If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:11:12 +1000, "Peter Webb"
wrote: "John L" wrote in message news You seem to base all your arguments on how I think, what I buy, & what my occupation is. Therefore your arguments have absolutely no validity, as you have no idea what I buy, how I think or my profession. Look back at the thread. You speculated on my employment - specifically that I worked for a telco or Bank. I did not speculate on yours. Perhaps you would like to give some validity to those spurious statements by stating what my profession is Ummm where did I do that? No its not "or is [he] simply employed in one of these industries as a manager". That was YOU speculating on MY employment. Forgetting which side you are arguing on? No, just aware of your less than subtle comments regarding my credentials re banks & telcos. Obviouslyf you don't believe my statement regarding my profession, so lets hear your thoughtrs on it. & what brand of shoe I wear, I don'y buy inferior products or your inferior arguments. Try to stick to facts & don't impose your fantasies regarding the buying habits & thoughts of other people. It appears you believe a little spin makes your own arguments appear more legitimate.. Your own hypocrisy is breathtaking. Gee, so I guess this is put up or shut up time. Do you buy Australian made shoes? From where? How much did they cost? How about your clothes - made in Australia, or at an overseas factory? Of course, your kids toys - no doubt all made in Australia? More assumptions on my spending habits as well as my family circumstances. As you were the one that raised spending habits, let's hear a little about yours. State your credentials. Unless you have never bought a pair of shoes that cost less than $300 (and this is the time and place to state this is true), you have made an economic cost-cutting decision to use an outsourced offshore supplier - exactly the same behaviour as you critisice the Banks for. This makes you a "greediest & most socially immoral entity" - somewhat worse than the Banks and telcos, as More about my spending habits. Nice emotive term, adds heat but not much light to your argument. 1. They are not flaming hypocrites Your words, not mine. 2. You did it long before you did I did what, before I did what? 3. They act this way to save some-one else's money - their shareholders - you do it for completely selfish reasons. Thank you for the free consultation, more assumptions of my motives & the motives of company directors.on your part. If you support overseas call centres why do you call the Indians idiots for playing Indian music, would it be better in your eyes if they conned people into believing they were in Australia. Better for them, yes. Because there are people who (rightly or wrongly) believe that the call centre industry should be protected from overseas competition. Possibly the majority of thinking Australians would fall into this group. No I don't speak for them, just understand the average Aussie's feelings. .. Your attempt to add a little (cough) racism says more about your own moral outlook than any of your spurious arguments. You'd do Warney proud with your spin. Missed this one, did we? It's more than a little curious why the companies would prefer their customers not know the call centres were overseas. Could it be they are aware of the slippery moral grounds for outsourcing? No. Its purely a matter of business. They win no friends in Australia by moving their call centres offshore. Doesn't of course mean that they are wrong to do so, its just that they have better things to do than explain macro-economic theory to bozzos on newsgroups. Lucky we have you, the consumate expert to do this. Your credentials are? Where is the benefit to the Australian consumer when it puts other Australians out of work & the taxpayer has to foot the unemployemnt bill. Your comment? Or is this one too hard? Everybody else in the developed world understood this argument 50 years ago. You asked everybody, you speak for everyone in the developed world? More spin. Lets take it from the top. Q) How is moving a call centre offshore morally different to moving a shoe manufacturing facility offshore? Probably none, are you using Nike as an example? Or do you think Australia should prohibit the importation of shoes, textiles, pharmaceuticals, factory equipment, aircraft, industrial chemicals, software, and patent rights from overseas? Alternatively, if you think that these industries should be open to offshore competition, explain to me just one more time why call centres should be protected when none of these other (strategically more important) industries are not? Australia can't exist as a customer nation, we need to take a stand somwhere. I am not responsible for short sighted government policies. You obviously prefer the lemming principle. Do that, and you can kick my arse with the $400 shoes, hand made in the Strand Arcade, that you are presumably wearing. I wouldn't bother, they would fit better in your mouth. John L. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
Two highly intelligent comments from Michael & Miquel, I would have
expected something a little better than that from Miquel. Unfortunately on forums such as this, the truth is hard to define, therefore hard to accept. I stand by my comments. John L On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:01:32 GMT, Miguel Cruz wrote: John L wrote: Your obviously don't believe in the adage"it's better to shut your mouth & be thought a fool, than open it & prove it". My profession involves consultancies with both telcos & banks, & I'm quite aware of the Corporations act. I don't believe it says anywhere in the act that companies have to act immorally. None of the companies I deal with have outsourced & all are showing higher profits than their counterparts. Uh huh. miguel |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
John L wrote:
Miguel Cruz wrote: John L wrote: Your obviously don't believe in the adage"it's better to shut your mouth & be thought a fool, than open it & prove it". My profession involves consultancies with both telcos & banks, & I'm quite aware of the Corporations act. I don't believe it says anywhere in the act that companies have to act immorally. None of the companies I deal with have outsourced & all are showing higher profits than their counterparts. Uh huh. Two highly intelligent comments from Michael & Miquel, I would have expected something a little better than that from Miquel. Your assertion is very hard to believe, or if believed, to find relevant. Assuming it is accurate, there are three reasonable possibilities: 1) You work with such a small proportion of companies - or outsourcing is so rare in general - that any observed correlation is meaningless; 2) There is a causative relationship such that outsourcing results in reduced profitability, and yet all these companies irrationally persist in doing so; or 3) There is a causative relationship such that low profitability encourages outsourcing, in which case it's irrelevant. miguel -- Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
Recently on TV in Australia we were shown an Indian class being held
