Dish is "Oh so sensitive"
- Thread starter dschritt
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 87
- Views 9K
Dish should REALLY do the right thing.
It may cost them some money, but it will gain them some good exposure and make a customer for life.
I can't believe how STUPID some folks are at Dish sometimes.
It may cost them some money, but it will gain them some good exposure and make a customer for life.
I can't believe how STUPID some folks are at Dish sometimes.
The bad press is already out there now. They should have done the right thing the first time. If they go back and change their minds now they will look like they are caving to media pressure. On top of that they probably wouldn't get their change of heart published so it wouldn't buy them any good will.
I am really surprised Dish does not insure their leased equipment. That would be too logical.
Again they can be so stupid at times.
Again they can be so stupid at times.
Why should this surprise anyone, coming from a company that charges extra for warranty service on leased equipment?
If E* replaced their receiver, then how many others? What happens after the next tornado? Things happen, that is why contracts and agreements are written. Yes, it seems cruel to demand payment for the lost receiver, but the customer should know that. If all of this lightning today strikes one of my receivers, can I call E* to replace it for free? No. Why should they? The lightning (tornado, hurricane, etc) is not under E*'s control. Neither the consumer, but that is the risk, hence the need for customer agreements.
I wonder how strong the ties are between this newspaper and the local cable company?
We had a tornado touchdown a few years back. I don't seem to recall anyone asking for replacement receivers. I think they were more worried about finding a place to stay after the shelters were full and then rebuilding their homes.
I wonder how strong the ties are between this newspaper and the local cable company?
We had a tornado touchdown a few years back. I don't seem to recall anyone asking for replacement receivers. I think they were more worried about finding a place to stay after the shelters were full and then rebuilding their homes.
You are correct that acts of God and nature are not covered, but they could write them off and not expect payment as an act of goodwill. Granted the customers would have to buy new receivers That is why I miss small town business. There is no longer any respect paid to the customer who pays the bills and keeps the CEO's pockets HEAVILY lined.
This loss would be a small amount for them. I would never consider lightning to be in this boat as you can attempt to protect against lightning (obviously not direct strikes) and power surges, but basically it all comes down to creating goodwill and customer satisfaction.
This loss would be a small amount for them. I would never consider lightning to be in this boat as you can attempt to protect against lightning (obviously not direct strikes) and power surges, but basically it all comes down to creating goodwill and customer satisfaction.
The point is that the evil local cable company did the right thing, and angelic Dish did not. It doesn't matter what makes "business sense" or not. There is what is right, and what is wrong.
Dish is wrong in this instance.
Dish is wrong in this instance.
You are comparing small town businesses to nationwide companies. Sure, a local company can provide more goodwill in an instance such as this. The goodwill will more than likely payoff multiple times. But a company with 10 million customers all over the US can not set the precedent of provided free services, replacements, or penalty waivers, in event of some disaster. It's a cold hard fact. And it is not 'wrong'. There is no 'wrong' in determining when and where to provide or not provide goodwill. If this lady receives a new receiver from E*, she would think that is 'right', but the person who lost a receiver 3 months ago during a tornado, and didn't think to go to the newspaper to complain will think it is 'wrong' or unjust that they didn't receive a replacement.
If someone breaks into a house and steals a leased receiver, is the subscriber going to ask E* to replace it? If not, is that 'wrong'?
Because this event was a tornado that destroyed their home, is the actual issue any different? Yes, a tornado is a terrible thing to go through. I know many people around here who did. Fortunately, I was on the other side of town. I agree it would be a great gesture on E*'s part to make some type of deal with this subscriber, although, I think that would be setting a costly precendent that others would pursue.
But I don't think it is right for someone to blame or criticize E* (or any company for that matter) for failing to provide some type of goodwill in disaster situations. After our tornado, I didn't make a list of those companies who were or were not providing free lodging, discounted meals, specials, etc for the community.
