How important are customer surveys?

[cc]

"To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade companies
to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
information. Empirically, however, it can be of little worth."
http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/jun2009/ca20090619_272945.htm

"But as a leading computer software company has learned to its
surprise, satisfied customers aren’t necessarily good customers.
Indeed, the company discovered in a recent survey that there was no
correlation between customers’ satisfaction scores and their actual
purchase behavior."
http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8

"MYTH: Customer satisfaction influences business performance.
FACT: Market-perceived relative quality, not customer satisfaction,
is correlated to profitability."
http://www.geonorth.com/blog/marketing/exploding-the-myths-of-customer-satisfaction-measurement-0

"Myth Five: Satisfaction = loyalty (or, if our top two box customer
satisfaction scores are OK, we’re doing fine)"
http://blog.vovici.com/blog/bid/60213/Five-Myths-of-Customer-Satisfaction

The articles address the important distinction between satisfaction
and loyalty and how satisfaction surveys do not often measure loyalty,
which is what companies covet. Satisfaction surveys seem to be thrown
around here from time to time, but it's important to remember that
they may not actually mean anything as far as customers sticking
around.

--
"what is the harm in, say, letting two 80 year old siblings have sex
if they want?" - Snit, advocating elderly incest
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0fdbdb?=hl=3Den&dmode=3Dsource

[Snit]

cc stated in post
2b233a7e-4e20-43f6...@d9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
8:35 AM:

<http://goo.gl/9tvue>
-----
iPhone Customers 'Most Loyal' Smartphone Buyers

Apple is doing a better job of inspiring loyalty among
customers than its rivals in the mobile marketplace,
according to a report.

Market research firm GfK said that 84 percent of iPhone users
they surveyed said they would pick the iPhone again, Reuters
reports.

The figure for current Android users who said they would pick
Android ahead of another mobile OS was 60 percent, GfK said.
For RIM's BlackBerry handsets, the figure was just 48
percent.
-----

So Apple has an 84% loyalty, at least based on user reports.

Android has a 60% loyalty rate... significantly lower. But even that is
biased to make Android look better - because the question here is not iOS
vs. Android but the Apple phones vs. Samsung vs. HTC vs. whoever else is out
there.

So how many of that 60% will stick with the same company? Even if most,
Samsung and HTC likely have *at most* a 50% loyalty rate. This means *half*
of their customers will look to a different company.

Half.

Or more.

Now look where Samsung was a few years ago:

<http://goo.gl/3PnHF>
-----
Samsung wins the Brand Keys Customer Loyalty award for 8
years in a row

Yesterday, Samsung Mobile announced that it has excelled as
the leader in customer loyalty among all cell phone
manufacturers for 8 years in row. Since 2001, the Brand Keys
Customer Loyalty Engagement Index has indicated that the
South Korean company knows best how to meet and even exceed
customers’ expectations, thus creating loyal customers.
-----

No percentages given... but Samsung used to be on top. Before Android.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 5, 10:53 am, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post
> 2b233a7e-4e20-43f6-9638-f9469c2e6...@d9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12

> 8:35 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade companies
> > to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
> > pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
> > information. Empirically, however, it can be of little worth."

> >http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/jun2009/ca20090619_27294...

>
> > "But as a leading computer software company has learned to its
> > surprise, satisfied customers aren’t necessarily good customers.
> > Indeed, the company discovered in a recent survey that there was no
> > correlation between customers’ satisfaction scores and their actual
> > purchase behavior."
> >http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8
>
> > "MYTH:  Customer satisfaction influences business performance.
> > FACT:  Market-perceived relative quality, not customer satisfaction,
> > is correlated to profitability."

> >http://www.geonorth.com/blog/marketing/exploding-the-myths-of-custome...

> > ction-measurement-0
>
> > "Myth Five:  Satisfaction = loyalty (or, if our top two box customer
> > satisfaction scores are OK, we’re doing fine)"

> >http://blog.vovici.com/blog/bid/60213/Five-Myths-of-Customer-Satisfac...

