About Me:
I'm a 32-year old Bronx livin' sarcastic bastard. If you cross me, I'll shred you. I have no problems sharing my opinion whether you want to hear it or not, so get used to it. There's a lot of it going on here. Hang around if you'd like and comment if you dare.
Meta
Recent Comments
Blogroll
Archives
Disclaimer
All e-mails sent to Vincent Ferrari or to any address at insignificantthoughts.com are considered for publication regardless of any disclaimers placed in the e-mail. It is automatically assumed that an e-mail sent is for publication purposes. Sending an e-mail with a disclaimer does not bind this site or its owners / moderators to adhere to your request. Thank you for playing!

Open Call for AOL Retention Specialists or Employees

Okay folks, here’s an open challenge for any of you to put your money where your mouth is.

I will interview, anonymously (after somehow verifying your employment at AOL), ANY ONE of you. Since many people are saying that this is company policy and Jonathan was scapegoated, please put your money where your mouth is.

Contact me.

The address is feedback @ this domain. Give me an interview that I can dig deeper into, and facts that I can verify. If there’s a service manual, hand it over. If there’s a memo you have, send it in.

If Jon was scapegoated to shut everyone up, let’s see the corporate memos, books, and so on that prove it. This should be really easy since many of you folks (most of you coming from cable accounts in Virginia and proxy.aol.com) claim the guy was only following procedure.

Let’s see the procedure in writing.

The floor is yours. Bring something to the table and let’s expose the whole story.

Finally, if you have a similar story to mine, contact me at feedback @ this domain.

I would also ask that any readers here please post this to their site to help in the collection of data. I truly want to get to the bottom of this and find out the truth behind whether Jonathan was acting alone or as a representative of a company using approved or encouraged methods.

UPDATE: As usual, as soon as I open my mouth, someone is there to analyze every word so that the misinterpretation can be absorbed by the masses.

I am not challenging people because I think AOL is innocent. I’m challenging people who claim this is the regular policy to come forward and be heard. I am not turning into an AOL apologist. In fact, I’m looking for the most damning evidence I can find. Evidence (real evidence on a corporate level, emails, memos, etc) that prove this policy is real.

Yes we know it happens. Duh. Who knows better than I do at this point? What I want is something from an AOL employee backing that up. Who knows, maybe that doesn’t exist, but can it really hurt to ask? Anyone who got their panties in a bunch over me becoming an AOL Apologist misunderstood the intention of this post. It’s possible I need to be more clear when I write, so I’ll try harder in the future.

In fact, go educate yourself. Grab Leo Laporte’s KFI Podcast from Today and listen to his interview with me. You’ll be glad you did.

Then we can stop talking about this mythical flip flop that never happened.

This entry was posted on Saturday, June 24th, 2006 at 4:43 pm and is filed under PSA. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Viewing 61 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Dude,

    Most major companies have their employees sign agreements not to share or disclose internal procedures and policies with anyone as part of their intake packages. If ANYONE tries to provide you with internal documents or info and gets caught they're going to lose a lawsuit big time.
    • ^
    • v
    What are you now? The Erin Brockovich of AOL?

    please tell us you are not this stupid. Companies like AOL have employees sign confidentiality agreements *precisely* because their tactics are questionable. In the 23 years its been in business why else do you think that nobody has come forward with a shred of cold hard proof? because AOL covers its ass, that's why.

    And that's why news sources affiliated with AOL refuse to run this story at all as well.
    • ^
    • v
    The sad truth is that individuals could be putting themselves in serious legal jeopardy by revealing what are basically trade secrets. I hope people tell or share whatever they can, though. Even if it's a company secret, unethical is unethical. (Encouraging people to keep accounts open for dead people, to make a "save" quota. WHERE IS AOL'S SHAME?) And there is strength in numbers: If a lot of former and present employees come forward, AOL will not be able to stop the tide. You otherwise do have a considerable amount of anecdotal evidence from the customer side of things. If we had all taped our cancellation calls, AOL would be sunk already. There was that New York ruling, too.
    • ^
    • v
    I think the entire reason of doing an interview with complete anonymity is to be able to blow the whistle on this snake of a company and allow for the employee to keep their position (if they need it) and remain out of legal battles. I, like many other people, who have been slithered upon by the proverbial python would love to have the responsible parties at AOL own up to their obnoxious ways without using a "low man" on the totem pole as their scapegoat.

