Open Call for AOL Retention Specialists or Employees

Someone posted: Time Warner doesn’t want them anywhere near their cable and broadband sectors.

yeah, thats why they offer AOL for broadband as a bundle deal with Time Warner....do some research and go to KW AOL High Speed.

Just wanted to respond, even though this conversation has changed directions...the initial comment was regarding whether this was aol's policy-to make it difficult to cancel memberships...two or 3 years ago, I cancelled my account and the representative spent a long time trying to convince me not to do it. THe person twisted the conversation many times into other subjects. I finally asked the person to record that I had requested the account be disabled, and if I was charged another month, I would seek legal advice. The account was cancelled, but it was very difficult to do so.

"The only thing wrong with that call is he didn’t make an attempt to pitch you a price plan.
"

I find this comment cultish. So John or Jon didn't tow the company line, and that's "wrong." In my view what was wrong was that the conversation didn't go approximately like this:

VF: I'd like to cancel my account.
AOL: [efficiently takes name and screen name and asks security question, then...][click-click-click] OK, it's canceled. Is there anything else I can help you with?
VF: No thank you.
AOL: Have a good day.
VF: Likewise.

To AOL: Your customers are trying to tell you that treatment a cancellation call as a "retention" call (or an opportunity to pitch a price plan) is wrong.

"Had you let him speak, that call would have been over in 3 minutes."

Oh, puhleeeeeeze. According to the many, many testimonials here and on countless other blogs, there's a tidal wave of anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

Then again, it's pretty evident from Vinny's taped conversation that you're extremely dense, so it comes as no surprise that you're delusional about AOL, too, Jon.

I think I'll form an opinion based on the thousands of people who come from all over the world, yet seem to have an eerily similar story when dealing with AOL and their shoddy scam.

And the class action lawsuits, and the numerous complaints to banking institutions and credit card companies....etc., etc.....

Dave Barry, the Pulitzer Prize winning humorist, wrote a blog (6-16-06) about the same experience. He refers the the company as America OnLineOrElse. hehe.

http://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog/2006/06/be_advised.html

a few days later, someone posted Vincents AOL tape on his blog. Daves's response: "Yep. This is pretty much what it was like."

http://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog/2006/06/yep.html#comments

Good job, Vincent!

About #53, from Vincent...

what to say... it's scary.

Andrew

For those of you who have, like myself, been frustrated to no end by AOHell, check out this computer advice column posted online:

http://www.askdavetaylor.com/how_do_i_cancel_my_america_online_aol_account.html

Troy, I dont know who you bank with, but as I said on another area of this site, Washington Mutual bank was very helpful.

When I was defrauded by AOHell with a bogus confirmation number after I called to cancel, they then proceeded to steal funds from my bank account.

After getting an appalling, "You never cancelled your account!" from the rep when I called to question it, they also stated that the confirmation code was invalid.

Based on my research into the issue, here is what AOHell did - then I'll tell you how Washington Mutual helped. Instead of cancelling the account, they simply told me it was cancelled, gave me a phony confirmation code, then put me into a free month or more in their computers. Once that time period lapsed, they then charged me as though I had never left.

Washington Mutual was fantastic! They reversed the charges and recovered my stolen money. They also blocked AOHell from ever charging me again. A week later I got a letter from Washington Mutual letting me know that AOHell had tried to again charge me and the charge was not authorized.

AOHell then sent me to collections, and I ignored the letters. They stopped pretty quickly.

Finally to Jon: Give it up, man. You kept up with your creepy sales pitch even after it was clear Vince wanted to cancel. He is not required to listen to your nonsense. You and others of your ilk have pressured and threatened and harassed and ripped off people like Vince and myself and many others.

The only sad thing, Jon, about you being fired is that it just covers up what is POLICY at AOHell.

EDIT:

JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE COMMENTER ABOVE CLAIMS TO BE JON FROM AOL (NOTE THE USE OF THE WORD I).

THEN HE SAID, "HAD YOU LET HIM SPEAK"

CHANGE IN TENSES, CHANGE IN PERSPECTIVE (FIRST PERSON TO THIRD PERSON). ODDLY ENOUGH, THIS ONE DOES COME FROM PROXY.AOL.COM.