Well it is a weird comparison. Who knows what phone the people
responding to Android were using. And potentially Samsung has huge
customer loyalty, but HTC is bringing it down by lumping them all in
to Android (or vice versa). Maybe they surveyed no HTC users at all?
Maybe certain phones Samsung makes have better loyalty than others
(ditto for HTC).

Weird, and almost useless survey, except that Apple has loyal
customers for iPhones (different from satisified).

> So how many of that 60% will stick with the same company?  Even if most,
> Samsung and HTC likely have *at most* a 50% loyalty rate.  This means *half*
> of their customers will look to a different company.
>
> Half.
>
> Or more.
>

That is all conjecture, and makes very little sense. Why would Samsung
and HTC likely have at most a 50% loyalty rate? Based on what facts?
You don't know what manufacturer the people responding to the survey
for Android were using. Suppose they were just HTC and Samsung users,
equal numbers of each. 100% Samsung customers could be loyal vs. 20%
of HTC which when grouped together would give a 60% loyality rating
for Android. This is all conjecture on my part too, but it's to point
out your analysis above doesn't make sense at all.

I snipped your Samsung loyalty bit, because we don't know what
Samsung's customer loyalty is at all based on this survey. They could
still be on top (but I would doubt it, 84% is hard to beat).

[Snit]

cc stated in post
6525c17f-9812-4365...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
9:22 AM:

>> <http://goo.gl/9tvue>
>>     -----
>>     iPhone Customers 'Most Loyal' Smartphone Buyers
>>
>>     Apple is doing a better job of inspiring loyalty among
>>     customers than its rivals in the mobile marketplace,
>>     according to a report.
>>
>>     Market research firm GfK said that 84 percent of iPhone users
>>     they surveyed said they would pick the iPhone again, Reuters
>>     reports.
>>
>>     The figure for current Android users who said they would pick
>>     Android ahead of another mobile OS was 60 percent, GfK said.
>>     For RIM's BlackBerry handsets, the figure was just 48
>>     percent.
>>     -----
>>
>> So Apple has an 84% loyalty, at least based on user reports.
>>
>> Android has a 60% loyalty rate... significantly lower.  But even that is
>> biased to make Android look better - because the question here is not iOS
>> vs. Android but the Apple phones vs. Samsung vs. HTC vs. whoever else is out
>> there.
>
> Well it is a weird comparison. Who knows what phone the people
> responding to Android were using.

I would presume that the people using the phones did!

> And potentially Samsung has huge customer loyalty, but HTC is bringing it down
> by lumping them all in to Android (or vice versa). Maybe they surveyed no HTC
> users at all? Maybe certain phones Samsung makes have better loyalty than
> others (ditto for HTC).

Sure, we can make up all sorts of stories!

> Weird, and almost useless survey, except that Apple has loyal
> customers for iPhones (different from satisified).

Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.

>> So how many of that 60% will stick with the same company?  Even if most,
>> Samsung and HTC likely have *at most* a 50% loyalty rate.  This means *half*
>> of their customers will look to a different company.
>>
>> Half.
>>
>> Or more.
>
> That is all conjecture, and makes very little sense.

The sense is simple: if 60% stick with Android, presumably some move from
one Android company to another. The 50% guess is just that, a guess... and
likely high. But maybe not. If you prefer you can say 55% and we can
pretend very few people go from Samsung to HTC or vice versa.

> Why would Samsung and HTC likely have at most a 50% loyalty rate? Based on
> what facts?

The ones listed above. Not sure how else to explain it to you. How about
this, stop lying about me and I will work to make the explanation easier for
you!

> You don't know what manufacturer the people responding to the survey for
> Android were using. Suppose they were just HTC and Samsung users, equal
> numbers of each. 100% Samsung customers could be loyal vs. 20% of HTC which
> when grouped together would give a 60% loyality rating for Android. This is
> all conjecture on my part too, but it's to point out your analysis above
> doesn't make sense at all.

Well, you can make up unlikely numbers and come to different conclusions
than the likely ones... sure! I have no problem admitting you can be silly.

> I snipped your Samsung loyalty bit, because we don't know what
> Samsung's customer loyalty is at all based on this survey. They could
> still be on top (but I would doubt it, 84% is hard to beat).

