
The $4 Million Complaint Call - mirceagoia
http://www.inc.com/ron-burley/4-million-complaint-call.html
======
ctdonath
Reminds me of a support call with Ruth in Idaho years ago. It didn't result in
$4M, but it wasn't small potatoes either.

Like Bob, she was new to computers. I spent 10 hours over 2 days walking her
thru the basics of using a computer so she could use our insurance company
software. She was very thankful.

So thankful she sent me a box containing ... two giant Idaho potatoes, nearly
a foot long each.

I said it wasn't small potatoes.

~~~
StacyC
I love this story and I don’t care if it’s true.

~~~
ctdonath
:-)

It is true. One potato was enough to supply all the mashed tubers for the
extended-family Thanksgiving dinner. Bonus: we happened to grow a ginormous
beet of comparable size, used at the same huge meal.

------
kevinalexbrown
While I thoroughly enjoy the heartwarming part, I don't think that's why it's
good advice from a business perspective.

It's great advice because word of mouth is extremely important for a technical
business selling to a small but lucrative market where buyers have
alternatives (like hiring decisions). This will have less impact in large
consumer sales where advertising matters, or when you have a market cornered.

It will work when you apply for a job or hire someone. You're selling to a
small market - the few employers you speak with. They have some alternatives,
but if someone they know and trust (Bob, in this story) raves about you from
first-hand experience, it matters quite a lot. Likewise if someone tells me
how awesome it is to work with a particular person or group, I am much more
likely to take that job among competitive alternatives. Treat your employees
like crap and all you'll get are crap new employees, etc.

We don't all run businesses in small lucrative markets. But we do all apply to
jobs from time to time, where previously helped or pissed off people will make
a huge difference.

~~~
seigenblues
This is dead on. It's a mistake to read this and take away some homey homily
about how "every customer is a snowflake!" -- the point is that you should
correctly value the passionate customer. Your marketing and outreach and
customer service departments should understand the relative values of "bought
it, loved it!" and "bought it, so?" Those relative values will vary from
product to product/industry to industry

The comment below at this time ('survivorship bias') is also correct, but only
if it's interpreted as a touching anecdote rather than as crucial customer-
behavior information for his market segment. Understanding the dynamics of how
your customers make their purchasing decisions seems like a better lesson to
take from this.

(Not the same for every product, either! E.g., my being passionate about
Cheerios does nothing for General Mills, really...)

~~~
Blunt
ya know, I just don't agree with anyone who posts here and uses the word
"customer." Yea, Bob was a customer but he is also a human being. Less we
forget this and remember we are working with other people then you don't need
to worry about "snowflakes" or whether you're customers are happy or not. Just
treat everyone you come in contact with with respect & regardless of how you
met (business or otherwise) and this world would just be a much better place.

~~~
cldrope
Thank you for using the word human.

I'm all about the "Don't kiss others' booties on the off chance that it will
come back to you" because if you're doing it for that reason, you're doing it
wrong.

Just treat people well, take everything one step at a time, and look at it
from their vantage point. These things in mind and everyone will walk away
from the table happy the majority of the time.

If your customer service reps are trained, mature and willing then there's no
difference between the experience with them and you.

~~~
cheatercheater
> Just treat people well, take everything one step at a time

You can only take so many steps each day. Forfeit too many steps for some guy
who won't pay off and you lose out.

~~~
cldrope
Sometimes I wonder what it's like to pretend that you aren't affected by the
mannerisms and maturity of all living human beings. To believe that there's a
good rationalization to finding a short cutoff of helping people.

This article's true evil is this: He puts helping the guy with a technical
problem as a favor, not as a simple kind duty.

We don't want to spend everyday as tech support, that's reasonable. But if
people were better educated instead of taken care of, perhaps they wouldn't
need as much.

~~~
cheatercheater
The "duty as favor" part of your comment was very insightful. This is a
recurring theme in all actions that ultimately cost the person performing them
without foreseeable payback. This is, in my experience, displayed by people
with shaky moral fundament and questionable values. There's always speak of
how e.g. "white lists", the inclusion in which is awarded to persons or
companies that act correctly, is detrimental - because they should not be
handling incorrectly in the first place, and being normal should not be
incentivized.