What I think is worse, is taking advantage of people's misfortune's to present a pro-cable piece in the newspaper.
If someone breaks into a house and steals a leased receiver, is the subscriber going to ask E* to replace it? If not, is that 'wrong'?
Because this event was a tornado that destroyed their home, is the actual issue any different? Yes, a tornado is a terrible thing to go through. I know many people around here who did. Fortunately, I was on the other side of town. I agree it would be a great gesture on E*'s part to make some type of deal with this subscriber, although, I think that would be setting a costly precendent that others would pursue.
But I don't think it is right for someone to blame or criticize E* (or any company for that matter) for failing to provide some type of goodwill in disaster situations. After our tornado, I didn't make a list of those companies who were or were not providing free lodging, discounted meals, specials, etc for the community.
What I think is worse, is taking advantage of people's misfortune's to present a pro-cable piece in the newspaper.
Boy this is getting ugly for Dish...
http://omaha.cox.net/cci/portal/_pagr/121/_pa.121/518?view=LocalNewsArticleView&articleId=229577
With this bad press it would have been cheeper to give the customer new equipment.
Dish blew it big time on this one.
http://omaha.cox.net/cci/portal/_pagr/121/_pa.121/518?view=LocalNewsArticleView&articleId=229577
With this bad press it would have been cheeper to give the customer new equipment.
Dish blew it big time on this one.
My GOD! If you actually believe what you have written above then you are a horrible person! To compare a mere theft of equipment to someone losing EVERYTHING in a Tornado is rediculous! Yes, legally Dish can demand payment for the lost equipment, BUT their is a human emotion called COMPASION that should have entered into this situation. At the very least it would have been a nice PR move for Dish to actually show some empathy for their fellow man (or woman in this case). But alas Dish continues to show their sheer lack of giving the slightest damn about their customers!JBKing said:
Perfectly said JBKing. Plus, the article doesn't even mention in this case whether homeowners insurance actually did cover the rented equipment. It just said some do not.... It also doesn't mention the how much they truly need to pay for their lost equipment.
I am actually thinking about giving Claude a call at DishStore.NET and finding out if we can donate the equipment to the lady.fslove said:
I don't think they should give away equipment to every Joe who has a problem, but when something like this happens I would think they would make an exception. This lady lost everything AND shes still getting charged for Satellite TV when she can't watch it because everything was distroyed
I said nothing about theft being covered. I am also confused on why it is bad to compare big and small business? I come from a small town whose father owned a small business that did well even with higher prices BECAUSE of customer service. Sure he had to eat cost a few times, but he kept customers because of it who came back and paid the slightly higher prices. While there will be no small town satellite providers, the same principles apply.
The position I have is why can't Dish just write off the cost of the receivers and not force them to pay for them? I never said they had to replace them with free receivers. I am curious if any of those affected had 1 or 2 year agreements with Dish that will now be forced to fullfil the contract or pay a termination fee cause their house is strewn across the next 10 blocks. "Oh hey, yeah, we know you don't have a house, so we couldn't send a bill, so now you owe late charges too" is something I can hear them saying.
I don't think this should apply to everyone or every loss. But there are special circumstances here. I do also wonder if the cable company is somehow vested in the newspaper, but the fact remains that the cable company is doing something while dish is flat out denying even listening or willing to work with the people.
And yes on your comment about companies doing something during a disaster is not mandatory and no they should not be criticised for non-action. I am criticising the responses quoted in the article from Dish. I am sure Directv had subscribers in the area, but they didn't comment (which was probably wise). Dish should of made sure the response was more politically friendly as it sounds like this guy just spoke off the cuff before thinking of how it might sound to people.
Another one to look at is why insurance companies can now just arbitrarily reject claims and change terms of an insurance agreement in mid term. I have all my insurance through a major provider and I think I have received 5 notices this year alone telling me of certain things that were covered are no longer. Why? Because it costs us money... Well, THAT IS WHY I HAVE INSURANCE! Unfortunately it is all the providers anymore. After 9/11 insurance companies are really tightening the purse strings and raising rates. Good business model yes, More preminum in and less claims out.... CEO PAYCHECK BIG = GOOD, Consumer happiness = WHO CARES.