It is mathematically possible they are close... but given the data (which
you have) and common sense (which you lack) it is unlikely. At least you
realize Apple is almost surely ahead in both customer loyalty and customer
satisfaction.

I wonder when / if that will change?

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12

> 9:22 AM:
>
>
>
>
>
> >> <http://goo.gl/9tvue>
> >>     -----
> >>     iPhone Customers 'Most Loyal' Smartphone Buyers
>
> >>     Apple is doing a better job of inspiring loyalty among
> >>     customers than its rivals in the mobile marketplace,
> >>     according to a report.
>
> >>     Market research firm GfK said that 84 percent of iPhone users
> >>     they surveyed said they would pick the iPhone again, Reuters
> >>     reports.
>
> >>     The figure for current Android users who said they would pick
> >>     Android ahead of another mobile OS was 60 percent, GfK said.
> >>     For RIM's BlackBerry handsets, the figure was just 48
> >>     percent.
> >>     -----
>
> >> So Apple has an 84% loyalty, at least based on user reports.
>
> >> Android has a 60% loyalty rate... significantly lower.  But even that is
> >> biased to make Android look better - because the question here is not iOS
> >> vs. Android but the Apple phones vs. Samsung vs. HTC vs. whoever else is out
> >> there.
>
> > Well it is a weird comparison. Who knows what phone the people
> > responding to Android were using.
>
> I would presume that the people using the phones did!

"What phone" is what I asked, not what people.

> > And potentially Samsung has huge customer loyalty, but HTC is bringing it down
> > by lumping them all in to Android (or vice versa). Maybe they surveyed no HTC
> > users at all? Maybe certain phones Samsung makes have better loyalty than
> > others (ditto for HTC).
>
> Sure, we can make up all sorts of stories!

Like you did below!

> > Weird, and almost useless survey, except that Apple has loyal
> > customers for iPhones (different from satisified).
>
> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.

And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.

> >> So how many of that 60% will stick with the same company?  Even if most,
> >> Samsung and HTC likely have *at most* a 50% loyalty rate.  This means *half*
> >> of their customers will look to a different company.
>
> >> Half.
>
> >> Or more.
>
> > That is all conjecture, and makes very little sense.
>
> The sense is simple: if 60% stick with Android, presumably some move from
> one Android company to another.  The 50% guess is just that, a guess... and
> likely high.  But maybe not.  If you prefer you can say 55% and we can
> pretend very few people go from Samsung to HTC or vice versa.

Hey, so you made a guess based on nothing! Good for you.

> > Why would Samsung and HTC likely have at most a 50% loyalty rate? Based on
> > what facts?
>
> The ones listed above.  Not sure how else to explain it to you.  How about
> this, stop lying about me and I will work to make the explanation easier for
> you!

You listed no facts other than a single survey said 60% of people
would stick with Android.

> > You don't know what manufacturer the people responding to the survey for
> > Android were using. Suppose they were just HTC and Samsung users, equal
> > numbers of each. 100% Samsung customers could be loyal vs. 20% of HTC which
> > when grouped together would give a 60% loyality rating for Android. This is
> > all conjecture on my part too, but it's to point out your analysis above
> > doesn't make sense at all.
>
> Well, you can make up unlikely numbers and come to different conclusions
> than the likely ones... sure!  I have no problem admitting you can be silly.

How is mine more unlikely than yours? Neither of us have data, yet
only I am willing to admit as much. Your guess is worthless.

> > I snipped your Samsung loyalty bit, because we don't know what
> > Samsung's customer loyalty is at all based on this survey. They could
> > still be on top (but I would doubt it, 84% is hard to beat).
>
> It is mathematically possible they are close... but given the data (which

The data: 60% of an unknown number of people using an unknown
manufacturer for their phones would stick with Android.

> you have) and common sense (which you lack) it is unlikely.  At least you

The common sense: You can't make the argument you're trying to make
because the data does not support it.

"The 50% guess is just that, a guess." - Snit

> realize Apple is almost surely ahead in both customer loyalty and customer
> satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.

> I wonder when / if that will change?
>

All it takes is a screwup.