However, when you're running a business, especially during its infancy, your
values need to be questionable and questioned in order for your approach to
adapt to the environment. Following questionable values in this case is not
only admissible but even required, and you'll need to reinvent yourself quite
often. There is no "normal" when you're trying to break the mould.

Definite upvote from me for bringing this up.

------
wccrawford
It all depends on the customer. Bob was apparently a nice guy who just needed
a lot of help. I'd have helped him.

Had Bob been a jerk and constantly harassed the support staff with problems
that were of his own making, then I'd have gotten rid of him. Probably. There
could be circumstances.

Anecdote time: I worked at an SaaS company. 1 customer was constantly flooding
our system via an automated system he had written. It caused quite a lot of
downtime and breakage. And he was a jerk.

My bosses hated him. He was nothing but a pain in their necks. I loved him. He
constantly stressed out our system and showed me the bottlenecks. I used it to
fix all kinds of problems years before they became a problem for other
customers. Any time he caused a problem, we'd lock his account, fix it, and
then unlock him again. Sometimes days later.

Eventually, he caused enough problems that they dumped him.

Fast forward years later, and now our regular customers were using the system
as hard as he was. Many of them. Now, if the system broke, we had no spare
capacity. Everything was harder to fix.

I will probably never forget his name and the lesson I learned about how
useful a 'bad' customer can be.

~~~
gautamsomani
This is interesting, I mean a user (aka customer) of a system pointing out the
bottlenecks (or loopholes) of your system. I'll remember this incident of
yours. :)

------
rohansingh
This is effectively gambling with your time. You only have a limited amount of
time available each day. The minutes or hours you spend on the phone with a
single customer, walking them through things like how to install Windows, are
minutes or hours you are not using to build things that could reach all of
your customers.

You could luck out, and that time you spent with a single customer could end
up like this, with a $4 million check. Or that call might go nowhere, and
because you've neglected other parts of your business and your other customers
to cater to the extensive needs of a few, you may find your entire venture
collapsing.

There are arguments to be made around where this line should be drawn, but
helping each and every customer with all of their problems — even when they
are unrelated to your actual product or service — is too far in one direction.

EDIT: At the end the article points out that not all calls can be treated
this, but that "you never know" which should. But, "some things are really
important but there's know way to know which", is not helpful in any useful
sense.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Interesting take on it, which I disagree with.

This isn't "gambling with your time" this is "making good on your customer's
commitment". And your note triggered a really interesting visceral reaction in
me.

You can look at life as a series of choices you make and a scoring system by
which you evaluate the quality of those choices. Typically a positive scoring
system is used so the higher the score the 'better' the decision. It is often
the case that people are judged by their scoring system.

Examples of scoring systems might be "how much money did I get out of that
decision?" or "How many people are better off based on that decision?" These
being centered on the individual describe the 'greedy bastard' archetype and
the 'saint' archetype. Most people have a more nuanced system which combines
the scores of several systems (is this good for my company? my career? my
personal wealth? my celebrity? my family? my community?) which they weight
sort of like the ice skating scoring system in the Olympics.

The point of the article was that if you're committed to your company and your
company's success, then you decide to do what ever it takes to solve your
customer's problems. That is because they took a chance on your product and
you want them to be ok with their choice. Its an anecdotal story which
illustrates a principle, of customer focused execution.

When you look at successful companies, you will see that they share this
principle. And companies that do not, can be disrupted (like the US car
industry in the 70's, the airline industry in the 80's, etc etc). There isn't
any gambling involved. Anytime you spend extra time with your customer you
_win_. That customer will relate that experience, win, they continue to buy
your products, win, and they stick with you if you accidentally screw up
somehow, total win.

~~~
drewcrawford
> if you're committed to your company and your company's success, then you
> decide to do what ever it takes to solve your customer's problems.

> Anytime you spend extra time with your customer you win.

I don't think that anyone actually adopts this position. You would probably
not become a kidney donor for your customer, or pay them $10,000 because they
confess to you in a support call that they recently became unemployed. You
would not build a new software application just for them. You would not even
add a feature to the product just for one customer! (At least at the consumer
software level.)

It's fine to make exaggerated statements because our society requires
exaggerated change. But there is a big difference between saying that Time
Warner, AT&T, et. al., need to get better about customer service, vs saying
that patio11 or Peldi do.