    This is not an isolated company problem. If you look at many of the sales and/or marketing tactics used by numerous reputable companies you will find sleezy and obnoxious practices within each of them.
    Example:
    * Recently I seen a commercial for dog food telling viewers that shedding is a sign of having a problem with the nourishment they are receiving. This of couse is true...but get serious, it is shedding season and they are preying upon peoples love and ignorance of their well loved pets.
    * I recently ordered a DVD to exercise with. Prior to my being able to get my DVD the person on the phone tried to sell me at least 10 other items that I did not want. I was so frustrated I began to raise my voice and asked if I should just go somewhere else to acquire this DVD. Irritated...beyond reason!

    Just wanted to let everyone know AOL is not alone in their quest to suck every last bit of blood from the customers they profess to care for so deeply. Even vampires leave the last drop of blood in their victims... so the stories go.
    • ^
    • v
    I agree with Pat that these tactics are too common. If you can't sell a product by virtue of the quality/value of your product, you have one of these choices:

    (a) figure out some way, somehow, to essentially trick or manipulate people into buying your product (this has been the route chosen by AOL and the dog food company)
    (b) improve the quality/value of your product
    (c) give up, and perhaps sell a different product

    (c) is an entirely legitimate option. If you had been a maker and seller of carbon paper or typewriter ribbons, (c) would be the best choice. If you were selling dial-up internet and high-speed came along from other parties, (c) might be a good choice for you, too.

    Probably a combination of (b) and (c) would have been the best choice for AOL. That's not the choice they made, of course.

    (My profession has to do with quality management. The anti-quality ethos at AOL -- and I was a long-time customer -- and of deceptive marketing, upselling, etc. makes me bonkers.)
    • ^
    • v
    Vincent, in all seriousness, go to Google, type in "AOL Cancel" (filter on your own name now since you'll probably get a hundred hits related to your case now), and spend a few hours reading the results. The problems were there long before your recording. AOL *definetely* and *absolutely* had a problem before Johnathan. By your own account, rumors of these problems are precisely what motivated you to make that call.

    If it will appease you any, yes, the *assumption* is simply that, despite lack of a written policy (which would probably be illegal), AOL nonetheless encouraged aggressive retention and stonewalling, and ignors simple one-click online cancellation solutions at the expense of time-sensitive consumers who would rather get on with things.

    I don't mean to offend you and I hope this won't come off that way. I'm going to believe a thousand separate stories and incidents - and my OWN experience, by the way, than one artificial apology letter from AOL to you.

    I'm a little surprised. Your defacto campaign has gone from alarmingly demonstrating against AOL, to defending it.

    My earlier call for John to come forward still stands. If and when he does, I hope there will be more light shed on this situation.
    • ^
    • v
    That's insane! I had basically the same type of call with AOL on numerous occasions... everytime I tried to cancel they gave me three free months, as a college student anything free is cool. But a few times I said NO! I just want to cancel. Stupid AOL. I know someone who worked for AOL Customer service. He is in College, and hates AOL. Willing to speak as to you and provide whatever he can as long as you don't tell AOL it was him lol.
    • ^
    • v
    I am convinced its SOP. I tried cancelling once and I finally had to resort to begging the CSR to just cancel the account.
    • ^
    • v
    • ^
    • v
    AOL has a reputation of having bad customer service. I worked for a company and have to deal with AOL subscriber having problem with their service. I have tried to contact AOL support and each time they said it is the pc problem and not AOL. I wind up telling the user to contact AOL directly. I usually tell them to cancel the account if the customer service tells them that it is their pc problem. Their are other service cheaper than AOL with faster speed.
    • ^
    • v
    My freind has had a free AOL account for 9 years.
    His method for keeping his legacy email address is :
    when the free months run out, he calls to cancel,
    and AOL reups him with 6 more free months.

    I, on the other hand, have never been an AOL cutomer,
    yet, I started to received collection notices from AOL on an account I did not open, and it took 4 months to get it straightened out!
    I would also like to add, there are no other users on my personal machine, so it is not like someone else started an account from here.
    I have sent in my story & call log to feedback at this domain.
    • ^
    • v
    You guys crack me up. You think because they sign a piece of paper no one is going to come forward.

    Here's a clue for you. The NSA, CIA, and FBI also make their workers sign similar agreements. I guess there have never been one of those whistleblowers, huh? In order to get sued, AOL would have to prove that the person handed over the document to me, something I would never disclose. People, use your heads, please. A piece of paper has never stopped a whistleblower before, and nothing says they have to be a current employee. A disgruntled ex is much more likely to help out in something like this anyway, wouldn't you say?