10 months ago:
http://www.reelseo.com/netflix-tops-customer-loyalty-survey/

Now:
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/12/23/netflix-loses-the-love/

So maybe that brings up another question, how important is customer
loyalty, when it turns out they're not going to be that loyal when you
need them the most?

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/internet/64206.html

[Kubuntu King]

cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:

> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>> 9:22 AM:
>>

>> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>
> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>

LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
importance of consistent UIs....

User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....

[JEDIDIAH]

Some customers really only care about the logo.

Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.

This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]

--

Windows is a petri dish.
|||
Linux, MacOS, and likewise are beakers of alchohol. / | \

[Snit]

cc stated in post
ad668db6-9d1e-463d...@q8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
12:22 PM:

1) Phones referenced in satisfaction and loyalty surveys are used by people.
This is obvious to people who are not functionally illiterate such as
yourself.

2) User satisfaction is not meaningless to others, but, sure, many things
are meaningless to you because you are functionally illiterate.

3) My guesses are based on the data and common sense - and thus are beyond
your understanding. Your made up stories are unlikely but who cares - you
are functionally illiterate.

4) Customers are loyal only as long as you are serving them well. If someone
serves them better you will lose loyalty. Heck, if others serve them as
well then Apple will lose its top spot.

5) You are still functionally illiterate and a liar... feel free to get the
last word in. Your ignorant and dishonestly bores me.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 3:23 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2012-01-05, Kubuntu King<linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc<scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> cc stated in post
>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>>>
>>>> Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>>>
>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>>
>>
>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>> importance of consistent UIs....
>>
>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>
> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>
> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>
> This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]

Are you actually saying BMW and Apple don't produce quality products,
and people buy them only for the brand name?

[Snit]

Kubuntu King stated in post lkobuiy...@news.eternal-september.org on
1/5/12 12:30 PM:

As is his norm, cc is showing he is functionally illiterate, unable to make
a reasoned argument or follow one, and is just going to lie to try to
obfuscate these facts.

Take his completely bizarre assumption:

100% Samsung customers could be loyal vs. 20% of HTC which
when grouped together would give a 60% loyality rating for
Android.

And he denies understanding how this is less likely than Samsung and HTC
having *roughly* the same customer loyalty (give or take, say, 10%)... which
would mean, at a reasonable best, they have 50% loyalty each as a top (some
users switch from Samsung to HTC or vice versa - or some other Android
company). This is just common sense... and being generous, really. And
completely beyond cc. What a boring fool he is.



--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnjgc1m...@nomad.mishnet on 1/5/12 1:23 PM:

> On 2012-01-05, Kubuntu King <linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> cc stated in post
>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>>>
>>>> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>>>
>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>>
>>
>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>> importance of consistent UIs....
>>
>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>
> Some customers really only care about the logo.

Well, some only care about the first thing they find, the color of the box,
or whatever.

But who cares?

> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.

LOL! This is the excuse the false "advocates" sink to... doing a good job
is just not important in their world.

> This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]

Apple has exceptional user satisfaction ratings and exceptional customer
loyalty because they serve people well. Why is this so hard for Linux
"advocates" to understand? Heck, Linux does great on super computers,
servers, embedded devices and the like because it serves people well.

Simple concept... but against the COLA herd's wishes so they cannot accept
it.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

DFS stated in post je52id$45b$3...@dont-email.me on 1/5/12 1:52 PM:

He cannot accept that anything serves people than desktop Linux... no matter
how strong the evidence.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:


> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.

This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).

Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
like?

[Foster]

You are talking to an idiot who claimed he wouldn't take a free
Corvette if it was given to him.

[Foster]

Linux users do.

They can't honestly *like* using that crap software.
They just use it because it's free and they hate Microsoft.

[Torre Starnes]

He's been brainwashed from looking at the green screen for the past
20 years.
Too many kernel compiles.

[cc]

On Jan 5, 2:30 pm, Kubuntu King<linuxrox...@gmail.com> wrote:

> cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
> >> 9:22 AM:
>
> >> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>
> > And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>
> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
> importance of consistent UIs....

You must be thinking of someone else, because I certainly never said
that. Link please.

> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....