Be honest with yourself man, you weren't trying to expose anything, you didn't let the call run its course like you said on matt lauer, you became defensive and abrasive, and I reacted, then you didn't like the fact that I put my foot down at the end and wouldn't allow you to run all over what I was saying, so you ran to the Today show for your 15 minutes of fame. Had you let him speak, that call would have been over in 3 minutes. Now you're a laughing stock. The only thing wrong with that call is he didn't make an attempt to pitch you a price plan.

hello

In France too, we had some stories as you.
It's very know'n to leave AOL is very difficult.
An aunt called them many times and at the end cut her bank agreement.
I precise they ask his credit card number and promise no use. AOL used it....

Never AOL

David

actually i think other call centers would hire ex aol employees if you can deal with the hell of aol then any other call center job would be cake

I wish I could edit comment 45, to be less harsh. My apologies on that. I feel genuinely sorry for anyone whose job is threatened. No doubt there are thousands of employees of America Online who are great, worthy, well-meaning human beings...who happen to be employed by a company that has been digging its own grave through sleazy policies and practices (established by management), and short-sightedness. (I used to have a job in a company that I discovered did a lot of unethical things...as soon as I had replacement income available, I left. I resented the displacement, it was unfair, etc., but the right choice was to leave.)

Maybe some of you started before the company got so...creepy (yes, as someone else put it, calling the cancellation department the retention department is creepy, and yes, there being quotas for retention is super-creepy...and I ask, as I've asked before: Why does a "retention department" exist unless a company is not serving its customers well?)

But, very sadly, the people who have run your company in recent years have taken the very low road. The road of "retention departments" and charging $24/month for an electronic advertising circular. (Maybe that's harsh, too, but the imbedded marketing in AOL, in the last few years I used it, was atrocious, gravely diluting the quality of the product.)

The apology letter to Vincent continues on that low road. It's insane to blame "John." I, and obviously many other people, had very similar experiences; in fact, I think Vincent was actually treated better than many of us. It would be naïve of Mr. Graham to think that the policies of the company didn't create the cadre of monsters in the monster-cave whose job is labeled "retention." (As the Milgram experiments proved, even good people have the potential to be monsters -- if "bosses" push them that way.) Upper management is responsible for the incentive programs and quotas they instituted and/or approved of, and is responsible for the very concept or policy of "customer retention" -- AS OPPOSED TO, um, "CUSTOMER SERVICE." (And part of customer service would be to immediately heed a customer's request to cancel.)

Missing from the apology letter was soul-searching. And that is what is needed.

One doesn't know what one doesn't know. Perhaps Mr. Graham, etc. haven't recognized that they have been taking the very low road. Maybe they are not aware that there are better ways to run a business, and better ways to treat human beings -- both employees and customers.

To paraphrase T. H. White: The best thing for being sad is...to learn something. I think there is a lot for everyone to learn from the AOL tragedy.

Hello i jsut saw your story about the aol endeavor on the news and had to check out your blog, because i too have had the same experience. I signed up for a free trial and could never get the software or the modem to work. after calling the ever so un helpful tech support every day for at least two hours i finally decided that it was not worth my time and called and requested to cancel the service to which i was assured it was cancelled after debating with a young woman for well over 45 minutes on the reasons i was not benefitting from the horrible service. Working in customer service myself i was absolutely appaled and requested a supervisor to which the request was declined multilple times. Finally they sated my account was cancelled. On with the horror story. Three months later i go to the grocery store, i had just got paid and paid my usual bills which i had carefully calculated to ensure i was keeping proper track of my finances. When i was checking out my debit card had been declined. I knew for a fact that i had at least 80.00 left and plenty of money for the odds and ends groceries i was purchasing. So i go home immediatle and get online to check my balance and sure enough aol had withdrawn 76.00 from my account. So i promplty called customer service. I was informed that i was actually charged for the three months which was supposed to be my free trial. (for the service i was unable to use) Which i advised the person on the other end of the line several times who told me he could do nothing to help me and that these charges were standard charges. after 20 or so minutes of arguing with the guy he hung up on me. Now i am beyond irritated. So i called back after speaking to four representatives i finally find someone willing to help. However i was advised that another charge would be coming from my account in a few days as they were charging me for six months worth of service. Now I am flat out pissed off . i was further advised that in order for my money to be refunded i would need to pay for the other three months and then after 30 more days they could refund these charges. I flet this was completely unacceptable and it made no sense to me whatsoever. Finally after ten supervisors i did get my money refunded two weeks later. This has made a horrible impression on me and i myself will never use aol or any of their shitty services and i would advise anyone who reads this to beware as well. Also on your news story it mentioned that this call was posted on your blog could you email me a link i would like to hear it.

