bobk@ncar.ucar.edu (Robert Kinne) (09/05/90)
A few weeks ago I rejoined the Sierra Club after a few years hiatus. Shortly thereafter, we received a telephone call requesting financial support for a specific Sierra Club fund. We politely declined, explaining that we never contribute or purchase in response to phone solicitation. Somewhat huffily, the caller accepted this. Since then we have had at least one, often two calls per day. The tone has ranged from arrogance to insult, with some relatively abusive. The callers have refused our request to take our name off the targeted list for their solicitations. This has been going on for about three weeks. Today I mailed a resignation to the Sierra Club, pointing out that I am opposed to all pollution, including sound pollution, and that I consider unwanted harassing phone calls to be sound pollution, and that I had no wish to belong to any organization that operates in this manner. I also plan to contact appropriate federal officials to seek a total ban on telephone solicitation, which has grown to comprise at least 20% of the incoming phone calls at my home. Others are encouraged to do the same. [Moderator's Note: I can't help but wonder if the Sierra Club was doing this or if they had farmed it out to some telemarketing organization. If the latter, you really should not take it out on the Sierra Club until you are sure they are aware of, and approve of the techniques being used. The organization may have not known how obnoxious their agents were on the phone. PAT]
af@sei.ucl.ac.be (Alain FONTAINE (Postmaster - NAD)) (09/06/90)
>[Moderator's Note: I can't help but wonder if the Sierra Club was >doing this or if they had farmed it out to some telemarketing >organization. If the latter, you really should not take it out on the >Sierra Club until you are sure they are aware of, and approve of the >techniques being used. The organization may have not known how >obnoxious their agents were on the phone. PAT] Are you sure ? Would not punishing those who use the services of telemarketers by boycotting them be The Best Way to finally apply some pressure to the brakes ???? /AF [Moderator's Note: In a strictly commercial application, I would agree with you completely. In the case of the Sierra Club, I'd prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt at least the first time. I think their good generally outweighs the bad associated with the telemarketing program. Call it my blind spot if you wish. PAT]
coleman@uunet.uu.net> (09/06/90)
>[Moderator's Note: I can't help but wonder if the Sierra Club was >doing this or if they had farmed it out to some telemarketing >organization. If the latter, you really should not take it out on the >Sierra Club until you are sure they are aware of, and approve of the >techniques being used. The organization may have not known how >obnoxious their agents were on the phone. PAT] From the standpoint of the call recipient, it's completely irrelevant that the call is coming from an agent of the SC rather than then SC. If I were to receive the kind of treatment the original author describes, I might well cut them off forever with a letter describing the reason, and that would be more than fair. Would we consider the I. Stohrs fiasco to be any less serious if it were the work of a telemarketing agency working on behalf of the courthouse? I doubt she would think so. For the record, I'm a member of the Sierra Club and generally feel that they are a fine organization. I'm very dismayed to hear this story. coleman@twinsun.com @cs.ucla.edu
cliff@garnet.berkeley.edu (Cliff Frost) (09/07/90)
In article <11732@accuvax.nwu.edu>, boulder!boulder!bobk@ncar.ucar.edu (Robert Kinne) writes: |> The callers have refused our request to take our name off the targeted |> list for their solicitations. |> [Moderator's Note: I can't help but wonder if the Sierra Club was |> doing this or if they had farmed it out to some telemarketing |> organization. I think the Moderator is right. You should let the Sierra Club know how bad these clowns were. My cousin worked for a telemarketing group for a couple of weeks until she realized the slime was so thick she had to get out. Apparently in California these organizations are required by law to turn over a whopping 10% of their take to the non-profit they are working for, and she doubts that compliance with this law is total. Where my cousin worked some of the best callers were drug addicts who were motivated to sound convincing on the phone and couldn't work any job where they had to regularly show up. They would come in and work until their commission was high enough to satisfy whatever needs they had at the moment. They might say just about anything. My policy is to never, ever, give money in response to a phone solicitation. When I like a group I donate directly, so 100% goes to the group. My sister, on the other hand, has worked extensively in non-profits and sees these folks as necessary evils. Even with only a 10% cut they do better than skeleton crews of volunteers. So, I think the best thing to do about these obnoxious marketeers is to let the non-profit know what they're doing. Then the non-profit will hire a different outfit -- apply market pressure without hurting the non-profit. Cliff Frost Central Computing Services UC Berkeley