for would be call centre employees in India. The female Indian teacher was trying to teach the class to say "gdday mate, how are you goin mate" & other aussie terms, with an Australian accent. If like most Americans you have tried to say this, you'll know how strange it sounds even from another native English non Australian speaker. This is more likely to crack the caller up with laughter & make then forget why they called. I have nothing against Indians per se (my best mate is one), but the last offshore call centre employee I spoke to could not answer a single question I asked, & had to put me on hold every time to refer the question to head office of the bank in Australia. The call took 15 minutes & the Australian office still had to contact me to fully answer my simple queries. This is part of the large company syndrome (yes, banks & telcos included) where their time is considered important & the amount of time the customer wastes is unimportant. In theory the idea of offshore call centres is fine, in practice the end user of the service, the customer, is the loser. Tell me that makes good corporate sense. John L. On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 16:03:25 GMT, Miguel Cruz wrote: John L wrote: If you support overseas call centres why do you call the Indians idiots for playing Indian music, would it be better in your eyes if they conned people into believing they were in Australia. It would be better if they tried as hard as possible to make potentially anxious callers feel comfortable. miguel |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
Thanks for the somewhat more considered reply to my postings. Your
assumptions are still a little off the mark but without compromising my relationships wiyh my clients I will not continue this thread. If you, or more likely Peter Webb consider that a win, that is your prerogative. John L. On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 01:09:29 GMT, Miguel Cruz wrote: Your assertion is very hard to believe, or if believed, to find relevant. Assuming it is accurate, there are three reasonable possibilities: 1) You work with such a small proportion of companies - or outsourcing is so rare in general - that any observed correlation is meaningless; 2) There is a causative relationship such that outsourcing results in reduced profitability, and yet all these companies irrationally persist in doing so; or 3) There is a causative relationship such that low profitability encourages outsourcing, in which case it's irrelevant. miguel |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
John L wrote:
Recently on TV in Australia we were shown an Indian class being held for would be call centre employees in India. The female Indian teacher was trying to teach the class to say "gdday mate, how are you goin mate" & other aussie terms, with an Australian accent. If like most Americans you have tried to say this, you'll know how strange it sounds even from another native English non Australian speaker. This is more likely to crack the caller up with laughter & make then forget why they called. At the end of my two years in Australia I was able to pass for Australian for at least 5 or 10 minutes (can't anymore, but that was a long time ago). Just a matter of training and experience. I have nothing against Indians per se (my best mate is one), but the last offshore call centre employee I spoke to could not answer a single question I asked, & had to put me on hold every time to refer the question to head office of the bank in Australia. The call took 15 minutes & the Australian office still had to contact me to fully answer my simple queries. Sounds to me like the company in question didn't choose to invest enough in adequate training or screening or whatever. It has nothing to do with whether or not the call center was in India. I have had many interactions with extremely knowledgeable Indian call center operators, and many bad ones with US operators. All a matter of budget and priorities. miguel -- Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
Your argument seems to have degenerated into you saying:
"I am a consultant to banks and telcos. Therefore I know what I am talking about. You have not stated your professional qualifications, therefor your argument is wrong" I would prefer to argue the merits of the moral argument, as this would appear independent of the employment of the person advancing the argument. But as an aside, and as already stated: 1. I do not work for Banks or telcos. 2. I am not professionally involved in call centres. My questions (not statements) concerning your purchasing habits were an attempt to determine your moral position and its consistency. So lets take this from the top; straight answers please: 1. Have you ever bought a pair of shoes manufactured off-shore? (Hint, if they cost less than about $300, they weren't made in Australia). 2, Assuming you have ever bought a pair of shoes worth less than $300, what is the moral difference between your decision to use offshore labour for cheap shoes and the banks decision to use offshore labour for call centres (other than you are spending your own money, and Banks are spending shareholders money)? |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection...HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
John L wrote: Thanks for the somewhat more considered reply to my postings. Your assumptions are still a little off the mark but without compromising my relationships wiyh my clients I will not continue this thread. bwahahaha... more thought...huh michael |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection...HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
John L wrote: I have nothing against Indians per se (my best mate is one), bwahahahahahaha....bwahahahahahaha...bwahahahahaha ha michael |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
When You Hear The Heavy Accent & The Poor Phone Connection... HANG UP!!! ------ 2tDMpvDi
I owe you nothing Pete, I stated my opinions, you don't like them
that's tough. Try to get over your shoe fetish & go back to your bike riding & bench pressing & I'll get on with my business. As I stated to Miguel, you can chalk it up as a win in your strange world where winnig at everythig is important. John L. On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:49:54 +1000, "Peter Webb" wrote: Your argument seems to have degenerated into you saying: "I am a consultant to banks and telcos. Therefore I know what I am talking about. You have not stated your professional qualifications, therefor your argument is wrong" I would prefer to argue the merits of the moral argument, as this would appear independent of the employment of the person advancing the argument. But as an aside, and as already stated: 1. I do not work for Banks or telcos. 2. I am not professionally involved in call centres. My questions (not statements) concerning your purchasing habits were an attempt to determine your moral position and its consistency. So lets take this from the top; straight answers please: 1. Have you ever bought a pair of shoes manufactured off-shore? (Hint, if they cost less than about $300, they weren't made in Australia). 2, Assuming you have ever bought a pair of shoes worth less than $300, what is the moral difference between your decision to use offshore labour for cheap shoes and the banks decision to use offshore labour for call centres (other than you are spending your own money, and Banks are spending shareholders money)? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|