7 ms·

This matches with what I've learned as well with digital B2C products. You should fully refund with a very low bar. No questions asked, even. Assume the cus

This matches with what I've learned as well with digital B2C products. You should fully refund with a very low bar. No questions asked, even. Assume the customer has a point, even if you don't fully get what the point is. If they are not happy for whatever reason, promptly give them their money back, apologise for the bad experience, and move on. Furthermore, your customer support should never be defensive; their job is not to protect your company but really side with the customer. Early on, when every dollar counts, it's easy to fall into the trap of trying to argue with the customer to keep their money. Just don't do that, it will annoy the customer and you'll have to refund them anyway. Yes, some people will take advantage of this, especially with refunds. That's the cost of doing B2C business, perhaps with digital products in particular where it's hard to prove the customer “received value”. When they say ”the customer is always right”, as cheesy as it sounds, they have a point. And it's not that the customer is always technically correct, but assuming that stance will be better for your business.

jenscow 6y ago
Also, that customer has unwittingly provided a service - they gave feedback. They might have identified something that many other people have experienced, but didn't bother to tell you. Depending on the situation, I usually gave a refund before asking for more details and see how the product can be improved from this.
wjnc 6y ago
Just as in mobile gaming you're mainly catering to whales, this kind of customer service is catering to sharks (or snarks?). It's a bad equilibrium to be in since bad customers do exist and the platforms act like they don't. Wisdom of the crowds is in averages, not in catering to the bottom .1%. I'm in old school insurance and we even have legitimised platforms to catch cheaters, liers and those that would threaten our staff. They don't get insurance anywhere after things like that. I would say that on average that leads to better premiums and better customer service, having procedures to remove the bottom .1% from service. A transaction shouldn't be based on received value (ex post), but on perceived value (ex ante). Two parties commit to a contract and follow through. We (EU) have laws about how to deal with problems after a legal commitment is made even for online. I think the US has less of that leading to the concept of (ex post) service as being free returns, unlimited refunds etc. It makes business harder, in a way. You can't guarantee happiness but you can guarantee delivering your part of the deal. It's a different mindset based partly on different legalities.
- tome 6y ago
  > I'm in old school insurance and we even have legitimised platforms to catch cheaters, liers and those that would threaten our staff. They don't get insurance anywhere after things like that. Interesting. Are you saying that insurance firms share info about bad customers?
  - Ntrails 6y ago
    It is on the disclaimer they make when processing you, may share your details with other insurers
  - wjnc 6y ago
    In the Netherlands, after a customer acts with the intention to defraud and a limited list of other abuses, yes. There are procedures in place for appeal and one could go to the courts for appeal as well. It truly is the <.1%. Health insurance is not in this scheme.
- drchiu 6y ago
  This is consistent with when I practiced medicine. No matter how hard you try, there’s always some percentage of people who try to take advantage of the system in what would publicly be considered inappropriate. Credit rating and systems such as the ones you described seem to be born out of the need to filter them out.
johnchristopher 6y ago
It's really weird how it's the total opposite for call centers for ISP/Cable companies. The job of the operator is not to solve your problem but to keep you as a client. I rephrase it: the first and main goal of the support person is to keep you as a client, not to solve your problem. I learned that when I applied for such a job, was given half an hour of sitting next to a support person and listening in to conversations between customers and that support person. Then I got a 5 minutes interview where I was asked what I thought was the purpose and first objective of the job I was applying to: "Before passing the door I'd have said to solve customer's problems but now I can see it's more like... 90% is to keep the customers from leaving, 10% solve the problems. It doesn't matter if the problem gets solved.". The recruiter/head of service and my eyes met and we instantly both agree it wasn't a place for me ^^.
- nsgi 6y ago
  Surely if the customer is prepared to go to the trouble of calling you up about their problem they're likely to leave if you don't solve it? At least unless you have a monopoly?
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    It’s just lip service in the US. Most people have only one option for decent Internet, and the ISPs know it.
    - ptero 6y ago
      It's not quite that drastic. Anywhere I lived I had at least two, often three options. But switching, especially if you have physical wiring and figured it out and working the way you want, is a hassle, so I would not do it lightly. My 2c.
      - flaviu1 6y ago
        I've generally had two choices: 5-12Mbps DSL or cable. A couple times I was able to get Google Fiber, but I'm sure you know how limited the availability of that is.
mrtksn 6y ago
Very true. It's also a golden opportunity of improving your product IMHO. I got a very nasty review and had a hard time understanding how this user had such a bad experience - my app cannot be doing this, there's no such use case. I was sure that the user is writing this in bad faith but I apologised anyway. Turns out, if a user follows a specific path they can get into a confusing situation that can be misinterpreted as App trying to force them do something that they don't want to do. The unhappy user had a very valid point despite the fact that it took me a month to understand the situation. As a developer, and a user, I strongly agree that you should never ever argue with your users. Most of the times the reason for a pissed of user is a bug or miss-communication that you failed to identify.
scarface74 6y ago
In the case of mobile apps, you can’t refund the customer. You have to send them instructions on how to request a refund through the App Store. Marco Arment - the author of Overcast a popular podcast app for iOS - has said repeatedly that if he could just offer refunds instead of dealing with an irate customer he would.

