Conversations With No One
Nowadays the mantra in the online world is that "markets are conversations." The idea, simply put, is that those selling and making stuff need to get back to talking to their customers -- engaging them, as it were, in a dialogue that respects customers enough to hear and absorb what they're saying. The days are over, the argument goes, when companies could just throw their products out at customers and expect them to mutely accept them. Nowadays many companies run online journals, or blogs, often with contributions from senior executives, as part of efforts to engage customers and users. They tend to still be a bit gushy, full of phrases like "we're really excited about this new feature we're working on that lets you compare dental floss preferences with your buddies -- please let us know what you think," but it's a start.
This is half of the Web. The other half (and it's a big half) still seems to behave toward visitors and would-be customers much like foot-in-the-door aluminum-siding or brush salesmen. They use tactics that I thought had gone out with the likes of, well, aluminum siding and brush vending.
Take online music Web site Napster, for example. Once the bad boy of music sharing, where users could and did swap gigabytes of music with each other illegally, the only similarity to its old self nowadays is the logo and name. Napster is now one of several sites selling music online legally, either by the song or, increasingly, through a subscription model. It's a treasure trove of music with some nice features, and now glistens with corporate respectability and professionalism. But a brief brush with it about 15 months ago, and the tales I've heard since of similar experiences, have convinced me that if markets are conversations, they can sometimes be one-sided.
Christmas 2004 found me in a computer shop in the United Kingdom that sold Napster vouchers. For about $25 you could download a certain number of music files from Napster's U.K. Web site. Excited to try it out, I redeemed the voucher online. Then it got complicated. On the company's Web site, I found that when I tried to enter the code on the voucher, the page would keep luring me to what it called a "free trial" of the $25-a-month full service. All that was required, it said, was my credit card. Three times this offer popped up as the default choice before I started to get a little ticked off. After all, the voucher had cost good money, and I wasn't in the mood to start giving away credit card details as well. Eventually I was able to use the voucher without divulging my card number, but it was a frustrating experience, and I posted something to my blog (
www.loosewireblog.com) about it.
And this is when the real conversation began. Someone named Peter posted a comment below mine the same day, saying he had signed up for the free trial and had to spend more than half an hour on the phone trying to cancel his account. Later someone named Larry posted a comment begging for a Napster phone number; he couldn't find one on the company's Web site. A month or two later someone named Rynna said she had spent the best part of a day trying to cancel her account, which she said "was created in error."
To be fair to Napster, when I recently did sign up for the full service as a test, I was able to cancel it the same day without any problem. Napster says it has provided a toll-free number for canceling accounts since October 2004, and a guide to canceling since September 2005; Dana M. Harris, Napster's vice president of corporate communications, says she doesn't know why the posters to my blog were unable to find the number. The company says asking for credit card numbers "allows customers to continue to enjoy uninterrupted access to Napster when their current subscription or trial is over" without Napster having to ask them if they want to continue, the company having got the whole difficult business of asking for credit card information out of the way at the start of the free trial. The company says that the average waiting time in February for customers indicating they were calling to cancel was less than seven minutes.
The situation is a common one on the Web, though. Try to download a free firewall program, a free antivirus program or a free online video and audio player, and you'll have to negotiate your way through the thicket of misleading signs trying to persuade you to cough up for a "free trial" -- which of course requires your credit card information. Tactics like these don't succeed: They earn short-term, resentful customers who will, however good the actual service, easily explode into anger if they face obstacles trying to cancel later.
Companies that make it difficult for customers to get in contact are shutting themselves out of a discussion that will happen with or without them. My blog is just a tiny example of similar spontaneous gatherings of the disaffected, easily found on the Web. As customers who have battled to get through to a company gather and compare notes elsewhere, so that company's reputation can suffer. Even a good aluminum-siding salesman could do better.