    Secondly, to anyone who thinks I'm defending AOL with this, I'm not. This is an open call for information that condemns them. I obviously can't pursue word of mouth, but one hard piece of proof would go a long way toward making the point. Some suggestions:

    1. Memos
    2. Emails
    3. Pages from a manual
    4. Anything similar.
    5. A pay stub (redacted, of course) that itemized retention bonuses.

    Basically, something I can pursue. As it is, I have nothing, and while I don't automatically doubt the veracity of the claims made, the story can't go on just claims alone. I'm looking for something more than "I know for a fact" at this point because in reality, that means nothing, and while it may be true, it doesn't stand up to any kind of scrutiny.
    • ^
    • v
    Vinny, my brother used to work for AOL. He worked at the Ogden location for like two years. He didn't leave on the best of terms, so I'm sure he'll be objective if you want to ask him some questions. Get with me and I'll get you his info if you're interested.
    • ^
    • v
    My bad experience with AOL began when I got a notice that AOL couldn't take $23.00 (AOL Monthly Fee) OUT OF MY BANK ACCOUNT.
    Problem: I had canceled my AOL over a year ago. I checked my bank account statements going back to March of 2005. Sure enought AOL had been taking $23.00 a month out of my bank account.
    I called AOL thinking they would chargeback the monies taken. Wrong. They even told me I couldn't cancel my AOL account let along chargeback my money. There is even a notation AOL has in their logs that I called on the date I said I canceled AOL. I asked for a supervisor. The supervisor said the same thing. I couldn't cancel my AOL and he wouldn't charge back my money. I said " I want to cancel the account now". He said No. Over and over we went through this. I finally started yelling cancel my account and give me a confirmation number. The supervisor finally said ok "but you have to listen to why you need AOL. He started reading off a script. I said just give me the confirmation number. No you have to listen to me. I finally shut up and listened to the 5 minute speech. Got the confirmation number. I'm stilll receiving mail saying I owe AOL money. I can't believe it.
    Everyone who stops useing AOL should check their bank statements. My bank says they have heard this problem before. And it is common. That AOL keeps taking money out of your bank account. Check it out to see if any other readers have had this bad experience.
    • ^
    • v
    lol, The Erin Brockovich of AOL... haha
    • ^
    • v
    My husband and I canceled our account and thought we were through with AOL. Then the collection calls started coming. We called and talked to a supervisor and told them that we were not going to pay the bills for after we cancelled. They are still calling about 3 or 4 times a day.
    • ^
    • v
    by the way...... just because someone signs a peice of paper doesn't mean they won't send something in anonymously :-) -- Hell, if I worked for AOL and I knew they were pulling some bullshit I would pop the training guide, or whatever shit in the mail for vinny.

    to vinny: Pretty crazy how much traffic your getting man...... I own a huge site, I remember when I first started getting a huge influx of traffic... fun times, keep it up... good luck to your future.

    - Damon
    - testmy.net
    • ^
    • v
    WOW. Is this 1998? This was common knowledge way back then.

    They are a dying business. Who uses dial-up? nobody, maybe the urban poor and the odd 40-something techno illiterate who has trouble opening explorer and uses a computer that dates back to the 386 days, but that is about it. Who is dumb enough to buy AOL and use it in addition to plunking down money for broadband access? almost nobody.

    I'm having trouble believing that AOL is a relevant company and that this story is making national headlines, when by all rights this should of happened seven years ago when people were still using aol in large numbers.

    This whole thing is like a bizzare timewarp back to the when Gateway was a major player in the industry and people were still refering to their computers as IBM Compatible or Clones.

    Honestly, If any one of you maintained an AOL at any point in time after 2000-2001, you belong in the back of a short bus with the rest of your extra-chromosomal bretheren.

    The rest of the world (it is 2006, you should join the rest of the world there) gets broadband from a regional cable provider or telecom provider and complains about their varying negligent to outright shady practices on sites like www.broadbrandreports.com
    • ^
    • v
    Dude, do you really know what you're talking about?

    AOL is the US's #1 ISP by a 2:1 ratio over #2.

    Say what you want about AOL, but questioning their "relevancy" is just flat out stupid.
    • ^
    • v
    Vin, might I suggest a PO box? Sure, you'll get a lot of crap, but it's even more anonymous than emails, etc. They could track to a general area, but if it's near a call center, who's to know?

    Just a thought. It might protect you from being in contempt if you get sued.