jenscow 6y ago

Also, that customer has unwittingly provided a service - they gave feedback. They might have identified something that many other people have experienced, but didn't bother to tell you. Depending on the situation, I usually gave a refund before asking for more details and see how the product can be improved from this.

wjnc 6y ago

Just as in mobile gaming you're mainly catering to whales, this kind of customer service is catering to sharks (or snarks?). It's a bad equilibrium to be in since bad customers do exist and the platforms act like they don't. Wisdom of the crowds is in averages, not in catering to the bottom .1%. I'm in old school insurance and we even have legitimised platforms to catch cheaters, liers and those that would threaten our staff. They don't get insurance anywhere after things like that. I would say that on average that leads to better premiums and better customer service, having procedures to remove the bottom .1% from service. A transaction shouldn't be based on received value (ex post), but on perceived value (ex ante). Two parties commit to a contract and follow through. We (EU) have laws about how to deal with problems after a legal commitment is made even for online. I think the US has less of that leading to the concept of (ex post) service as being free returns, unlimited refunds etc. It makes business harder, in a way. You can't guarantee happiness but you can guarantee delivering your part of the deal. It's a different mindset based partly on different legalities.

tome 6y ago
> I'm in old school insurance and we even have legitimised platforms to catch cheaters, liers and those that would threaten our staff. They don't get insurance anywhere after things like that. Interesting. Are you saying that insurance firms share info about bad customers?
- Ntrails 6y ago
  It is on the disclaimer they make when processing you, may share your details with other insurers
- wjnc 6y ago
  In the Netherlands, after a customer acts with the intention to defraud and a limited list of other abuses, yes. There are procedures in place for appeal and one could go to the courts for appeal as well. It truly is the <.1%. Health insurance is not in this scheme.
drchiu 6y ago
This is consistent with when I practiced medicine. No matter how hard you try, there’s always some percentage of people who try to take advantage of the system in what would publicly be considered inappropriate. Credit rating and systems such as the ones you described seem to be born out of the need to filter them out.

johnchristopher 6y ago

It's really weird how it's the total opposite for call centers for ISP/Cable companies. The job of the operator is not to solve your problem but to keep you as a client. I rephrase it: the first and main goal of the support person is to keep you as a client, not to solve your problem. I learned that when I applied for such a job, was given half an hour of sitting next to a support person and listening in to conversations between customers and that support person. Then I got a 5 minutes interview where I was asked what I thought was the purpose and first objective of the job I was applying to: "Before passing the door I'd have said to solve customer's problems but now I can see it's more like... 90% is to keep the customers from leaving, 10% solve the problems. It doesn't matter if the problem gets solved.". The recruiter/head of service and my eyes met and we instantly both agree it wasn't a place for me ^^.

nsgi 6y ago
Surely if the customer is prepared to go to the trouble of calling you up about their problem they're likely to leave if you don't solve it? At least unless you have a monopoly?
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  It’s just lip service in the US. Most people have only one option for decent Internet, and the ISPs know it.
  - ptero 6y ago
    It's not quite that drastic. Anywhere I lived I had at least two, often three options. But switching, especially if you have physical wiring and figured it out and working the way you want, is a hassle, so I would not do it lightly. My 2c.
    - flaviu1 6y ago
      I've generally had two choices: 5-12Mbps DSL or cable. A couple times I was able to get Google Fiber, but I'm sure you know how limited the availability of that is.

mrtksn 6y ago

Very true. It's also a golden opportunity of improving your product IMHO. I got a very nasty review and had a hard time understanding how this user had such a bad experience - my app cannot be doing this, there's no such use case. I was sure that the user is writing this in bad faith but I apologised anyway. Turns out, if a user follows a specific path they can get into a confusing situation that can be misinterpreted as App trying to force them do something that they don't want to do. The unhappy user had a very valid point despite the fact that it took me a month to understand the situation. As a developer, and a user, I strongly agree that you should never ever argue with your users. Most of the times the reason for a pissed of user is a bug or miss-communication that you failed to identify.

scarface74 6y ago

In the case of mobile apps, you can’t refund the customer. You have to send them instructions on how to request a refund through the App Store. Marco Arment - the author of Overcast a popular podcast app for iOS - has said repeatedly that if he could just offer refunds instead of dealing with an irate customer he would.