4 ms·

I'm completely average, not above, nor below (at least in my own personal assessment - others may differ). The difference is the front line personnel can sense

I'm completely average, not above, nor below (at least in my own personal assessment - others may differ). The difference is the front line personnel can sense if you're agitated and they need to escalate your case quickly. I've heard saying "operator" repeatedly down the line may help in this particular case. A human operator will normally react. AI/ML/Expert Systems etc don't care. Plenty of "average" people have complained to me about this use of their time, and that it is not good value for money, especially given the extravagant fees or taxes they may be paying these particular organizations.

lotsofpulp 7y ago
The real benefit will come once everyone’s phone number is tagged with a dollar value, so if you’re a low value person, you get sent to the back of the line, perhaps even being dropped as a customer because the system can calculate how much you cost to support versus how much revenue you bring, and if it’s negative, then there’s a reason to not do business with you. This always did happen before, people who knew people or were much higher net worth obviously got better service, but when it can be automated and subjected to everyone in a granular fashion, it really brings home where you are in the hierarchy and removes any veneer of being equal in society. This is also already implemented at various types of businesses via their “rewards” programs where you’re tiered into different support based on how much you spend or can spend, and get routed to different support agents accordingly.
- nineteen999 7y ago
  Of course. And in a well functioning society, you'd be able to move to a competitor if you were treated badly enough. But of course, that won't happen for much longer, because we love our monopolies (yay FAANG or utility companies etc.)
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    Some of it is just an unintentional consequence of the benefits of technology and its ability to scale leaving no other option (other than to legally forbid it, but then another country might allow it and take advantage, etc, etc). Consumers can and have benefited from economies of scale greatly that the big companies can provide in the short term, but in the long term it can be costly as they exercise their monopoly power, but who can accurately put a price on this so that people choose wisely today.
- sokoloff 7y ago
  I personally don't think everyone should be treated equally by support. I've been left waiting at the counter at an auto parts store while the store personnel left me to address the needs of the local auto mechanic's shop (who undoubtedly buys 1000x the parts I buy in a given year). The parts store should prioritize the mechanic over me, because they're a much more valuable customer to the parts store. It doesn't do me any good to have the parts store fold because they served everyone exactly in sequence. The USPS undoubtedly has specific support lines and discounted rates for high volume mailers while I as a retail customer pay retail prices and get crappy retail support. Amazon and UPS should get much better service from USPS than I do. Comcast Business customers probably (hopefully) get better service that $99/mo “TriplePlay” residential customers. People with startups here probably prioritize engaged, paying customers over free users. Airline Elite or Diamond or Private customers spending $25K or more every year should get better service than the buyer of a once-a-year $250 trans-continental ticket. When an airline experiences a disruption, they're going to re-accommodate their First Class and Elite frequent fliers first. That's just good business, every bit as much as when I walk into the local diner and the server brings me a coffee prepared as I normally order it before taking someone else's order.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    I agree, but the problem for a buyer comes when the number of sellers is so few (2 or 3 in many markets), that they effectively have no options. You can easily be blacklisted nationwide (perhaps deservedly, perhaps not), but there is no recourse, and no transparency. It's also psychologically different when you know an organization is tracking every single person and how much future potential revenue they can bring versus how much they cost to support and price discriminating accordingly. It's obviously the optimal thing to do as a business, but as a society, the idea that we're equal and should be treated as such is also an important feeling. I can see possible discord in society from having that socioeconomic tiering be so blatant and in your face, but perhaps it's inevitable in a world where the gap between the haves and have nots keeps getting bigger and bigger. I don't go to theme parks much, but I did a couple years ago as an adult for the first time since I was a kid, and I have to say it felt weird to see all of the different tiers for the queues for the rides. You pay $x, you wait in longer line, you pay $x+$20, you get to skip to halfway through the line, you pay $x+$50, you get to skip to front of line. It really brings to the forefront how un-valuable your time may be compared to someone who can afford to spend more, and I know the world has always worked like that, but I wonder how it feels to the kid who can see it happening in front of them.

lotsofpulp 7y ago

The real benefit will come once everyone’s phone number is tagged with a dollar value, so if you’re a low value person, you get sent to the back of the line, perhaps even being dropped as a customer because the system can calculate how much you cost to support versus how much revenue you bring, and if it’s negative, then there’s a reason to not do business with you. This always did happen before, people who knew people or were much higher net worth obviously got better service, but when it can be automated and subjected to everyone in a granular fashion, it really brings home where you are in the hierarchy and removes any veneer of being equal in society. This is also already implemented at various types of businesses via their “rewards” programs where you’re tiered into different support based on how much you spend or can spend, and get routed to different support agents accordingly.

nineteen999 7y ago
Of course. And in a well functioning society, you'd be able to move to a competitor if you were treated badly enough. But of course, that won't happen for much longer, because we love our monopolies (yay FAANG or utility companies etc.)
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  Some of it is just an unintentional consequence of the benefits of technology and its ability to scale leaving no other option (other than to legally forbid it, but then another country might allow it and take advantage, etc, etc). Consumers can and have benefited from economies of scale greatly that the big companies can provide in the short term, but in the long term it can be costly as they exercise their monopoly power, but who can accurately put a price on this so that people choose wisely today.
sokoloff 7y ago
I personally don't think everyone should be treated equally by support. I've been left waiting at the counter at an auto parts store while the store personnel left me to address the needs of the local auto mechanic's shop (who undoubtedly buys 1000x the parts I buy in a given year). The parts store should prioritize the mechanic over me, because they're a much more valuable customer to the parts store. It doesn't do me any good to have the parts store fold because they served everyone exactly in sequence. The USPS undoubtedly has specific support lines and discounted rates for high volume mailers while I as a retail customer pay retail prices and get crappy retail support. Amazon and UPS should get much better service from USPS than I do. Comcast Business customers probably (hopefully) get better service that $99/mo “TriplePlay” residential customers. People with startups here probably prioritize engaged, paying customers over free users. Airline Elite or Diamond or Private customers spending $25K or more every year should get better service than the buyer of a once-a-year $250 trans-continental ticket. When an airline experiences a disruption, they're going to re-accommodate their First Class and Elite frequent fliers first. That's just good business, every bit as much as when I walk into the local diner and the server brings me a coffee prepared as I normally order it before taking someone else's order.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  I agree, but the problem for a buyer comes when the number of sellers is so few (2 or 3 in many markets), that they effectively have no options. You can easily be blacklisted nationwide (perhaps deservedly, perhaps not), but there is no recourse, and no transparency. It's also psychologically different when you know an organization is tracking every single person and how much future potential revenue they can bring versus how much they cost to support and price discriminating accordingly. It's obviously the optimal thing to do as a business, but as a society, the idea that we're equal and should be treated as such is also an important feeling. I can see possible discord in society from having that socioeconomic tiering be so blatant and in your face, but perhaps it's inevitable in a world where the gap between the haves and have nots keeps getting bigger and bigger. I don't go to theme parks much, but I did a couple years ago as an adult for the first time since I was a kid, and I have to say it felt weird to see all of the different tiers for the queues for the rides. You pay $x, you wait in longer line, you pay $x+$20, you get to skip to halfway through the line, you pay $x+$50, you get to skip to front of line. It really brings to the forefront how un-valuable your time may be compared to someone who can afford to spend more, and I know the world has always worked like that, but I wonder how it feels to the kid who can see it happening in front of them.