I guess the fundamental problem I have with your position is that you are
preaching a message that lots of people in Fortune 500s should hear (and
won't), to a group of people that are probably treating their customers too
well already, and are perhaps feeling guilty that they do not do even more for
them, and are thus primed to further the error. So in that specific sense, I
think this advice is dangerous.

A much better approach would be to advocate a scoring system that takes into
account more of the actual benefit of customer service, e.g. realistically
estimating the marketing benefits, considering the product feedback benefits,
and so on. The value of customer support may vary greatly with the kind of
market you are in, for example.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Ok, lets look at that for a moment.

This comment: "I don't think that anyone actually adopts this position. You
would probably not become a kidney donor for your customer, or pay them
$10,000 because they confess to you in a support call that they recently
became unemployed. You would not build a new software application just for
them. You would not even add a feature to the product just for one customer!
(At least at the consumer software level.)" seems a bit like reductio ad
asurdum right? Of course you wouldn't donate a kidney. The argument goes you
solve their problems _that are blocking their use of your product._ In the
anecdote the customer Bob didn't have quite the computer skills they needed,
but those skills were essential to being able to run the product platform. So
our author helped them develop those skills. Note that this person has already
paid for and bought the product so they are already a customer.

 _"I guess the fundamental problem I have with your position is that you are
preaching a message that lots of people in Fortune 500s should hear (and
won't), to a group of people that are probably treating their customers too
well already, and are perhaps feeling guilty that they do not do even more for
them, and are thus primed to further the error. So in that specific sense, I
think this advice is dangerous."_

I disagree with that too, consider the AirBnB case of the customer who had her
apartment trashed. That was a case where a non-fortune 500 company initially
took the position of 'do what is best to protect the company', got a ton of
criticism for it, and then turned around and focused more on making the
customer whole before counting costs on the company. The latter was much more
successful, and AirBnB has remained a steadily growing company. And they
learned from that experience both how to be more customer focused and how to
protect themselves in the future. If you have one customer, or ten, or ten
thousand, every time you help one of them through a problem of using your
product your company and your product gets better.

There are some great examples of great customer service in many YC companies
and amongst folks here. There are also some less than great examples.

Then you finish with this, "... to a group of people that are probably
treating their customers too well already, and are perhaps feeling guilty that
they do not do even more for them, and are thus primed to further the error."
which completely jumps off the rails. Small companies are busy places, and if
the customers aren't having problems then generally they aren't taking any
resources away. Its good to periodically poll them and ask how they are doing
but there is never a risk of deciding to go just go out looking for customer
problems to solve, if the company is focused on getting the product out the
door.

So I started at Sun on the Monday after they went public. They were still a
pretty small company < 2000 employees they were not a fortune 500 company yet,
but they were very customer focused. I joined Network Appliance the Monday
after their first layoff in their history, they weren't a fortune 500 company
yet, but they were customer focused. My point is that being customer focused
isn't something you 'add on' when you get big, it is something you 'build in'
when you are small and you nurture. I strongly believe it contributes to the
success probability.

~~~
drewcrawford
> seems a bit like reductio ad asurdum right?

That's because the grandparent's claim _is absurd_. Grandparent was actually
claiming that _you should do anything_ for a customer. I'm not exaggerating
its position at all; that's actually what grandparent said. Absurd position
yields absurd counterargument.

With AirBnB, you have an example of one small company that needed to hear the
customer service message. But one example is not much of an argument when
somebody posits a _general trend_.

I can defend the trend easily: a small company depends much more on customer
service than a large one does. The first group of customers is make-or-break;
once you reach a certain funding level, pleasing every single customer is less
of an issue.

------
zem
even if it had not led to the $4M account (which was an unpredictable,
lottery-ticket sort of occurrence), the author identified an excellent
"selfish" reason to take the call and spend time with bob - they explicitly
designed their software as easy to use, so the travails of an actual person in
the industry, who was using their software for his day-to-day business and
having problems with it, would have been incredibly valuable user feedback.

this is true even if the specific problems bob was having (windows startup
options) had superficially nothing to do with their software - if you take a
step back, they were all things he needed to do to get their product up and
running properly, and were therefore worth taking a look at to see if things
could be made easier for the next customer.