Of course you read the links that showed there is ZERO correlation
between customer satisfaction and return customers.

[cc]

On Jan 5, 3:50 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> ad668db6-9d1e-463d-8b76-3f49a4c3d...@q8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12

> >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0...

> > =3Den&dmode=3Dsource
>
> 1) Phones referenced in satisfaction and loyalty surveys are used by people.
> This is obvious to people who are not functionally illiterate such as
> yourself.

No shit you retard. What make/model those phones are, are not
mentioned though. Who's the functionally illiterate one?

> 2) User satisfaction is not meaningless to others, but, sure, many things
> are meaningless to you because you are functionally illiterate.

Zero correlation between user satisfaction surveys and return buyers.
Read the links.

> 3) My guesses are based on the data and common sense - and thus are beyond
> your understanding.  Your made up stories are unlikely but who cares - you
> are functionally illiterate.

What data did you base your guess on? Show your work.

> 4) Customers are loyal only as long as you are serving them well. If someone
> serves them better you will lose loyalty.  Heck, if others serve them as
> well then Apple will lose its top spot.
>

Yes, loyalty is fleeting. Kind of makes those surveys unnecessary
then, doesn't it. What will get Apple through any potential hard
times, their customer loyalty surveys, or their MASSIVE profits?

[cc]

Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers. So
I left out a word, sue me. There is no correlation between customer
satisfaction surveys and returning customers. It's a meaningless
phrase. Satisfied customers switch all the time. Loyalty is what
you're looking for, and even that is fleeting.

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 4:50 PM, cc wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2:30 pm, Kubuntu King<linuxrox...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc<scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> cc stated in post
>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>
>>>> Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>>
>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>
>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>> importance of consistent UIs....
>
> You must be thinking of someone else, because I certainly never said
> that. Link please.
>
>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>
> Of course you read the links that showed there is ZERO correlation
> between customer satisfaction and return customers.

That's a RIDICULOUS claim for anyone to make. Bored and trolling, are we?


"American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) is a scientific standard of
customer satisfaction. Academic research has shown that the national
ACSI score is a strong predictor of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth,
and an even stronger predictor of Personal Consumption Expenditure (PCE)
growth. On the microeconomic level, academic studies have shown that
ACSI data is related to a firm's financial performance in terms of
return on investment (ROI), sales, long-term firm value (Tobin's q),
cash flow, cash flow volatility, human capital performance, portfolio
returns, debt financing, risk, and consumer spending.[12] Increasing
ACSI scores has been shown to predict loyalty, word-of-mouth
recommendations, and purchase behavior. The ACSI measures customer
satisfaction annually for more than 200 companies in 43 industries and
10 economic sectors. In addition to quarterly reports, the ACSI
methodology can be applied to private sector companies and government
agencies in order to improve loyalty and purchase intent. Two companies
have been licensed to apply the methodology of the ACSI for both the
private and public sector: CFI Group, Inc. and Foresee Results apply the
ACSI to websites and other online initiatives. ASCI scores have also
been calculated by independent researchers, for example, for the mobile
phones sector,[13] higher education,[14] and electronic mail.[15]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_satisfaction#Methodologies

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 4:58 PM, cc wrote:
> On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS<nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>
>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>
>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>
>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>> like?
>
> Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers. So
> I left out a word, sue me.

Not necessary.

How about a $100K wager on a round of gold?</sarcasm>

> There is no correlation between customer
> satisfaction surveys and returning customers. It's a meaningless
> phrase.

This doesn't make sense, assuming customer sat is reflected in the
surveys people complete.

> Satisfied customers switch all the time. Loyalty is what
> you're looking for, and even that is fleeting.

You may need to learn the Venus Butterfly Technique.

[cc]

On Jan 5, 3:58 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> Kubuntu King stated in post lkobuiymk1....@news.eternal-september.org on

You're an absolute moron. Samsung has 73%, HTC has 75% and Apple has
93% according to this (US numbers):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-05/apple-beats-htc-samsung-as-nokia-s-customer-loyalty-falls-for-first-time.html

So your "50% loyalty each as a top" is so fucking off as to be
laughable, as I pointed out originally. You were basing it on NOTHING!