Anonymous,
Do your self a favor...stop wasting your time posting and start working on your resume....

After this story, how many potential employers do you think will view your time with AOL as a positive entry on your resume.

Some jobs are not worth saving. I cry no tears over lost jobs in the tobacco industry, for example.

So that's what the people who were rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic felt like, huh? :lol:

First off we all sign a NON DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT. Not only do we (as aol employees) agree to it, and are held accountable for the damages incurred, but if I (or anyone) was to send you confidential documents substantiating your biased point... both you AND the person releasing information are held accountable, financially.

Sure I know you want to prove a point, getting people to break their NDA's is another. I'll share this bit - its common knowledge EVERY retention business has quotas. Duh.

Lighten up a bit, stop being such a prick because you chose to repeatedly say "cancel the account" repeatedly, and you saw the rep was being an asshole too. You earned your 15 min of fame, on who's watch - your employers?

I however do commend you for shining light on an issue - and changes have been made... but seriously - dont risk other workers their jobs just so you can end out on top. Cancelling my aol account wasn't that hard as you had it, or others mentioned herein.

- anonymous -

I to had AOL high speed for 3 years and when i decided i needed cable for my x box live account i had to call and cancel my AOL account and they gave me seven kinds of hell before they would cancel me as well! After that i thought to myself "My god that was the longest cancelation phone call i had to go through in my entire life & i hope i never have to go through that again!" They tried everything they could think of to keep me a member! Like i heard you on your CNN headline news tape recording they did me pretty much the same exact way as you!!! Good idea taping it dude:)

I have undug the article leading to this post at Digg. I really didn't hear *all* the interviews Vincent has done, but I did hear the Laporte one he directed me to and concede that I was a bit hasty in assuming this might become about something *other* than the sole instigator: AOL.

mfanigan 1961,

Congratulatioons for subscribing to the worst tech product...ever!

1. PC WORLD has rated AOL "THE #1 WORST TECH PRODUCT EVER. Here's why.

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,125772,pg,2,00.asp

2. AOl has lost every class action law suit that has been filed agianst them

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/ny_aol.html

3. Amongst the list of Best ISP providers, this site goes out of it's way to state that AOl is, in a word, awful.

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/internet/isp/index.html

And i quote:"America Online (AOL) is the most popular ISP in the United States. AOL claims 22.1% of the dial-up ISP market (almost 20.8 million users), yet AOL (*est. $24 per month for dial-up) receives lower scores in customer surveys on almost every ISP performance measure, including reliability, support and overall satisfaction. Despite the popularity of AOL, ISP reviews say it's far from the best Internet service provider. In another review, PC World's survey also reveals that AOL Internet service has the fewest happy customers. Only 39% of AOL users say they're satisfied with the overall service, the lowest score of all ISPs. Users report trouble with installation, connection and support."

Interesting note..."AOL claims 22% of the dial up ISP market." That numer must be skewed as they illegally retain customers who believe they have cancelled.

if that kind of service makes you happy......

I just saw the CNN report and felt the urgent need to share my story. I want to add to the evidence that this is not an isolated incident. This must be company policy. It makes sense that it is a tactic of a desterate company. My horror story with AOL took place in approx. August of 2003. Recounting my experience still makes me extremely angry, so I'm going to attempt to make it brief. My sister, who was living temporarily in my apartment, had opened an AOL account without my knowledge that was being billed to me though my SBC (another unethical company) phone bill. I discovered this when the AOL charge showed up on my phone bill. Since the phone bill (and the apartment lease) were in my name, there was no reason she should have been authorized to add a charge to my phone account. When I discovered this situation, my sister was traveling in Europe for a month and I had no way to get in touch with her. AOL refused to tell me the name of the person who opened the account, despite my insistence that this was MY phone bill. When I guessed the name of my sister, they did say yes. They still refused to let me cancel the account, saying my sister would need to be the one to do it. They pacified me by crediting the account for the time she was gone. When she returned the horror continued. In the end her request wasn't any more successful than mine. AOL said I needed to contact SBC, SBC said I needed to contact AOL. Both denied the ability to make the change. I can't even remember how many phone calls I made back and forth now, but the whole process certainly took longer than 21 minutes. By the end I, a normally soft-spoken person, was screaming into the phone. Since I was soon moving out of the apartment and had a cell phone, I ended up cancelling the entire phone line in order to get rid of both companies. It seems to me to be no coincidence that very similar techniques to those used on Vincent were also used on me.

