AOL job cuts

greencreeper · 10-05-2006, 13:35

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4755103.stm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beeb

Customers have become more internet "savvy" and had better tools to resolve their own technical problems, said spokesman Nicholas Graham.

"That's a remarkable success in terms of customer care," he said.

Er, could it not just be that, in the face of adversity, customers have been forced to get educated or simply turn to their (friends) kids?

Call centre staff - just not feeling the love right now

danielf · 10-05-2006, 13:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by greencreeper

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4755103.stm

Er, could it not just be that, in the face of adversity, customers have been forced to get educated or simply turn to their (friends) kids?

Call centre staff - just not feeling the love right now

I thought that customers getting internet savvy meant people were leaving AOL en masse?

greencreeper · 10-05-2006, 13:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

I thought that customers getting internet savvy meant people were leaving AOL en masse?

I do love the marketing spin though.

NitroNutter · 10-05-2006, 15:16

AOL block so much theres not a lot of internet left to have issues with. Could be now they are reducing customer care its time to warner off and find a new isp if your with AOL

greencreeper · 10-05-2006, 15:42

I think the question is, "Why is it that users have become more capable/educated". I think it's borne out of necessity - the tech support people aren't much use, so the caveman comes out and you sort it out yourself. Believe me - I'd never phone NTL if I had Ignition's knowledge. I'd be out there in the green box sorting it myself

A lot of adults do turn to the younger generation to fix things because the level of IT knowledge is that much greater among the young, simply because of exposure from an early age to computers and other technologies.

iSteve · 10-05-2006, 21:34

I just don't understand AOL anymore.

AOL has a potential to do a lot of good for the industry, if they could be bothered. Instead they seem to adopt a "we'll be okay", cost-cutting, lets-rest-on-our-laurels attitude.

AOL used to boast of their helpful, freephone support. Then they outsourced the lot to India and now tech support is, uh, let's see, how to put this? Not very supportive?

People reacted in the only logical way - by giving up bothering to call tech support as they know it will be a waste of time. AOL's response? "We must be getting so good and easy to use, that nobody is having problems, hence nobody needs help and so no-one's calling tech support, therefore might as well get rid of what's left of our Stateside support since people don't need it anymore!"

AOL are the world's largest ISP. Read: tons of money. With money, you can afford to throw lots of it around in order to stay on top, and remain competitive. Why not use some to invest in exclusive content which people will find really appealing? Broadband is a big pipe with not much in the way to shove through it yet. And yet Time Warner are a media giant! Finding content shouldn't be too hard for them! Their stackloads of money could be used in invest in sports games content, television programs (e.g. like the time they provided live Big Brother feeds for free to all their members), in other words, something to make broadband worthwhile. An 'edge' over their competitors.

But AOL don't seem to want to compete on content - they've given up that ghost and now put whatever they do have - which is quite pitiful IMO - up for free online, supported by ads. They also don't seem to want to compete on providing the best in freephone technical support any more. Or on price, something which, with their big bank balance, you've think they could afford to be aggressive about in order to capture a large chunk of the market, before slowly brigning it back up (anyone remember when AOL were amongst the first to offer free 0800 unlimited dialup Internet? Whatever happened to that forward-thinking attitude?).

And yet despite failing on all these fronts, they're wondering why people are leaving in droves? Uh, what, exactly, makes them "better"?

So unless they start making a few major u-turns and changing direction, AOL are doomed, IMO. Giants can die. AOL are going the right way about it. Sure, it's a painful and slow process, but there are many examples of giants who, despite having so much potential, preferred to just twiddle their thumbs, scratch their heads, and do not much, that they just run out of time, and money. Commodore Computers, are a good example for those that remember them.

MadGamer · 10-05-2006, 21:45

Makes me glad to say i left them 3 weeks ago

greencreeper · 10-05-2006, 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by iSteve

People reacted in the only logical way - by giving up bothering to call tech support as they know it will be a waste of time. AOL's response? "We must be getting so good and easy to use, that nobody is having problems, hence nobody needs help and so no-one's calling tech support, therefore might as well get rid of what's left of our Stateside support since people don't need it anymore!"

My thoughts exactly

Quote:

Originally Posted by iSteve

AOL are the world's largest ISP. Read: tons of money. With money, you can afford to throw lots of it around in order to stay on top, and remain competitive

You can, but giants tend to be less than agile. As a company grows and the levels of management increase, so the speed of response to change, threats and opportunities decreases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iSteve

Broadband is a big pipe with not much in the way to shove through it yet

Yes. I've labelled it "Dyson syndrome", though there may already be a name for it. Dyson advertise their brilliant cleaners - no loss of suction. The solution to the problems inherent in the old-style cleaner. But if you stop and think, there are no problems with the old-style cleaner - yeah they may lose suction but not enough for it to be a problem, and certainly not to the extent demonstrated on their adverts. Dyson style cleaners are messy to empty - a nightmare for those like me with allergies. So they create a non-existant problem and sell a solution. I think it's the same with broadband. 56K was slow but the 2MB I have at the moment is more than enough for what I use the Internet for, and I cannot see me using the Internet for anything more than I do at the moment. I think 1MB is more than enough for most Internet users. The drive towards 100MB broadband seems to be driven by smoke and mirrors - for a profit. Is there ever likely to be a real need for 100MB. I can't imagine it.

iSteve · 10-05-2006, 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by greencreeper

You can, but giants tend to be less than agile. As a company grows and the levels of management increase, so the speed of response to change, threats and opportunities decreases.

You're so right here. AOL have gone from anticipating change to stay ahead, to copying others and trying to match what works for others, as opposed to innovating themselves and introducing something new and exciting. NTL and PVRs come to mind too; several years after they let TiVo wither away, and several years Sky introduced Sky+. As a former CSR I said we'd need a PVR to compete as early as 2003. We're now nearly halfway through 2006,and still no PVR to speak of yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by greencreeper

Yes. I've labelled it "Dyson syndrome", though there may already be a name for it. Dyson advertise their brilliant cleaners - no loss of suction ... they create a non-existant problem and sell a solution. I think it's the same with broadband. 56K was slow but the 2MB I have at the moment is more than enough for what I use the Internet for... The drive towards 100MB broadband seems to be driven by smoke and mirrors - for a profit. Is there ever likely to be a real need for 100MB. I can't imagine it.

I love your Dyson analogy, and I couldn't agree more. When NTL announced they were ramping up the speed to 10MB, my first reaction was "Great, but what I'd really like is some exclusive, bandwidth-pumping CONTENT!"

I'm currently using my folk's 1MB connection, and since I mainly only web browse, check emails, and download the odd video or image or two, 100MB is absolute overkill. How will a webpage appearing in .001 second be any better an experience than it appearing in .1 second? I know I can impatient at times, but I'm not THAT impatient!

AOL Time Warner was such a waste. I had so many images in my head as to how that would work out. As it happens the merger didn't change much about AOL, if anything they've just got slower at adapting and changing as you point out happens.

I even took an 'AOL trial' about six months back to sample the 'exclusive content' and see if anyone good had turned up. I wasn't impressed in the least, and cancelled before the trial was up. With the stories of their lousy tech support, and their prices pretty standard, there's just no way I'd even consider having AOL Broadband installed when I get my new place. I can't be alone in thinking that.