[Snit]

cc stated in post
86ef8e43-07e6-4a84...@t8g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
2:50 PM:

> On Jan 5, 2:30 pm, Kubuntu King<linuxrox...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>> cc stated in post
>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>
>>>> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>>
>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>
>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>> importance of consistent UIs....
>
> You must be thinking of someone else, because I certainly never said
> that. Link please.

We debated this forever. I noted it was a guildeline to follow and you
disagreed... later morphing your BS into the claim you only meant it was not
a "general" guideline... but *all* guidelines are general, *BY DEFINTION*.

You made a complete fool of yourself. Ever since then you have been lying
about me in your ever post... because you are pathetic and dishonest.

>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>
> Of course you read the links that showed there is ZERO correlation
> between customer satisfaction and return customers.

Bottom line: you have claimed there is no importance to customer
satisfaction. And you are wrong. You are wrong and functionally
illiterate. I am a business owner and I *know* I value my customer's
satisfaction... I know it means a *lot* to me.

But you are a clueless liar by choice. Hey, have you found a post of yours
*yet* where you did not lie? I asked you about a month ago and you have yet
to find a single example of a post of yours where you did not make claims
which were obviously and heavily against easily verified facts or, at best,
just completely unsupportable.

> --
> "what is the harm in, say, letting two 80 year old siblings have sex
> if they want?" - Snit, advocating elderly incest
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0fdbdb?=hl
> =3Den&dmode=3Dsource

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
e977ec9e-91d7-40d0...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
2:58 PM:

> On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>
>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>
>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>
>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>> like?
>
> Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers.

Ah, in your world customer satisfaction is important but knowing how
satisfied your customers is not. At least now. Before customer
satisfaction itself was not even important.

You are completely lost. As is your norm.

...



--
🙈🙉🙊

[Lloyd]

In article <CB2B71B9.B086C%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,

Ya gotta wonder if any of these guys work outside of the tech room,
don't you?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
50d6cdb3-1f45-4bb3...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
2:56 PM:

A *lot* closer than your "guess" of "100%" for Samsung and "20%" for HTC.

A whole lot closer.

But, sure, you showed I was wrong... with evidence. This is what I
encourage you to do and not just your name calling, making things up, and
out and out lying like you generally do.

Thank you for taking me up on my suggestion to use data and evidence. It
shows you *are* listening to me and taking my advice.



--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

DFS stated in post je56us$e7$2...@dont-email.me on 1/5/12 3:07 PM:

Look who made the claim.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Lloyd]

In article <CB2B7645.B0886%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:

> Lloyd stated in post
> lloydparsons-E68B...@news.eternal-september.org on 1/5/12 3:29
> PM:

> Repeatedly cc shows he is just clueless... he reads a couple things on a
> webpage and tries to push himself as an expert. If you want a good laugh
> read though his comments about UIs. He simply could not wrap his mind
> around the idea of there being a number of general guideline which are very
> well respected in the world of HCI and UI development.

I don't do the geek side. I was a business man, marketing and selling
tech products. Talking geek doesn't sell squat!

[Snit]

Lloyd stated in post
lloydparsons-E68B...@news.eternal-september.org on 1/5/12 3:29
PM:

> In article <CB2B71B9.B086C%use...@gallopinginsanity.com>,
> Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
>> cc stated in post
>> e977ec9e-91d7-40d0...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>> 2:58 PM:
>>

>>> On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>>>
>>>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>>>
>>>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>>>> like?
>>>
>>> Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers.
>>
>> Ah, in your world customer satisfaction is important but knowing how
>> satisfied your customers is not. At least now. Before customer
>> satisfaction itself was not even important.
>>
>> You are completely lost. As is your norm.
>>
>> ...
>
> Ya gotta wonder if any of these guys work outside of the tech room,
> don't you?