Ron Heiby <heiby@mcdchg.chg.mcd.mot.com> (09/08/90)
This seems to be getting off the topic, but I wanted to reply to Patrick's comments. My wife joined (in *my* name) the Sierra club about a year ago. Expecting a call on my data/answering-machine line that I actually wanted to take, I picked up an incoming call and it was a Sierra telemarketer asking what I wanted to "pledge" for renewing my membership. She finally agreed to accept a "null" pledge as I kept insisting that it was my wife who made those decisions. When I asked her about it later, she told me that she'd decided not to send them any more money as she felt that her entire initial donation had gone to pay for mailings asking for more donations. She wants to donate to a similar organization that A) does good work, and B) sends members (at most) a couple of low cost newsletters a year to let them know what their money's going for. I don't disagree! Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod
mmm@uunet.uu.net (09/09/90)
Running an obnoxious telemarketing operation sound like it might be a good business to get into. Does anyone have any idea how profitable these things are? Is there a book or magazine article which explains what you need to get started (like what phone equipment to buy and where to find slimeballs to work the phones)? As I understand it, you give a small amount to the charity and keep all the rest, after expenses. Are there many charities eager to have their name associated with this method of fund-raising? Like, gee, if I can just rent some cheap office space, rent the phones, hire the people, can I get the Sierra Club or the Audobon Society or some prestigous name like that? Would I be breaking any laws by doing this? About how much money is needed to get started?
clif@itivax.iti.org (Clif Flynt) (09/09/90)
My solution to TeleSolicitors for a few years has been to explain gently that I *NEVER* donate *ANY* money to a group that phone solicits me. If they are a group I used to donate money to (like my Alumni group) they get knocked off the list. I encourage the solicitor to relay this information up to the supervisor. I figure that if more people follow this practice, then the loss of revenue will begin to exceed the gains, and this practice will cease. In the meantime, I find that I'm saving more money every year as more groups become ineligible for continued funding. Clif Flynt uunet!sharkey!clif!clif -------- clif@clif.ypsi.mi.us ----------- [Moderator's Note: I'd be more impressed if you said you were diverting the same amount of money to other worthwhile organizations which you were holding back from the ones who phone solicit. PAT]
cap@nwfdc.nwf.org (Chuck Paquette) (09/10/90)
I found the opinions expressed by posters regarding telemarketing by
environmental organizations interesting. I have passed them on to one
of my colleagues here at NWF who is responsible for our telemarketing,
which is done by NWF employees.
The Moderator is correct that most environmental organizations employ
firms to do telemarketing. Telemarketing is most often used for
"lapsed" donors/members and for requests to significantly increase an
annual gift to an organization. It is more (usually _much_) expensive
than mailing.
Telemarketing firms tend to have fairly high employee turnover. Many
rely on traditional management methods (computing calls per hour and
gifts per hour, listening to caller conversations) rather than softer,
more enlightened approaches. Consequently, some horrors do occur in
otherwise well-managed programs.
Feedback is essential. If you don't wish to be called, tell the
caller what you think! If that doesn't work, call or write the CEO of
the charity. If that doesn't work, write to the Board chair. As a
fundraiser, I often find there is a significant communications gap
between the senior officers of a charity and the telemarketing
operation. Don't let them get away with it!
The Sierra Club has an e-mail address. It is --
<cdp!sierraclubsf@labrea.stanford.edu>
Someone may wish to forward to them a digest of this thread.
Chuck Paquette <cap@nwfdc.nwf.org> National Wildlife Federation
1400 16th Street, N.W., Washington, DC, 20036, USA (202) 797-6678
[Moderator's Note: Thanks very much, Mr. Paquette, for writing us and
sharing your thoughts. I must say where *good, worthwhile*
organizations are concerned, sometimes the telemarketers they employ
are simply an embarassment. I don't get angry at the organization, I
just feel terribly embarrassed for the person calling me. It behooves
all organizations trying to do something to save what little is left
of our planet, its animals, its plants, and its people to be as
professional in their fundraising as they are in their other efforts.
