4 ms·

"We know not having online and mobile access to your account is unacceptable" is some refreshingly clear and direct apology language. I don't know if the typic

"We know not having online and mobile access to your account is unacceptable" is some refreshingly clear and direct apology language. I don't know if the typical corporate bullshit-speak resonates better with the average person, but this apology would make me a lot less angry with the company (if I were affected) than the typical vague statements companies seem to emit in such cases, even though the end result is the same.

dstaley 6y ago
FWIW, this was standard operating procedure when dealing with upset customers at Apple Retail. If I remember correctly, it was referred to as "Acknowledge, Align, Assure". This is the acknowledging bit, and the latter portion of the sentence contains the assure bit ("we will continue to do all we can").
- smt88 6y ago
  Someone should tell that to Apple's tech support. Their motto seems to be "Deny, Blame, Upsell" -- until there is a class action, anyway.
  - breakingcups 6y ago
    My dad, upon bringing his crashing MacBook back into the Apple Store, was told by the Apple Store employee: "No no sir, Apples do not 'crash'." (Turned out to be a bulging battery pressing on the wrong parts, leading to random kernel panics.) So he moved back to Windows for all his music production work and has been satisfied with that move ever since.
fireattack 6y ago
I don't know. I do like their statement since it's direct and not vague as you said. However, I've seen multiple times on Internet that a company made an apology which looked fair to me as a bystander, while people who were affected screamed "sorry but not sorry". I think it makes a big difference emotionally depending on if you're involved or not.
- sodality2 6y ago
  Sure, but at what point does a genuine apology look identical to one that is "fake"., and at what point will people just be unhappy with any response they give? I mean, losing bank access is pretty ridiculous, so it's not exactly uncalled for, but then the response to their message shouldn't be "this is unauthentic" but rather something along the lines of "this does not give me my bank access back" since no response would satisfy them.
  - ryandrake 6y ago
    My favorite response is the standard: “At [Company] we take [X] very seriously.” Where [X] is what recently catastrophically failed because they didn’t take it seriously at all.
  - fireattack 6y ago
    Just in case I wasn't clear, I think we both agree that message being unauthentic is a different matter from the incident itself. Just that angry people often can't/wont distinguish the two. I pointed this out because GP seems to not be affected, so his view won't be obscured by this; but the phenomenon should be noted.
    - sodality2 6y ago
      Oh whoops we agree! sorry for making it sound like I disagree lol
  - Qwertious 6y ago
    'Sure, but at what point does a genuine apology look identical to one that is "fake"., and at what point will people just be unhappy with any response they give?' It's about what they're apologising for. For instance, if (hypothetically) they stole everyone's money and spent it all on hookers and blow, then their apology for dropping web access is completely besides the point. The main problem IMO with fake apologies is that they're a shitty attempt at pretending to be reasonable to those who aren't aware of the situation (and by extension, portraying people who are still mad and ignore the 'apology' as being unreasonable), without actually acknowledging the real problem or committing to fixing it. AFAICT Simple is giving a genuine apology, btw, I'm just speaking generally here.
1shooner 6y ago
They are now at EOB of the first business day after this failed migration, and have still not sent any email communication, including the instructional email they promised as part of the migration. I don't know that I'm angry, but I certainly won't be trusting them with any business as soon as I have access to my account again.

dstaley 6y ago

FWIW, this was standard operating procedure when dealing with upset customers at Apple Retail. If I remember correctly, it was referred to as "Acknowledge, Align, Assure". This is the acknowledging bit, and the latter portion of the sentence contains the assure bit ("we will continue to do all we can").

smt88 6y ago
Someone should tell that to Apple's tech support. Their motto seems to be "Deny, Blame, Upsell" -- until there is a class action, anyway.
- breakingcups 6y ago
  My dad, upon bringing his crashing MacBook back into the Apple Store, was told by the Apple Store employee: "No no sir, Apples do not 'crash'." (Turned out to be a bulging battery pressing on the wrong parts, leading to random kernel panics.) So he moved back to Windows for all his music production work and has been satisfied with that move ever since.

fireattack 6y ago

I don't know. I do like their statement since it's direct and not vague as you said. However, I've seen multiple times on Internet that a company made an apology which looked fair to me as a bystander, while people who were affected screamed "sorry but not sorry". I think it makes a big difference emotionally depending on if you're involved or not.

sodality2 6y ago
Sure, but at what point does a genuine apology look identical to one that is "fake"., and at what point will people just be unhappy with any response they give? I mean, losing bank access is pretty ridiculous, so it's not exactly uncalled for, but then the response to their message shouldn't be "this is unauthentic" but rather something along the lines of "this does not give me my bank access back" since no response would satisfy them.
- ryandrake 6y ago
  My favorite response is the standard: “At [Company] we take [X] very seriously.” Where [X] is what recently catastrophically failed because they didn’t take it seriously at all.
- fireattack 6y ago
  Just in case I wasn't clear, I think we both agree that message being unauthentic is a different matter from the incident itself. Just that angry people often can't/wont distinguish the two. I pointed this out because GP seems to not be affected, so his view won't be obscured by this; but the phenomenon should be noted.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    Oh whoops we agree! sorry for making it sound like I disagree lol
- Qwertious 6y ago
  'Sure, but at what point does a genuine apology look identical to one that is "fake"., and at what point will people just be unhappy with any response they give?' It's about what they're apologising for. For instance, if (hypothetically) they stole everyone's money and spent it all on hookers and blow, then their apology for dropping web access is completely besides the point. The main problem IMO with fake apologies is that they're a shitty attempt at pretending to be reasonable to those who aren't aware of the situation (and by extension, portraying people who are still mad and ignore the 'apology' as being unreasonable), without actually acknowledging the real problem or committing to fixing it. AFAICT Simple is giving a genuine apology, btw, I'm just speaking generally here.

1shooner 6y ago

They are now at EOB of the first business day after this failed migration, and have still not sent any email communication, including the instructional email they promised as part of the migration. I don't know that I'm angry, but I certainly won't be trusting them with any business as soon as I have access to my account again.