~~~
cheatercheater
Who doesn't design their software to be easy to use? This sort of claim is a
catch-all.

~~~
zem
there's often a power versus ease-of-use tradeoff

------
msluyter
Survivorship bias.

Meanwhile, at the other companies where CEO was too sleepy to make good
decisions because he was up all night helping customers configure Windows...
well, we don't hear those stories, because they folded.

Edited to add: not to denigrate what he did here. He did a nice thing, and
it's laudable to be a good person who helps people, whether or not it's the
optimal way to spend your time.

~~~
anon01
We have made our first two customers extremely happy with our late hours and
endless customer support. We also spent so much time customizing our product
for them, we've had to invest 6 man months(so far) trying to get back to a
stable product, on one codebase, that works for them AND new customers without
direct engineer involvement in each turn up... it has been a mess.

------
biot
There's a bit of confirmation bias going on here. I'm a huge advocate of going
the extra mile to help out a customer, but I could easily imagine a story
where a company wasn't able to focus on its profitable customers because it
was so inundated with supporting unqualified users that it didn't have the
time and resources to close a $10M sale.

"We would have chosen to go with ACME Technologies, but when we had challenges
with the installation their staff was so tied up offering Windows tutorials
that we could never get the help we needed to do a proper implementation. It's
a shame as their product did appear to have the edge."

~~~
vacri
Not to mention that if you're not providing 'free' tech support (as in, free
to the company), 2-hour calls at 2am on a Sunday morning gets expensive fast.

I used to work for a company that worked in sleep medicine, so we had the
wonders of a busy night call schedule. Our CEO boasted of our support record
(wilfully ignoring actual data) and would demand to know why we didn't do a
2am drive to a customer having difficulties like he did back when he was
operating the business out of his garage. It didn't slow him down much when we
pointed out that the lab having problems was literally on the other side of
the continent.

Support is a bit like healthcare - there is always more demand than there is
supply. The trick is how to triage it appropriately.

------
Mz
I love stories like this. A couple of others that come to mind with a similar
theme:

A bank was going to turn down an account for some long-haired young man in
jeans who wanted his statements forwarded all over the place. Then some young
employee told the middle-aged manager he was a wealthy rock star who needed
his bank statements available while touring.

Some young bank teller with an attitude was being an ass to a guy in coveralls
or similar, covered in paint and looking kind of like a day laborer. He
finally got mad and said he would move his accounts if he did not get treated
properly. She continued with the attitude and told him "Go ahead". He was the
owner of a construction company and his accounts were worth millions. (Edit:
And, yes, he moved them.)

~~~
eli
Bah, that's a wimpy version. The story I heard was he bought the branch and
fired her.

~~~
Mz
Well, that's the way I (mis?)remembered it. But have an upvote. :-)

------
juddlyon
This makes for a heartwarming magazine article but I don't think it's good
advice.

If you don't set boundaries with your clients, they will set them for you.
Which means calling the CEO at 2 AM on a Saturday.

The sentiment of always respecting your clients is a good one, but allowing
yourself to get roped in on issues that you shouldn't is a surefire path to
burnout and losing money.

~~~
mirceagoia
Depends on what kind of clients do you have. If you have individual clients
then yeah, it may be a waste of time sometime. But if you have institutional
clients (other companies), like this startup had (broadcast stations), then I
think it's worth going the extra mile.

------
patio11
I paid for college working as an Order Entry operator for a division large
office supplies store (you know, the kind of place where you go when you want
to buy paper and... staples). We got a memo from the CEO every couple of
months. I can quote the most memorable one in it's entirety:

[Grainy photograph of photocopied email with effusive praise from the
Purchasing Director at a Midwestern life insurance company, which had just
opened a $300,000 a year account with us, about his purchasing experience with
$COMPANY.]

Bob is talking about the $22.69 order he made of balloons for his daughter's
birthday. Treat every order like Cindy treated that one. Keep up the good
work. -- CEO

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Isn't it likely that is the only order that CEO ever made personally? And he
happened to catch Cindy on good day?

My only takeaway from this is if you want orders to be taken from CEOs by
pleasent happy people, hire pleasant, happy people to work for you.

