Telemarketers on the ropes

CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER ^ | 8/11/2003 | Lance Williams

[xrp]

Popular do-not-call list bringing industry to its knees

Aug. 11 — In the past three months, the hallways at Groesbeck-based Tel-A-Sell Marketing Inc. have become a lot less crowded. CEO Edd O’Connor has been forced to trim his telemarketing staff from 72 to 18.

“I WAS RUNNING a full house earlier this year,” said O’Connor, who also serves as president of the American Teleservices Association’s Great Lakes Chapter, which covers Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky and Michigan.

One of the big reason for the cuts: the chilling effects of the National Do Not Call Registry and other similar efforts in statehouses across the country.

A month into the sign-ups for the federal Do Not Call list, nearly 30 million phone numbers across the United States have been registered for the list. That number could double by the time the list takes effect on Oct. 1.

The ATA, which is challenging the list in court, said the national list could eventually cause more than 2 million lost telemarketing jobs. The ATA estimated that telemarketers are responsible for $660 billion in sales. The combined effects of do-not-call lists and the movement of jobs overseas have left the industry ailing.

“It’s going to cause significant business problems for this industry,” said O’Connor, who said he expects a pickup in business in early fall. “We’ve got to step back and regroup.”

[steve-b]

Don't blame us for telemarketers destroying their business. They were using a service WE were paying for to try to sell us junk we didn't want. That's theft, stopping theft is a legitimate use of government.

****DING DING DING*** No more calls; we have a winner.

[steve-b]

Please enlighten me as to how American legislation will affect spammers from the other 199 countries in the world.

Civilized countries make international agreements to prevent cross-harassment. Barbarian countries don't have anything (not even the crap products offered by telepests) to sell.

[steve-b]

This suggestion is even dumber than the rest of your telepest apologia (and that's saying a lot).

The telepests made the mess; the telepests can pay to clean it up (as they are, quite correctly, shouldering the costs of the DNC list). To suggest that civilized users of telephone services should pay extra is outrageous.

[steve-b]

Up to 2,000,000 more Americans could be put out of work.

Nonsense. Even if they don't do what they should have done in the first place (learn skills that would enable them to do something besides talk on the phone), they can work for legitimate incoming phone banks. Then, people who want to do business on the phone might be able to do so without waiting until Sol leaves the main sequence.

[bfree]

Too bad, get a real job and stop invading the privacy of others.

[xrp]

So you now have to get a real job?

[Tired of Taxes]

I didn't read any of the comments on this thread, so I don't know where others here stand. But, I'm amazed at the people I know who are anti-legislation in almost every circumstance but who are just thrilled about this do-not-call list.

It seems that any other industry is worthy of defense except this one. I used to work in an industry where we HAD to rely on telemarketing - we were their sales people - and without it, the company would've failed. Yes, I hate receiving those dreaded sales calls, too, and they shouldn't be allowed to harrass people on the phone. But, if a company can't call to ask for someone's business, the company cannot make as many sales, and not just the telemarketers but the other employees (clerks, accountants, etc.) might as well kiss their jobs "goodbye".

[xrp]

Basically they're pro-big government, especially when it prevents someone from calling them on their precious little telephone.

[Tired of Taxes]

And here's another point: I find all the junk mail we receive to be quite irritating. I'm force to shuffle through and recycle it, dealing with so much paper in my mailbox. Does that mean Big Brother should start a "do-not-mail" list next? Hey, let's just stop companies from advertising altogether. Yeah, that's it. (/sarcasm)

[discostu]

The important functional difference is that you don't pay to receive mail, you pay to receive phone calls.

[xrp]

Mass mailers help to subsidize the postal service. If it weren't for these companies sending out all this junk mail, you could easily pay quite a bit more for your personal mailings.

[Tired of Taxes]

But, you also pay to watch TV (cable or satellite service), yet we're subjected to advertisements on TV, too. :-)

[=Intervention=]

*LOL* So we are babies because we don't want folks harassing us? Uhm, ok. I'm all for American jobs. I'm not for American parasitism, which telemarketers and spammers embody. Those people are better off working at Mickey D's or K-Mart where they're actually performing a service or doing something useful.

[discostu]

True, the height of the junkmail boom was the only time USPS was profitable. But the primary difference between telemarketers and junk mailers is that you don't pay to receive mail, you pay to receive phonecalls. Because of that junk mailers aren't taking anything from you and telemarketers ARE taking from you. While there are methods of avoiding telemarketers they all involve either paying more to maintain the value of your telephone service or modifying your behavior in such a way that it reduces the value of your telephone service. Telemarketers should have seen the writing on the wall when they got banned from cellphones, changes in their behavior would have avoided this.

[=Intervention=]

Is that how you defend your positions -- insulting the other person?

[=Intervention=]

I'd pay more if it meant a reduction in irritation.

[discostu]

That's because commercials pay for TV shows to be made, it's the implicit agreement between me and the network that if I want to watch their show I also watch the messages from the companies that paid to get the show made and broadcast. Also there's plenty of commercial free TV out there. And finally commercials don't turn my TV on whenever they want to try to sell me something.

[RightWhale]

Up to 2,000,000 more Americans could be put out of work.

Must be a misprint. At most 2000 part-timers will have to go back to stuffing envelopes that everyone can toss in the trash without opening.

[-YYZ-]

I agree with you in principle on the subject of telemarketers, but I must say your arguments here are condescending and offensive - way to win over converts to your way of thinking. News flash: as much as you may think so, you don't have the answer to every question in the world.

Now, on the subject of email spam, in my opinion email spammers are nothing but parasites. They consume vast quantities of resources that they don't pay for, compared to the typically tiny amount they spend. And in many cases they illegally use resources they have no right to to do the dirty work (ie if they're going to send out several million emails, then they should have to pay for an ISP service that will allow them to originate all those emails. I guarantee you my ISP would certainly notice if I started sending millions of emails out from my account, and cut my service).

[Tired of Taxes]

Alright, good point. I'm not trying to legislate away TV commercials or even junk mail (which has always cost me much more time and energy than hanging up on a telemarketer). But, we do pay for the mailbox, and we pay for the TV. And, what about people knocking on your door to sell something? It's your door, your property, and you're paying for it. Should we start a "do-not-knock" list?

I just find it hypocritical that the same group who would rightly oppose other laws that intrude in the business of private companies would support a big-government program that does just that, all to stop a little inconvenience on their time.

Of course, I will admit, we're on the list, too. :-)