Repeatedly cc shows he is just clueless... he reads a couple things on a
webpage and tries to push himself as an expert. If you want a good laugh
read though his comments about UIs. He simply could not wrap his mind
around the idea of there being a number of general guideline which are very
well respected in the world of HCI and UI development.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 4:56 PM, cc wrote:

> You're an absolute moron. Samsung has 73%, HTC has 75% and Apple has
> 93% according to this (US numbers):
> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-05/apple-beats-htc-samsung-as-nokia-s-customer-loyalty-falls-for-first-time.html
>
> So your "50% loyalty each as a top" is so fucking off as to be
> laughable, as I pointed out originally. You were basing it on NOTHING!

He might be referring to this from July 2011:



Apple iOS: 70%
WinPhone 7: 57%
Android: 50%

http://www.redmondpie.com/windows-phone-7-now-ahead-of-android-but-still-way-behind-iphone-ios-in-customer-satisfaction-survey/


Of course, as you say, customer satisfaction surveys are meaningless and
Apple purchasers aren't necessarily loyal...

[Snit]

cc stated in post
2b233a7e-4e20-43f6...@d9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
8:35 AM:

> "To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade companies
> to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
> pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
> information. Empirically, however, it can be of little worth."
> http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/jun2009/ca20090619_272945.htm
>
> "But as a leading computer software company has learned to its
> surprise, satisfied customers aren’t necessarily good customers.
> Indeed, the company discovered in a recent survey that there was no
> correlation between customers’ satisfaction scores and their actual
> purchase behavior."
> http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8
>
> "MYTH: Customer satisfaction influences business performance.
> FACT: Market-perceived relative quality, not customer satisfaction,
> is correlated to profitability."
> http://www.geonorth.com/blog/marketing/exploding-the-myths-of-customer-satisfa
> ction-measurement-0
>
> "Myth Five: Satisfaction = loyalty (or, if our top two box customer
> satisfaction scores are OK, we’re doing fine)"
> http://blog.vovici.com/blog/bid/60213/Five-Myths-of-Customer-Satisfaction
>
> The articles address the important distinction between satisfaction
> and loyalty and how satisfaction surveys do not often measure loyalty,
> which is what companies covet. Satisfaction surveys seem to be thrown
> around here from time to time, but it's important to remember that
> they may not actually mean anything as far as customers sticking
> around.

Looking at your links...

<http://goo.gl/87I65>
-----
The most common corporate metric of customer satisfaction is
the "top two boxes" score, which measures how many customers
are satisfied or very satisfied with the company's product or
service. However, research shows that the distinction between
the top two boxes is extremely important. The customer
responding with the highest possible score is an advocate -
the ideal customer. As a result, moving customers up a box,
from the second to the first, can have a huge impact on
future sales.
-----

<http://goo.gl/9XnFp>
-----
Customer satisfaction is concerned with attracting, keeping,
and enhancing customer relationships. ... Measure behavioral
intentions and correlate them with actual behavior over time.
-----

Note: the referenced studied were looking at behavior
intentions.

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable. ... Good satisfaction measurement can help identify
what's broken in your business today (although fixing it is
up to you).
-----

And here is what cc concluded after reading those:

cc:
-----

Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.

-----

Completely bizarre and absurd. Even cc backed away from this one. But only
barely.

cc:
-----

Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied
customers.

-----

After linking to the above quotes, *that* is cc's conclusion.

How the hell does one take "There's no question that satisfaction
measurements can be valuable" to mean "Customer satisfaction surveys are
useless"? How can he read about the importance of moving customers "up a
box" on customer satisfaction surveys and conclude the surveys are of no
value?

Easy: cc is functionally illiterate.

And he is a liar.

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

Lloyd stated in post
lloydparsons-5A5E...@news.eternal-september.org on 1/5/12 3:50
PM:

...
>>> Ya gotta wonder if any of these guys work outside of the tech room,
>>> don't you?
>>
>> Repeatedly cc shows he is just clueless... he reads a couple things on a
>> webpage and tries to push himself as an expert. If you want a good laugh
>> read though his comments about UIs. He simply could not wrap his mind
>> around the idea of there being a number of general guideline which are very
>> well respected in the world of HCI and UI development.
>
> I don't do the geek side. I was a business man, marketing and selling
> tech products. Talking geek doesn't sell squat!

LOL! Fair enough. Even on just this topic of customer satisfaction, and
*just* looking at the links cc pointed to, we see:

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.