Mr Mfagan1961,

I guess you haven't followed through all of this, as I on the contrary did.

Please consider that on the original blog post only there're more than 800 comments, most of which are similar stories.

This, in my view of things, does pose AOL's policies in question.

Also, googling a bit reveals about the same amount or more of stories like this.

So, your point falls short.

Have a nice day,

Andrew

Mr Pinero,

I'm sure your comments were meant as constructive, however, you should also consider that - being permanent in Google - could also be used "against the cause", that's why I replied promptly.

I'm also convinced(but that's my opinion) that Vincent took them in the best possible way.

Cheers,

Andrew

i've had AOL for 10 years. it's been great. if you found something else to use, then why whine about it. if you're short TWX stock, i hope you lose. you are no different from others. every company has had bad employees. your 15 minutes of fame basically marked you as a crybaby. live with that. chump.

same thing happened to me. they also charged my credit card 2 times while taking the monies out of my bank account. did get 5 x 23.95 back after bitchin' at some jerk overseas. he wanted to know why i was dumping AOL i told him that it was shiitty service and the fact that they hire overseas. wasn't happy with him at all. I think they do that so they can say they didn't understand us who speak english, i was so happy to be rid of AOL.

Vinny, you're my hero! Had a similar experience with AOL several years ago but finally got the service cancelled. We live in the mountains and our ISP selection was, at the time, very limited. Thank goodness we now have high speed but at a not very competitive price.

An experience I've been going through for the past year is trying to cancel my Capital One credit card account. I've had a $0 balance since spring 05 and yet still continue to receive monthly statements (with a $0 balance). I've tried everything...website contact, phone contact, written letters to every address I can find. Recently I received a letter back from "a higher up" apologizing for the lack of response but the next day, got a letter telling me I would start receiving mail solicitations again. Anyone else out there having Capital One issues? Could they be owned by the same parent company as AOL :-)

Andrea Raimond, you might be right, Vince is walking a thin line which I think I acknowledge now. I think there are ways to forward the truth without subjecting the process to tight legal statements, however. For instance, one statement is illegal: "AOL forces its employees to abuse, harass, and badger customers that try to cancel." The other is the truth AND legal: "AOL sent me an apology letter regretting the actions of its employee. But the problem must go beyond that because these stories have been around for years and Google is rife with these stories and calls for action, going back years. I have received hundreds of e-mails and comments from people with similar stories, and indeed it's why I recorded the conversation in the first place. So while I have this apology, I remain perplexed."

The latter comment is not only true and legal, it would have a few AOL attorneys throwing themselves out windows if it were ever uttered on national television.

But again, (and I should be one to talk, trust me!), thinking of the perfect things to say during media interviews is extremely difficult. I've opened my big mouth to the contrary I admite, but I really do think Vincent is doing a great job - has ignited a scary ordeal for AOL, and from what I'm hearing, has even better earth-shattering stuff to come.

You're not alone Vince. I had the same problem cancelling my account. I called to cancel and got into an arguing match with them. I wasn't giving a "good enough" reason for cancelling my service. This went on, round and round, for several minutes and the conversation heated.

It was simple! Cancel my account! I don't want it anymore..... Why? It doesn't matter...I DON'T WANT IT ANYMORE! Not a good enough reason - hung up on me!

I called my bank and told them to not allow anymore withdrawls from AOL. They said that I could have more trouble with AOL if I did that and have collection calls and credit report problems. They transferred me to another department within which deals with problems like this (fraud or something - I don't remember) and they said that they would be listening on the line with me, but not to tell AOL they were on the line. I told AOL I wanted to cancel and had to go through the whole drama again, but at least that agent finally agreed and I got a cancellation number.

I think it was a good idea to have my bank listen to the call and back me up. They said they have had numerous complaints with AOL and have had to do this many times.

Glad to be rid of them!

DVan
Oregon

I just wanted to let you know, like you didn't already know, that you are not alone.

I cancelled my account, or tried to, about two months ago. After BS-ing with the guy forever, I gave up and took the free month they offered, thinking I would come back and cancel when I had more time to deal with these tools. That was my second mistake, the first being when I subscribed to AOL.

I am in the navy, so my ship went out to sea, and came back just before my time would be up to cancel. I got home pretty late, but made my call at just after 11pm, well before the 12-o-clock deadline, but I was wrong. Apparently the number I called to cancel was based in another time zone, and therefor I was "late" and was charged an additional month's worth of service.

