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.”

[Conservababe]

Oh, but there is an alternative, deah. But you want it FREE from your governmant. LOL

Technology does exist now that would rid you of your annoying calls.

But, I never cease to wonder why folks are so adamant of having a cell phone on their persons or in their car to receive all calls...yet they demand not to be bothered at home.

[Michael Barnes]

re #61

I work out of my home. I have to be reachable 24x7. As with my cell phone, I wish no one to contact me unless I have given them permission to do so.

BTW, where do you live? I'm gonna come over and borrow your car for a few minutes tomorrow..What the hell right? You pay for it (or lease it); but it's all good for anyone to grab what is your's, right? No inconvienance to you.

[Fledermaus]

He also CHOOSES to own a phone. No one forces him. He CHOOSES to use an ISP that doesn't have spam filters. No one forces him

[Fledermaus]

Then maybe all you school geniuses should have thought about that before getting the computers.

If you didn't have a plan that's your fault.

Does your school library get every magazine in the world? No. You make decisions.

And bulk mailers are the controversy in the government funded postal service because they don't fully PAY THEIR OWN WAY with lower rates for volume. I can do a simple Nexus/Lexus or Google search and show you gazillions of articles on junk mail costing the postal service more. Some liberal whiners, like spam and telemarketing whiners, wanted to ban junk mail also. They have for years. Do you then whine about the money it costs to hire more administrative assistants to retrieve, open, and sort the mail? Probably not since unionized government employees are involved.

And in regards to your assertion that a domain email server has NO WAY to filter email before it reaches the server shows you don't understand the machines as well as you think. If you can think of it, it can be done. You'd be amazed at how many companies waste money buying paper because some moron programmer says he can't stop the blank page from printing between jobs. BS! If it prints a blank page it can be stopped, he's just not smart enough to know how.

If I had a dollar for everyone that told me something with computers couldn't be done I'd be richer than Bill Gates.

[KineticKitty]

But you want it FREE from your government. LOL

Are you slow on the uptake or did you completely skip Post #60? I mean this seriously. But feel free to quote me on where I said that I WANTED this free from my government. Good Luck.

"But, I never cease to wonder why folks are so adamant of having a cell phone on their persons or in their car to receive all calls...yet they demand not to be bothered at home."

Here I'll clear the confusion up for you... This is America, and whether you agree with it or not, these people have the right to make the decision to have a cell phone on them or for that fact 20 cell phones for all I care, and also expect privacy in their home. You can have the opinion that it's stupid, but you don't have the right to dictate what people should do while at home while minding their own business relaxing.

John Doe can choose to carry a cell phone and be "bothered" all day long, but he also has the right to choose be left alone and not harassed in his own home. Interesting how you seem to think his right to make this choice is a bad thing.

If it's simply because it's provided for by the government, then why don't you take it up with the government?

[Concentrate]

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.

Music, sweet music...

[KineticKitty]

"He also CHOOSES to own a phone"

He also has the right to "choose" how he wants to use it... or how it is to be used.

[Fledermaus]

And others with phones have that same right. Or do you want to create a police structure, through wire taps, to determine who can call whom?

Let me put this delicately. You enter a contract with the phone company. You now have access to communications. Under that contract they can publish your name, address and phone number in their White Pages that are now on the internet.

If you don't like that, you have to pay them to have an "unlisted" number. Unless of course you get your way with your totalitarian utopia to force your phone manners on everyone else.

Thank goodness there are busy bodies like you to keep me from my stupidity and relieve me from the horror of actually controlling my own life.

[Graybeard58]

"Is there an alternative right now? No".

It may not be an alternative for everybody but my wife and I went wireless about a year ago and haven't had a single telemarketer call yet on our cell phones.
With all the long distance charges that we had on our land line phone that no longer apply, we are paying less for mobile service than we did for land line.
It works for us.

[KineticKitty]

Don't forget those that are suggesting that anyone taking advantage of this list is doing it completely on tax payers expense.

I think that it's appropriate that the actual telemarketers are having to pay for this list they have to comply with (so much for the taxpayer paying 100% myth) But beyond that, could this be the real reason their mad?;

Data for up to five area codes will be available for free. Beyond that, there is an annual fee of $25 per area code of data, with a maximum annual fee of $7,375 for the entire U.S. database.

A company that is a seller or telemarketer could be liable for placing any telemarketing calls (even to numbers NOT on the registry) unless the seller has paid the required fee for access to the registry. Violators may be subject to fines of up to $11,000 per violation. Each call may be considered a separate violation.

Sounds like the "responsibly" is finally being placed where it needs to be, on the very people that have created this problem.

[KineticKitty]

Yes, I have considered that possibility lately just to reduce the amount we pay in local and long distance charges alone. It looks like it will save us money in the long run. No telemarketers would just make the deal more sweet. ;-) I'm still working all the different service contracts at the moment.

[Cronos]

A simple annoyance that can be remedied by hanging up, using caller ID or an answering machine

That does not make sense. It's not a simple annoyance. Why should I be troubled in my own home by some idiotic voice? You say hang up? Well, that means I've wasted my time running to the phone and picking it up and slamming it down. Caller ID? Well, what if someone who's number I don't have is calling? Or, if I let the telemarketer keep ringing and holding up my line? Answering machine? You mean I have to delay important calls just for these jokers??

[KineticKitty]

Your quite welcome... it must be so fullfilling to tell others how they should be living their lives.