虚拟世界也要对话
“市场即是沟通”如今已成为网络世界的金科玉律。简而言之，它是说产品销售和生产人员要重新重视与客户的沟通。具体来说，就是在对话过程中给客户以足够的尊重，倾听并消化他们的需求。企业把产品丢在消费者面前、指望他们逆来顺受的日子已经一去不复返了。
如今，不少企业都推出了自己的网上杂志，并经常有企业的高层管理者在上面发言，以此与客户或用户进行沟通。尽管他们多少有点矫揉造作，而且类似于这样的内容比比皆是：“我们对正在开发的新功能兴奋不已，这个新功能能使你与好友对比牙线的优劣──请让我们知道你的想法，”不过虽然如此，企业已朝著改善沟通的方向迈出了第一步。
这只是一部分企业，而更多的企业对待顾客或潜在的顾客仍然缺乏足够的尊重，就像那些别人刚打开门就把一只脚伸进去的推销铝制壁板或牙刷的家伙一样。而我认为这样的营销技巧已经不合时宜了。
就拿在线音乐网站Napster来说吧。这家网站曾因允许用户非法交换乐曲而恶名远播，但如今它已发生了巨大变化，只有企业标志和名称还留有以前的痕迹。作为目前几家合法在线音乐销售网站之一的Napster除了出售单曲之外，还提供订购服务，且订购在其业务中占到越来越大的比例。它简直就是一座音乐宝库，还提供了一些不错的功能，如今更是凭借对用户的尊重和专业服务精神而声名鹊起。但15个月前我的一次短暂的亲身体验和我听说许多网友遇到的类似经历足以使我确信：如果说市场就是沟通的话，那么，有时这种沟通会出现剃头挑子“一头热”的情况。
2004年圣诞节期间，我在英国一家电脑商店里面看到有Napster的优惠券出售。花费大约25美元你就可以从Napster的英国网站上下载一定数量的音乐文件。我就在线买了一张优惠券，兴冲冲地准备去体验一下。但随后我就遇到了麻烦：登陆Napster的网站、输入优惠券上的密码时，页面不断地诱惑我去尝试一个免费试用软件（免费期过后每月会收取25美元的费用）。
相关信息称，使用过程很简单，只需我的信用卡即可。把使用这个免费软件作为默认选项的页面前后共出现了三次，这有些把我惹恼了。毕竟，购买优惠券就花了我一笔钱，我也不愿提供我的信用卡信息。最终，我在没有泄漏信用卡信息的情况下用上了这张优惠券，但我对此很是郁闷，于是就把我的遭遇写到了我的博客（
www.loosewireblog.com）上。
这时候，真正的对话才刚刚开始。一个名叫Peter的网友当天便在我的博客上跟帖写道，他在同意使用试用版之后在电话中花了半个多小时才取消了这项服务。之后，网友Larry贴出了希望给他提供Napster电话的留言，因为他在Napster的网站上无法找到联系电话。一到两个月后，一位叫Rynna的网友称她为了取消无意中订购的服务而花费了大半天时间与Napster交涉。回想起我当时的遭遇，我对Rynna的处境并不感到惊讶。最后，一位叫Sarah的网友找到了Napster美国分公司的电话，并把它贴到了我的博客上面。
为了公平起见，我最近又尝试著订了Napster的一项收费服务。这次，我当天就取消了这项服务，而且没有遇到任何麻烦。Napster称，从2004年10月起就提供了取消服务的免费电话，并从2005年9月开始提供注销服务的用户指南。Napster负责企业公关的副总裁德纳?哈里斯(Dana M. Harris)表示，她不知道在我的博客上发言的网友为何没有找到她公司的电话。
Napster称，索取信用卡号码是为了让用户在现有收费或免费试用服务到期之后继续不间断地使用其提供的服务，而不必再询问他们是否继续使用，并表示，该公司在推出免费试用版本之初索取用户的信用卡信息很是费了一番周折。Napster称，二月份时客户取消订购服务的平均等待时间只有不到7分钟。
不过，所谓的“免费”试用在互联网上已经屡见不鲜。在下载免费的防火墙程序、防病毒程序、多媒体在线播放器时，用户需要突破各种误导信息的重重包围。这些信息往往让你为“免费馅饼”付出一定的代价，如提供你的信用卡信息。但这类做法并不会成功，只能一时得逞，受到愚弄的消费者随后在取消收费服务时遇到麻烦很容易会勃然大怒。
那些与消费者沟通不畅的企业等于是剥夺了自己与消费者本来有可能发生的对话机会。类似的自发汇集消费者不满信息的地方在网上轻而易举地就能找到，我的博客就是一个很简单的例子。与企业难以顺畅沟通的消费者如果收集材料并与其他地方的资料进行比较，那么这家企业的名声就会受损。事情如果到了这种地步，可以说这家企业在这方面连一个优秀的上门推销员都不如。