I pled, not no avail, to have this refunded, and apparently no one has any span of control over these things. I guess AOL, in their infinite knowledge only gives these phone retards the power to grant a free month of service. After about an hour of me arguing about how I was not 20 minutes late, I gave up and went to bed. A week later, I receive a letter from AOL stating that "[I] would not receive any more charges after the 19th", so I felt the issue had been resolved. That was until the 23rd when my account WAS charged.

So, I proceeded to call their "customer service reps" to defend my case. Their answer was the typical legalistic, "the letter was sent before the draft went through"-type answer. I argued that I knew when the letter was postmarked, and when the transaction had occurred, but no mountain of evidence could help my case. I was ensured that I would not receive any MORE charges and that my account was cancelled, and I hung up in disgust.

I hope that AOL is proud of themselves for having milked another month's worth of payment from me over being 20 minutes late to cancel. I hope the 20 or 30 dollars for them was worth all of the negative publicity I would ensure they got. I have done nothing since then but bash AOL to anyone who will listen. The service is garbage. The people are garbage. Their practices are abhorable. They will be broke before they know it if they continue with this course of business. They think their little checklists of high-pressure, annoying tactics are bull, and they should be required to cancel accounts with NO QUESTIONS ASKED. I shouldn't have to prove my damn case as to why the service sucks and I want high speed or whatever. I hope AOL takes a substantial hit in the pocketbook from all of the negative publicity, and I will see to it that I do everything in my power to help that along.

As far as your comments with CNN about "did you feel bad the guy lost his job", yes it was his fault, BUT, he was following AOL's policies and tactics. If they disagree, they are just lying even more. If it was not their policy to harass, then so many people would not have the SAME STORY. I applaud you on your efforts and hope you can help bring all of this down.

Rural users who don't have access to consumer broadband are in the fringe.

Area Coverage is something like 92%

As of April 06' it is 30%, the amount of people on dial-up is projected to be 20% by 2009 and less than 10% of users by 2012.

You are doing a disservice to your parents by not pointing them in the direction of an extremely easy to use alternative like gmail or how to utilize the services they already pay for through their existing ISP.

Snide? I'm just stating the truth.

My group of friends? I've got statistics to back up my claims. For example, broadband penetration in my immediate area is 90%, with cablevision holding the vast majority of subscribers and Verizon a distant second.

All you've done is reinforce the fact that AOL relies on the less technologically literate and certain fringe population segments to keep their core business alive.

The core business of AOL is not sustainable, hence the current drive to diversify and compete Apple iTunes, Google, and Ebay in other market segments.

Besides, the new "Value DSL" packages from Verizon and BellSouth are going to make further inroads against the dial-up segment within the next year or two.

I'm a kid? I don't know any kids with a mortgage, a BA in Electrical Engineering from Carnegie Mellon and an MBA from USC.

Oh and to add about NDAs... I'm fairly confident that it's *utterly* lawful to break on them if they sustain a criminal charge, although IANAL.

Anyone knows better?

Even if it wasn't, however, given the amount of feedback found here and on the web about this whole thing, FBI could send someone under cover and prosecute them if they find something not going as it should.

Cheers,

Andrew

AOL is the worst. I tried to accept an introductory offer for some hundreds of free minutes (don't recall how many). Took at least 3 phone calls - two clearly answered in a foreign country with limited English-speakers following a script. On one call was on hold for more than an hour before I spoke to someone. Service was extremely poor. Thought I had cancelled AOL, but got billed for two months that I didn't use. Disputed it with my credit card company who reversed the charges. AOL sent my account to collections agencies twice - when I sent the collection agencies my extensive documentation including letters to AOL, they didn't bother me again. I laugh every time I see their commercials on TV about their great customer service.

Mr Pinero.

To my understanding(but that's just me and English isn't even my first language, so here it goes my interpretation) Vincent Ferrari simply didn't replicate on either side of the fence while giving his interviews, just because he was standing on a lawful side and saying anything against AOL without proof would have led to an immediate suit.

Since he didn't want to "apology" AOL, he got to keep his mouth shut.

That's how I see it.

Cheers,

Andrew

All right Vincent, if you say trust you, then I for one will. You're in a difficult situation and in any event, what you've done already has scared the bajeezus out of AOL.

You're undertaking a huge project to document AOL's bad practices legitimately and hopefully that goes as well. I think the "beef" I've been spraying around has more to do with how I wish the camera time you're getting could be used to deliver a message like "I appreciate AOL's apology, but despite John's rudeness, we know he isn't the problem here. The problem is much larger"...or something.

