixes their premium customers first, and you need to wait over a month to get that line fixed., not to mention the hours of waiting on the phone.

That seems a rather.....oddly specific example.

[GoodBytes]

Actually, to make this conversation more interesting... nothing stopped company selling your score and purchasing habits to other companies. So if you have an issue with 1 company, even you are a great customer everywhere else, and just that company you have an issue with, whatever the reason (say the company is shit with you), then it may affect your score with other places.

 

Heck that info can linked to online shopping. Imagine you go on Amazon, by stuff and then at checkout you get "Hey! Here is a 10$ discount on your order!", or you get 0 benefits from Amazon because you have issues with another unrelated company, like your ISP because they are doing billing errors on you all the time.