Is that what you meant?

~~~
patio11
Sorry, wasn't clear, let me elaborate: prior to the Director of Purchasing at
$CUSTOMER deciding to award $COMPANY a $300,000 a year account, Bob Smith (who
happens to be DoP at $CUSTOMER when not doting on his daughter) was in a bind
with regards to shipping time frames on birthday balloons, and Cindy (a lovely
lady who makes $10.50 an hour and whose good days were best described as "the
ones ending in Y") overrode the computer's heuristics for shipping methods,
shipped $25 of balloons in a $50 envelope, and called the warehouse personally
to make sure it ended up on the very last van for delivery in time for the
birthday the following day.

Working in seasonal order entry is a very cruddy job, by the way, but I'll
give it to $COMPANY: they _genuinely believed and practiced_ all the words
that everyone repeats about customer satisfaction.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Thank you. Now the world would be a fairer place if 10.50 an hour could be
supplemented with x% of 300,000

------
benjaminwootton
IMO providing quality service and tech support is _the_ most cost effective
thing you can do to market your business bar none.

It's shockingly rare to get good proactive customer service nowadays that by
giving it a little attention, you can easily give yourself a competitive
advantage of your entire industry.

------
dsirijus
Only slightly flammable honest question:

If it was so lucrative to take calls at 2AM, why don't they offer that kind of
service after anymore?

<http://support.bsiusa.com/>

:{-

~~~
dalke
My guess is that they've improved their training support, like with the
"remote control software" option under Platinum Tech Care Plan. Early on it's
cheaper to provide phone support to a small number of customers then it is to
set up a comprehensive training program.

------
mirceagoia
How many companies, even small ones, have that kind of support?

~~~
jasonkester
Small companies can afford to do this much better than big ones, since they're
often doing it in house. "White Glove" customer support is one of the few
things you can do to beat the big guys when you're first starting out.

Joel said it best: Remarkable Customer Service, as in service so good that
people actually _remark_ about it.

<http://joelonsoftware.com/articles/customerservice.html>

~~~
pacaro
The first software company I worked for (approx 15 employees) had a system
where the devs each spent one day every two weeks on the support desk (we also
had a full time support person). We probably scored 1/12 on the Joel test[1],
but we definitely knew our customers pain points - the insight I gained from
the delta between my understanding of a product and a customer's understanding
of the same product has been invaluable.

[1] <http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000043.html>

------
iuguy
> There's a moral to the story: Every customer needs to be treated with
> respect, and no customer should be left dissatisfied. I'm not saying that
> every customer call is crucially important. But some of them certainly
> are–and you never know which one might be your "Bob."

I'm sorry to correct this, I really am. To provide apple as an example of how
the 'bob' issue scales. It isn't about treating customers with respect, it's
about treating the customer better than the competitor. Your competitor may
respect the customer, as does you. How do you differentiate? If you're aiming
for higher cost you need to go better quality of service.

I was in a meeting the other day and I spoke candidly to the customer about
differences between our penetration test reports and most others. At the end
of the day it boils down to relationships and the investment in them. The
customer might not be aware they're paying for that, but that's a factor in
every business. For us, that means we invest more in relationships and doing
things our customers want than publishing research at conferences on the
vulnerability du jour. Does it make us less known? Yes. Does it make us less
loved? No. I find it hard to believe that there are many companies that have
used us and thought, "There was an average company", and that's why bob
thought the guys in TFA were so good. It wasn't that they were actually good,
it was that they exceeded expectations, which is the goal we should all aim
for.

------
JeffBlauser
As a support manager, I was ready to tweet "Always Listen to your support
manager" until I saw it was $4MM in revenue...

This is one of the reasons that is hard to adopt the "80/20, walk the
difficult customer" approach; I have seen the right manager turn a bad client
into a good one too many times. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

------
rexreed
The only thing worse than a customer that constantly calls and requires
attention is one that doesn't call at all and finds your product or service
useless. If the customer is bothered enough to spend his/her valuable time on
your product, that means you have some value. I would much prefer this over a
customer who doesn't trouble themselves to spend any time at all on my product
and then mysteriously cancels later.

Yes, customer support has a cost. So does marketing and getting customer
feedback as part of an MVP process. While I cringe when customers are
demanding, I also realize how valuable it can be. But I make sure they pay
their bills as well. And if I have a support contract, I make sure they buy it
-- even if they squeeze the value of that to the last drop.

------
pnathan
Some people advocate firing your troublesome customers.