There are *highly professional* fund raising organizations which use
some telephone contacts; they are acquainted with and dedicated to their
cause; it's done so professionally and courteously the person being
called feels good about hearing from them. PAT]ritchie@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (David Ritchie) (09/10/90)
>insisting that it was my wife who made those decisions. When I asked >her about it later, she told me that she'd decided not to send them >any more money as she felt that her entire initial donation had gone >to pay for mailings asking for more donations. She wants to donate to >a similar organization that A) does good work, and B) sends members >(at most) a couple of low cost newsletters a year to let them know >what their money's going for. I don't disagree! In the Fall 1990 Whole Earth Review, Paul Hawkin wrote an interesting article about junk mail. In it, he said: "One of the largest and most famous environmental organizations in the United States spends nearly eighty percent of its revenues on postage, printing and name rental in order to live off of the remaining twenty percent." Above the article, there was an example of how junk mail solicatations are written for maximum effect. Wonder of wonders, it was from the Sierra Club. Draw your own conclusions. Has anyone seen a Sierra Club annual report to confirm this? Dave Ritchie
tad@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Tad Cook) (09/10/90)
In article <11732@accuvax.nwu.edu>, boulder!boulder!bobk@ncar.ucar.edu (Robert Kinne) writes: > I also plan to contact appropriate federal officials to > seek a total ban on telephone solicitation, which has grown to > comprise at least 20% of the incoming phone calls at my home. Others > are encouraged to do the same. I have been using an interesting technique with phone solicitors lately. I start asking THEM questions right away. I ask for their name, and of course they just give me their first name. Then I ask for their last name, and act like I am writing it down. What really puts the fear of God into them is when I ask for, and then demand, their home phone number! Of course, they wont give it to me, and I ask them why it is so unreasonable for me to call them at home, since they called me at home! The call always degenerates into: 1. They wont give me their home phone number. 2. I wont talk to them unless I can return their call AT THEIR HOME. So far, it's been a lot of fun! Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP
carroll@beaver.cs.washington.edu (Jeff Carroll) (09/15/90)
In article <11883@accuvax.nwu.edu> twinsun!coleman@uunet.uu.net (Mike Coleman) writes: >>[Moderator's Note: I can't help but wonder if the Sierra Club was >>doing this or if they had farmed it out to some telemarketing >>organization. If the latter, you really should not take it out on the >>Sierra Club until you are sure they are aware of, and approve of the >>techniques being used. The organization may have not known how >>obnoxious their agents were on the phone. PAT] >From the standpoint of the call recipient, it's completely irrelevant >that the call is coming from an agent of the SC rather than then SC. >If I were to receive the kind of treatment the original author >describes, I might well cut them off forever with a letter describing >the reason, and that would be more than fair. A couple of years ago I received a call at 3:30 AM from a young lady who asked me if my refrigerator was running. Incredulous, I replied something to the effect that it was none of her ****ing business, and did she realize that it was three-thirty in the morning. I asked her why the hell she would call people in the middle of the night to ask them stupid questions. She seemed somewhat surprised that I was angry at having been awakened at 3:30 to answer the phone. She claimed to be representing General Electric, but gave me a local phone number and the name of her supervisor, which name I still remember and could be persuaded to post here should someone feel a strong need for justice to be done. The supervisor was conveniently away from the office (probably at home in bed with the phone unplugged), but I summoned enough presence of mind to remember that GE has a 24-hour toll-free number for comprehensive customer service for the entire GE consumer product line. I have no idea where I pulled up the number (possibly from 1-800-555-1212), but I called GE and reported to the polite gentleman who answered the phone that someone was waking people in the middle if the night in Bellevue, WA, in the name of General Electric; and I gave the name and phone number of the supervisor. I was going to call him myself, but the urgency had somehow gone out of it by the next morning. Jeff Carroll carroll@atc.boeing.com [Moderator's Note: I think you were the victim of a joke. Typically, when a child or very young person calls and asks 'is the refrigerator running?' they are leading up to to an answer that (if you say yes, and you nearly always will) goes, 'well then you better hurry and catch it before it gets away.' Funny? Not very, except to young children. Many of them assume you will be dim-witted enough to actually go in the kitchen to find out and report back to them on the phone, leading up to their response, mentioned above. Why this one chose to elaborate, making reference to GE is a mystery. Chances are the 'supervisor' she mentioned was some other hapless soul. Had you called that number, waking them up at 3:35 AM -- asking if they were 'the supervisor for the phone solicitor who just called' -- then you would have unwittingly perpetuated the prank, to the delight of the person who called you first. PAT]