Thread regarding AT&T layoffs

Fireside chat

I found McElfresh’s comments on “forced migration “ to be disingenuous to put it nicely.

I was here when the company “force migrated “ customers from DSL to Uverse.

The company sells a new product. At the same time they stop selling the old product. When a customer calls in to complain about the old product they are pushed to move to the new one. The company also raises the prices on the old product and stops support for the old product.

This naturally “forces” the customer to migrate to the new product which is cheaper and more supported.

But to act like that is not the plan for the Uverse to ATTtv migration is the disingenuous part. Just say what you mean and quit being vague. The plan is to move all Uverse customers to the new ATTtv platform as quickly as possible.

Then to “streamline “ that organization (Uverse) as quickly as possible to cut costs.

The savings will be huge for the company as the Uverse full tech installs stop on day one. And each work group who supported that full tech install is now collateral damage.

by
| 1603 views | | 3 replies (last December 16, 2019) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+12xOIUZ4

3 replies (most recent on top)

Stank will find a way to spin the migrations as adds and therefore a success. But all the while cannibalizing one service for another. Like with uverse and dtv.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @asj+12xOIUZ4

why would anyone want atttv when there are plenty of cheaper and better serviced options.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xak+12xOIUZ4

Agreed, disingenuous, however, a most all smart marketing departments in big companies use this technique to drive customer adoption. They do it because they find it works, and drives them to improve the numbers where they need it most. May s—, but s—ing it not unique to AT&T.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qfg+12xOIUZ4

Post a reply

: