In what can only be described as a tantrum – wrapper Kid Cudi has damaged thousands of dollars worth of equipment when his set was cut short at an Australian music festival.

My first response to his dummy spit was to question why the operators left the P.A. and lighting rig on in the first place? When he started with his behavior, mute the P.A. and turn the lights off. He was obviously feeding off the audience reaction – especially after knocking the first lamp off it’s stand.

More importantly though – why weren’t these valuable items rigged properly? The lamps should have just been sitting on top of a road case. In Kid Cudi’s case – he pushed them off with ease – but what if somebody tripped and fell in to a road case and ended up with a lamp on top of them?

This is a prime example of exactly what not to do on a stage on so many levels. Don’t have security that fail to react to a dangerous situation, don’t leave a stage lit when somebody is trashing it and don’t be lazy when rigging lights in an environment where they could easily topple off.

I’d love to know who’s insurance is going to pay for the repairs, and I would love to know the reaction of the hire companies concerned. Given a ratchet strap or two could have potentially stopped or at the very least minimised all this damage.

Yes, this is clearly a malicious act by a tantrum throwing flavor of the month who surely won’t be held to account – but it is equally a failing of the designers and riggers who put the things there in the first place ready to fall.

Up until now Qantas has been the only true air carrier in Australia as far as I am concerned with regard to “old style” air travel. By that I mean, not all their customers are treated equally – the regular customers enjoy certain benefits according to just how regular they are.
Sadly, as the years have passed Qantas has lost site of what it means to look after their regular customers – and is more and more trying to use the same “all passengers are equal” methodology as their budget carrier JetStar.
This would be fine, if the pricing was inline with a budget carrier – but you can’t charge normal domestic rates, and treat your customers as budget travelers.
Given that we are touring a show, I have had to purchase additional luggage for several members of our touring party. I did this online, and have printed the confirmations. I received a receipt a little later – that showed the incorrect amount billed to my card (they hadn’t charged enough).
I called customer care, after a little over 10 minutes on hold – the assistant spent some time researching it. It appeared as though there system had “dropped” one of the additional bag requests. At this point in time I would have expected an apology, and then their rectification of the problem. Instead, they offered nothing.
When I pressed them and explained that I didn’t just buy the extra luggage for my health – it was actually needed – they said that they could separate the traveler out – and I could try the booking online again.
This is not my type of customer service. I shouldn’t have to “try again” when I was not at fault. And not when we are flying a party of 11.
A little later, I tried to undertake what I would consider a simple task of getting a touring party of 11 seated together. Because for some reason the bookings were made under two reference numbers – I wasn’t able to sit everybody together. One group (that includes a Qantas Club member and another Silver Frequent Flier) were allocated seating near the front of the aircraft – and the other larger group allocated seating near the rear.
Because I couldn’t use the online seating allocation to sit everybody together, I tried calling customer service. I had the screen open on front of me where a group of 11 seats were available together. I told the phone assistant the rows that were open, and she told me it just couldn’t be done – and then went to end the call.
When I insisted that it would be done – and that our touring party will travel together – she put me on hold, and then proceeded to take nearly 30 minutes to (not) assist with the call.
On returning she explained again it just couldn’t be done, and that she had checked with a supervisor. So, I asked to speak with this supervisor.
After a brief explanation, I was told that it could in fact be done, and that I would receive a call later to confirm that our seating had been arranged. And about 15 minutes later, it was all done.
My disappointment here is firstly that I am now sitting some 18 rows behind where we could have initially sat as a group, this may not sound too bad – but I do like to get off and not have to sit around when we land.
Finally, it’s just not good customer service. The two “first level” service staff didn’t care at all about my concerns and didn’t want to resolve the issue at hand. They wanted to blame policy, or their computer systems – and have me just accept it. Which I would do if I was flying with a budget airline – but I’m not, so I don’t.

As the Android mobile phone platform takes hold across the board as one of the leading operating systems for handheld and portable devices perhaps it is time for Google to start identifying risks to the platform.

One of the biggest risks facing any platform is the developers that release applications. As Android grows Google has been tweaking their application requirements that are imposed on those developers. The biggest issue with this is that lazy developers who don’t maintain their applications, end up frustrating users.

With recent changes to the Android Marketplace requirements for developers, many applications have “disappeared” for some or all handsets. From an end user point of view – this looks like it might be a problem with the market. Many users complain that App’s they used / last week are now no longer accessible via the market.

Common complaints in forums are that users have re-installed or upgraded their handset and when searching for their favourite app’s – the market returns zero results.

If developers don’t stay on top of the details communications sent out by Google, and ensure that their applications comply – of course they will disappear from the market. The problem for google is that most end users will not know it is the developer of their application that’s at fault – leading to frustration with the platform – and not where it should be directed.

If you are a developer and have been too lazy to keep abreast of the requirements – the most common issue with disappearing apps is copy protected applications are no longer allowed – you can check out the application security changes here.

12 Hours and still inaccessible

I use and recommend Google Hosted Applications constantly. I live out of my email, especially leading up to crucial things like opening a performance in a venue.

I am currently days away from opening a two night performance for one of our major clients.

The loss of functionality for any business system can lead to issues, but the loss of email – something that is now a very acceptable way of communicating – has a serious business impact.

I have called Google 8 times, have a ticket lodged, and requested updates to that ticket now over 8 hours ago. The silence is resounding.

If this were a free account, I would be happy to expect the level of service commiserate with what I invest in it – but we are paying customers, not only that – we refer many paying customers both directly and via our reseller account.

I can live without access to the GUI, but at least give me IMAP or even a plain text feed to get old email out – this level of customer care is unacceptable.

or.. “Why Vodafone should offer compensation for wasting a week of my time”.

The Vodafone twitter team requested I write this article, and I am glad they have. It will be a great opportunity to document what I would consider some of the worst customer service that I think I have ever been party to.

It started over a week ago, when one of the Purple Oranges team who had just purchased a new handset contacted Vodafone to get the unlock code for his device after trying the web interface and receiving an incorrect code.

He explained that the code supplied on the Vodafone Australia unlock site didn’t work, and was told they would have to talk to the unlocking team, and they might get back to him some time in the next 10 business days. For those playing at home, that’s two weeks. And – as far as I am concerned – two weeks is just about two weeks too long.

If you own the hardware, and through no fault of your own can’t use that hardware – then why should you be inconvenienced?

I personally got involved a few days later, calling VHA to find out why it could possibly take so long to retrieve a code. I was assured in no uncertain terms that I was mistaken – and the code was correct. I tried everything I could to convince the abrasive consultant that the code was not working. They did everything they could to convince me that I was somehow mistaken – and the code would work. When they realised that I wasn’t going away – they hung up on me.

So, I called back.

This next operator was at least a little more helpful. After initially assuring me that the code was correct, they at least paused to listen to my assertion that it was in fact not working. They placed me on hold to talk with the unlocking team, and came back to assure me that the code is correct.

Again, there being nowhere to go – the call was ended.

Friday afternoon, I tried calling again. I got the offer of a return call in 30 minutes, so I entered my number. Two hours later (late Friday evening) VHA returned my call. I was annoyed, but hopeful. This was the first operator who actually took the time to listen to the issue. He initially insisted that the number would be correct, but finally agreed to have somebody call me the following day when he started his shift from technical support to resolve the problem.

Saturday evening, true to his word (which shocked the pants off me) I received a call from VHA, as promised – the operator was ready to transfer me to technical support. Sadly, my happy face disappeared when the person I was transferred to told me that they were from Nokia – and couldn’t help me, and there ended the call.

As luck would have it, this particular VHA operator followed up to check the problem was resolved about 20 minutes later. When I explained that I had been transferred to Nokia – he apologised, and tried to find somebody again. However, as it was now late Saturday evening – nobody was available.

Notes were put on the account authorising an in-store return. Given that VHA were adamant the subsidy unlock code was correct, the hardware must be faulty. The unit was summarily swapped on Sunday.

About 30 minutes after the unit was swapped, we realised we had a serious issue to deal with. The new device also did not work with it’s subsidy unlock code.

Come Monday morning I started to feel quite confident that VHA and their staff weren’t going to resolve this any time soon, so I started my contact with Motorola. Initially, they were hesitant to discuss carrier unlocking a device – but after I explained the sheer lack of customer service experienced with Vodafone – they were happy to at least try and help.

Initially they contacted their support / unlocking team – which confirmed that the number I had was likely to be correct. We agreed to follow their instruction – and leave the device idle for 12 hours. Then try the code again.

…12 Hours later, we were no closer to having an unlocked handset.

I called Motorola to follow up, who were apologetic. A call was lodged for their engineering team, and we were given a new number to try. This unlock code was completely different then the one supplied by VHA – so we were excited and hopeful. Sadly however, it also did not work.

Motorola engineering were again contacted, and today we received a phone call from a very happy Motorola operator. It turns out the devices need 16 digit subsidy codes. The codes on file at VHA were incorrect. And I’m assuming we are the first to try and unlock a handset, because even Motorla didn’t realise.

This is ultimately an issue caused by Motorola. If indeed it is true that they supplied the wrong codes to VHA – then that is most assuredly the root cause of our issue here.

VHA’s hands however are far from clean. They are covered in dirt in fact. It would be reasonable to assume that VHA has a business to business channel of communication open to Motorola that I don’t have access to. And as such, you could be forgiven for assuming that had VHA made an effort to talk about this problem directly with Motorola – it would have been resolved significantly faster then I managed to get it done as a consumer (for those not keeping track – it took me two business days with Motorola).

VHA’s stance is that the issue has nothing to do with them. Although I spent many hours (I have a log of all my communications with them) either on hold, being hung up on, or generally having to try and convince their own staff of the issue… Some how – there abhorrent customer service is Motorola’s fault.

Stand behind your name VHA, apologise that we had so much time wasted on something that could easily have been resolved in 48 – 72 hours. Our paging service is hosted at VHA, and I am giving very serious thought to closing our account. I know they are entirely separate teams – and I honestly only have great things to say about the paging team. But this issue can not be overlooked – how can I be assured that one day I won’t have to deal with this same sort of ignorance in other departments at VHA if they clearly don’t care that it’s happening in their mobile phone area?

[UPDATE 25/11/2010 10:44]

Obviously information about the invalid codes is not being shared internally at VHA. We just received the email below from their Correspondance Team.

Hi Troy,

Thank you for your email,

Vodafone do pride themselves on a high level of customer service and I am disappointed this what not the level of service you received. I would be more then happy to look into this for you.

To unlock a handset there is a series of keys you need to hit in a particular order then followed by the unlock code. If you use only the unlock code the handset won’t unlock.

I have looked up your IMEI number for your handset to check the instructions, and it came back with the response that there is a charge for you to retrieve your unlocking instructions. You can also obtain these by going to www.vodafone.com.au/unlock.

If you have already obtained your full unlocking instructions, I would recommend you taking them into a store and having the dealer go through them with you manually. This way, if anything goes wrong, you will also have someone there to assist you further.

If have any further enquiries, please don’t hesitate to contact us again,

I hope you are having a good week,

Kind regards,

Alicia

Correspondence Team

Vodafone Pty Limited ABN 76 062 954 554

www.vodafone.com.au

Not only does it show that they are completely unaware the lock code is incorrect – it also is a great written example of just what we had to endure with the telephone staff, the complete lack of understanding that the customer may actually be doing it correctly – and it may be Vodafone’s issue – not the customers stupidity.

Finally – it also shows a failure in their record keeping – the handset in question is not subsidised – as such – there should be no unlock fee.