This is an example of why you just might not want to do that.

~~~
epoxyhockey
There are 2 types of troublesome customers, ones that need extra help using
your product and ones that want you to bleed (i.e. they want free stuff or
competitors that want you to lose).

I _love_ customers that need extra help because I discover all kinds of things
that can be improved with my products and I usually gain insight into a whole
demographic that I didn't previously understand.

~~~
shinratdr
> I love customers that need extra help because I discover all kinds of things
> that can be improved with my products and I usually gain insight into a
> whole demographic that I didn't previously understand.

This is a great attitude, and unfortunately quite rare in the dev community.
It's very difficult to see what is cumbersome about a UI if you have been
navigating cumbersome UIs your entire life.

------
huhtenberg
For every Bob there is a metric ton of idiots that feel _entitled_ to support
and won't give much thought to you answering their calls in 2AM on Sunday
morning.

Being extra nice to customers doesn't preclude to using some common sense.

------
larrys
Stories like this (as well as the HN comments below which basically agree with
my way of thinking) make good interview topics. Best way to find out how
someone thinks is to tell them a story and see how they respond. Not ask them
a question because then the answer is to obvious. Whether it be a person you
are on a date with or a job interview.

While some people are sharp enough to see around the corners and figure out
the end game not everybody is.

------
DaveChild
Well, don't bother visiting that on a mobile. The entire page loads, and
_then_ you get redirected to a mobile version ... which is broken. Pathetic.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Same here; maxthon on android.

------
ereckers
This was a nice story and at the end I couldn't wait to get to the comments to
hear that this was wrong and customers are in fact sh!t. I wasn't
disappointed. Coming from having some customer issues of my own recently it
was nice to read a genuine feel good story. Even if it just a fairy tale.

------
jwallaceparker
Great story.

I always appreciate a company that has top rate customer service.

Amazon.com is the best example I can think of these days.

Comcast is the worst.

------
scott_meade
Hope I'm not a customer of the commentators declaring they don't have time or
resources to help all customers who ask. If you don't, you're not holding up
your end of the bargain.

------
damian2000
That is just an awesome story. Goes to show that one of the most important
things a new business should provide is unbelievably good customer service.

------
kristianp
That's not a complaint call, it's a support call.

I used to enjoy this type of article, now the thought process is about the
likelihood of it happening to your company.

------
maxxpower
I love that story, thanks for sharing

------
sethbannon
Incredible story. Treat your customers like they're everything, because at the
end of the day they are.

------
tersiag
This is a really great story

------
sparknlaunch
Nice story however you would only commit to this level of customer service if
you had the time, patience and suitable customer base. I don't think many
would be spending hours with a customer for a low value product or where
little value can be derived.

This situation paid off, however you never know if the directors or companies
may have discovered the business through other means.

I know this all sounds cynical but it's a careful balance of sensibility.

------
cheatercheater
TLDR: Yet another story about how someone lucked out, and therefore you should
follow their flawed approach, because they think the chance to luck out like
they did is 100%, whereas in fact it is 0.00001%.

The blog poster's dream world: we have randomly lucked out by having a single
annoying customer who we stuck with against better judgement, and the frog
turned out to be the prince six months after we cupped its balls on a Sunday
at 2 am.

In reality: if you spend your time indulging annoying customers there's a
99.9999999% chance they'll just keep being annoying customers. You will piss
off everyone at your company for indulging in the annoying customers'
ridiculous requests, and if you're on my support team I will fire you, because
you have better things to do, such as supporting people that respect the
privacy of people they do not know.

If Bob called me at 2 am, there's a non-zero probability the outcome would be
him having a lot of bad words to spread about me. You know what? It's probably
worth it, because I don't want good word of mouth spread by people clueless
enough to call me at 2 in the morning. My experience here? In over a decade of
working freelance, therefore needing a new job every several weeks, I've never
had bad word of mouth stop me from getting a job. And I have had to shut down
a lot of Bobs, quite often in a fiery fireball of very, very satisfying fury.
In retrospect, most Bobs have never amounted to much at all, and I often
wonder why I hadn't cut them off much earlier. Think Bob would have stood up
in that meeting, and said, "oh yeah, totally go with those guys you plan to,
because that one company you're not thinking of using wouldn't speak to me at
2 am"?

------
cocolos
I wish at&t would read that.

------
alanh
On that note — avoid Yellow Cab. They don’t give a hoot about either customers
nor cab drivers.