[Hank Rearden]

Telemarketers are in the same class as government parasites. Throw all of them over a tall cliff and don't give them a second thought.

[garandgal]

I have an unlisted phone number, and still receive countless telemarketing calls.

How about this?: Those of you who enjoy being harrassed by the telephone version of "paid programming" keep your numbers on the "call" list. Legitimate products are generally sold through legitimate channels, anyway...not telemarketing.

AND, no one should have to pay additional fees to prevent intrusions in their own home.

Oh, and this should really frost you...

To counter the expected increase (the telemarketing creeps have threatened this, you know) in cretins coming to my door trying to sell me orange cleaner or some other worthless product, I plan to approach the city council about a "do not solicit" list. This would apply to anyone over the age of 17 (to avoid harming the Boy Scouts, Band kids, etc.)....HAH!

[Cronos]

1) If you are tired of calls from the local newspaper trying to get you to subscribe, call their business office. 2) If your credit card company calls too often, cancel that account. 3) Here's a novel approach: don't answer the phone. If you salivate like Pavlov's dog every time it rings that's your problem. Try caller ID, it's cheap. Try an answering machine. If grandma is dead, you'll know when you check the message in the next 5 minutes and there wasn't anything you could have done about it anyway. 4) Legitimate and wonderful charities raise a lot of their money over the phone. They don't have the knowledge, equipment or resources to do that themselves and thus hire agencies to do the work. These agencies do indeed have millions of workers. 5) This same stupid argument has been going on for decades. It used to be, and still is, junk mail in your box. These same siding companies that call you on the phone also send out flyers in the coupon magazine you get once a month. Are you going to ban that too? 6) Now comes computer Spam. As is usual with our new whiney society, they don't set up different (and free) e-mail accounts for family and friends and other groups, they demand ALL "Spam" be blocked. These whiney morons are those you know that are too lazy or stupid to even keep their own e-mail account tidy. They still have 6 month old e-mail jokes in their inbox, never clear out their send list, etc. 7) So now everyone wants the government to solve the problem of the technological convienience the consumer demands and pays for. What's next? Outlawing door to door salesmen? Outlawing billboards? Outlawing ads on the back of your shopping cart? Sooner or later someone is going to want to ban the business you work for from advertising for customers. Two words for the whiners: Personal Responsibility. </>

1.So, I have got to spend my money on a call to tell the telemarketers to stop wasting MY time?
2.Yeah right, then they'll call asking me to reconsider, then buy another card etc. etc.
3.Don't answer the phone? What about an urgent call from someone using a number I don't recognise? Should I give up my right to use the phone because of these teleloons?
If something urgent comes up? Your example doesn't make any sense.
4.I would rather get a flyer from those charities. If they irritate me over the phone I'll never give them a cent, no matter how worthy.
Plus, you're also trying to excuse all the 99.99% of slimy teleloons by holding up the 'few' 'charities' that do call over the phone.
5. Junk mail doesn't waste my time as much as the phone, but yes, if I could I would ask for it to be stopped.
6.Junk all unknown email accounts? What if I get an account I haven't recognised as a friend's account? It goes straight to the junk box. duuuh, again a nonsensical argument.
7.The govt is there to protect the citizenry from outside aggression and internal crime and spam, teleloons are a crime.

[Cronos]

Simple you can choose not to buy those annoying twist ties any longer. -Unlike the rest of us that are sick and tired of telemarketers... we had no choice when it came to being bothered by them. Billboards? I could care less about them... As long as I am not forced to look at them while I am in the comfort of my own home Junk mail? I choose a time in which to go check my mail, and when to deal with what is in the mailbox. which includes throwing away anything they have paid for, like envelopes, postage and such, unlike my monthly phone service. Spam? I check that on my own time... and if it is that intrusive, I can dump my free email accounts. ~But~ I do believe (as arguments have stated above) SPAM costs money, and in the long run it isn't the spammers that are going to be paying for it. The telemarketers rights NEVER supercede mine when I am in the comfort and privacy of MY own home. I could care less how they feel about the no call list.

Well put..

[Cronos]

He also CHOOSES to own a phone

Huh? You mean to say that he should disconnect himself just because the teleloons are too barbaric to respect a citizen's privacy?

[Cronos]

Maybe, but I've had teleloons calling me up on my cell. That's really irritating when you're out of the country and YOU have to pay to listen to their inanities.

[Arthalion]

And in regards to your assertion that a domain email server has NO WAY to filter email before it reaches the server shows you don't understand the machines as well as you think. If you can think of it, it can be done.

Sure it can. All you'd have to do is rewrite the SMTP protocol to allow remote analysis of email, and simply refuse to accept those that appear to be spam. Of course, you've now broken the oldest protocol on the Internet, and you've got to convince every email server administrator in the world to implement your broken protocol in order for it to make any difference, but it could be done. Theoretically. By someone with much more clout than I (you think MS is going to rewrite SMTP support on Exchange just because I ask them to?)

The problem is that the basic SMTP protocol requires email servers to receive an email and THEN analyze it to determine its content and recipient. This takes storage space, bandwidth, and processing cycles. Even if you use a spam blocker to delete it, it'll still cost you resources to deal with it. There IS some early stage discussion going on about implementing a new SMTP standard called Authenticated SMTP, but it's likely to generate controversy because it will make ALL emails traceable and eliminate email anonymity. Without support from the major server vendors, however, any attempt at a new email protocol seems doomed to failure.