It's just a sad state of affairs when consumer spending accounts for 75% of the GDP, yet we are constantly the ones who get abused by corporate america and government.
The position I have is why can't Dish just write off the cost of the receivers and not force them to pay for them? I never said they had to replace them with free receivers. I am curious if any of those affected had 1 or 2 year agreements with Dish that will now be forced to fullfil the contract or pay a termination fee cause their house is strewn across the next 10 blocks. "Oh hey, yeah, we know you don't have a house, so we couldn't send a bill, so now you owe late charges too" is something I can hear them saying.
I don't think this should apply to everyone or every loss. But there are special circumstances here. I do also wonder if the cable company is somehow vested in the newspaper, but the fact remains that the cable company is doing something while dish is flat out denying even listening or willing to work with the people.
And yes on your comment about companies doing something during a disaster is not mandatory and no they should not be criticised for non-action. I am criticising the responses quoted in the article from Dish. I am sure Directv had subscribers in the area, but they didn't comment (which was probably wise). Dish should of made sure the response was more politically friendly as it sounds like this guy just spoke off the cuff before thinking of how it might sound to people.
Another one to look at is why insurance companies can now just arbitrarily reject claims and change terms of an insurance agreement in mid term. I have all my insurance through a major provider and I think I have received 5 notices this year alone telling me of certain things that were covered are no longer. Why? Because it costs us money... Well, THAT IS WHY I HAVE INSURANCE! Unfortunately it is all the providers anymore. After 9/11 insurance companies are really tightening the purse strings and raising rates. Good business model yes, More preminum in and less claims out.... CEO PAYCHECK BIG = GOOD, Consumer happiness = WHO CARES.
It's just a sad state of affairs when consumer spending accounts for 75% of the GDP, yet we are constantly the ones who get abused by corporate america and government.
I know that DirecTv has offered to replace some of their customer's receivers for FREE after lightening him them. Dish Network has even replaced receiver(s) for free if they sign up for the $5.99 warranty even if they were not under the warranty in the first place.
I think a big nationwide company such as Dish Network or DirecTv are more able to take a loss on some satellite receivers than the local cable company because the local cable company would have lost a lot of their hardware locally which makes up a greater portion of their business for that area.
For a small cable company (a LOT smaller than Dish or Direct) to not only take it as a loss but replace the hardware for free would be two things in itself that they would have done that Dish didnt. I do understand that Dish has every right to charge and that it is the customer's obligation to do so, but what about morals? Looks like Dish (and maybe Direct if they done the same thing) lost a lot of customers to cable in that area. The cable company may have some insurance on the boxes anyways.
What do you think would have happened to the cable company if they would have told their customers that they had to pay for the hardware after such an incident? They could have went out of business so they may not have had much of a choice, as where Dish and Direct could afford such a loss not losing a lot of their subscriber base over this.
I think a big nationwide company such as Dish Network or DirecTv are more able to take a loss on some satellite receivers than the local cable company because the local cable company would have lost a lot of their hardware locally which makes up a greater portion of their business for that area.
For a small cable company (a LOT smaller than Dish or Direct) to not only take it as a loss but replace the hardware for free would be two things in itself that they would have done that Dish didnt. I do understand that Dish has every right to charge and that it is the customer's obligation to do so, but what about morals? Looks like Dish (and maybe Direct if they done the same thing) lost a lot of customers to cable in that area. The cable company may have some insurance on the boxes anyways.
What do you think would have happened to the cable company if they would have told their customers that they had to pay for the hardware after such an incident? They could have went out of business so they may not have had much of a choice, as where Dish and Direct could afford such a loss not losing a lot of their subscriber base over this.