But to be fair, I haven't seen or heard all of your interviews. I apologize for being so shrill about the "apologist" thing. I continue to watch how it unfolds and wish you luck!

Another thing: employees can come forward and report unethical, bad faith, or corrupt business practices. A confidentiality agreement is not an ironclad cover for widespread corruption.

The employee can leak the information anonymously -- people do it all the time. If AOL tried to go after individual employees, their current public relations disaster would worsen.

AOL has brought this on themselves.

I'm sure there are many fine people who use AOL and think it's just dandy. But the company's practices are deplorable: thereby making them a company where the customer must be aware that they're dealing with an unethical company.

They steal from people's accounts, then harass them with collection agencies. Refuse to cancel, etc...

If dial-up still has a place, a better company will try a fill the vacuum that has been created by AOL's tanking.

AOL squandered the public trust, and for that they deserve to go out of business. Like Enron.

If I were a person who still needed or preferred dial-up, I'd still stay the hell away from that company. One thing you can't get back is your good reputation once you've thrown it away.

Aol try to make it difficult to cancel their account. I had a rep who did something simalar to what this John guy did to Vincent. I told the rep that I just "lost my job" and getting my "computer reposesed" in order for her to finally cancel my account. They just don't get it over there at AOL. The sad thing about it is it's not the rep's fault but management for stressing to the rep that their goal is to not let their customer to cancel their account.

The figure is more like 36% using dialup, but it's still a minority of users in the US now. People are using alternate methods (cable, DSL, WiFi) 2 to 1 over dialup, but the fact is that AOL is still a large company with many subscribers (both dialup and broadband) and even though they are losing subscribers like crazy, it's foolish to write them off as irrelevant.

My parents are in their 70s and they have a wireless network in their home and attach over Time Warner cable, but they maintain their AOL account because it's the e-mail service they're familiar with and (to them) is the easiest to use. They aren't alone.

Whether you like it or nor, 36% of the US internet business is significant and AOL is the biggest player in that (plus they hold a good number of broadband subscribers, too). Regardless, to sneer at anyone who has an AOL account as "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" is not only foolish, it's downright ignorant. It shows that you are very myopic and pretty damn snide...that you do not have the capability to look outside your small circle of friends and acquaintances. In fact, a recent piece on FOX News' website cited that many dial-up users are quite content and have no plans on upgrading. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200606,00.html)

Here are some other people who might use dial-up:

Rural users who cannot get DSL/Cable
People who do nothing more than check e-mail
Travelers who use WiFi during the week and only surf occasionally on weekends
Users who do not wish an always-on connection for security reasons

The bottom line is not everyone lives in mommy's basement and spends all day on Xbox Live before headed to their thrice-weekly job at Starbucks. There are a lot of people with a multitude of needs and not all of them need broadband. Their's is not a growing market share, but it's not one to be ignored, at least not yet.

Oh, and there are a lot of us 40-somethings who use technology daily (and have been for years), and we do a damn sight more with it than download Korn mp3s and pics of Lindsay Lohan, junior.

30% of internet users are still on dial-up

This is the econoline segment of the market.

AOL has two thirds of those customers and competes against other budget providers like NetZero and EarthLink dial-up in this ever shrinking segment.

They are not the giant that dominated the United States with something like 90% of all internet subscribers a mere decade ago, they are a dead end business in a perpetually shrinking, niche market.

They are a dying business model and bleeding something like 50,000-100,000 subscribers a month.

They lose Time Warner more money than you can imagine.

Time Warner doesn't want them anywhere near their cable and broadband sectors.

AOL is the largest dial-up ISP in the country, no question. The fact is that dial-up is a sinking ship and they are going down with it.

AOL has that ranking because broadband services are fractured by their very nature between the historical (localized) cable monopolies and the five or six biggest telecom companies who are limited to providing service in the regions they own the lines.

Broadband subscribers need to be looked at as an aggregate

The concentration of AOL users in any given area compared to local DSL or Cable subscribers is relatively low, but they show up big because their business operations are national in scope, unlike Cox or Comcast.

AOL is the last "big name" in a visibly dying and increasingly dinosauric sector.

As of 2006, nearly 70% of the people who have the internet in their home have Broadband.

They are as irrelevant as you can get and their business has a clear expiration date on it.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

lol, The Erin Brockovich of AOL... haha

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I am convinced its SOP. I tried cancelling once and I finally had to resort to begging the CSR to just cancel the account.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.