-----

After (presumably) reading this (he did link to it after all and use it as
his "evidence"), cc concluded:

cc:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless

-----

But he will insist he is right until the cows come home. :)

--
🙈🙉🙊

[GreyCloud]

At the development level on apple, there really aren't that many
differences in regards to c or c++ coding and the system. Both osx and
linux have pretty much the same libs, except for cocoa. I really don't
see what they are complaining about. There is one org that provides the
same code for linux as for osx and compiles pretty well on osx .


--
It is difficult to please everybody, but it is a piece of cake to piss
off everybody.

[GreyCloud]

So far after buying a new HP i7, I'm having pretty good luck so far with
VS2010 Pro. VS has a few nice features inside the editor that I like.
The only thing they need now is code completion, which I hear is going
to be in their new version out this year.

[Snit]

GreyCloud stated in post QcednczDpdgUrJvS...@bresnan.com on
1/5/12 4:26 PM:

As a non-programmer I cannot say... but I was talking user experience. On
that level there is a *huge* difference.

> Both osx and
> linux have pretty much the same libs, except for cocoa.

Does this include all of the Core technologies?

🙈🙉🙊

[Kubuntu King]

cc <scat...@hotmail.com> writes:

> On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>
>> > Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>
>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>
>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>> like?
>
> Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers. So
> I left out a word, sue me. There is no correlation between customer

And you're still an idiot.

Well done surveys are VERY revealing and important to companies who
value their customers.

[JEDIDIAH]

Repeating a lie won't make it any more true.

--

Windows is a petri dish.
|||
Linux, MacOS, and likewise are beakers of alchohol. / | \

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-05, Foster <frankf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:26:08 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>
>>
>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>
>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>> like?

Anyone that's employed.

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-05, Foster <frankf...@yahoo.com> wrote:

You are not nearly as smart as you think you are.

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-05, GreyCloud <mi...@cumulus.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/2012 2:02 PM, Snit wrote:
>> JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnjgc1m...@nomad.mishnet on 1/5/12 1:23 PM:
>>
>>> On 2012-01-05, Kubuntu King<linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> cc<scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>> cc stated in post
>>>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
>>>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>>>>>
>>>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>>>> importance of consistent UIs....
>>>>
>>>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>>>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>>>
>>> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>>
>> Well, some only care about the first thing they find, the color of the box,
>> or whatever.
>>
>> But who cares?
>>
>>> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>>
>> LOL! This is the excuse the false "advocates" sink to... doing a good job
>> is just not important in their world.

It's a world dominated by marketing.

Sad but true.

That's not "my" world. That's "your" world.

[deletia]

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-05, GreyCloud <mi...@cumulus.com> wrote:

> On 1/5/2012 1:52 PM, DFS wrote:
>> On 1/5/2012 3:23 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>> On 2012-01-05, Kubuntu King<linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> cc<scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>> cc stated in post
>>>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on
>>>>>> 1/5/12
>>>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user
>>>>>> loyalty.
>>>>>
>>>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>>>> importance of consistent UIs....
>>>>
>>>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>>>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>>>
>>> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>>>
>>> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>>>
>>> This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]
>>
>>
>> Are you actually saying BMW and Apple don't produce quality products,
>> and people buy them only for the brand name?

Of course I am.

I don't buy into BMW hype any more than I do Apple hype.

Whereas my knowledge of BMWs are only 2nd hand, I do have firsthand
experience with Apple products that soundly contradicts all of the propaganda.

[JEDIDIAH]

It's hard to take such things seriously when you are asking questions
of starstruck idiots that aren't even fully aware of what they are using
and not likely to ever do anything meaningful with it.

Your answers may say more about your customers than the product.

The "well done" part there is also especially amusing.

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 9:07 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2012-01-05, Foster<frankf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:26:08 -0500, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>>
>>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>>> like?
>
> Anyone that's employed.

So which disliked company's products do you use/eat/drive?

[Snit]

JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnjgclu...@nomad.mishnet on 1/5/12 7:09 PM:

>>>> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>>>>
>>>> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>>>>
>>>> This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you actually saying BMW and Apple don't produce quality products,
>>> and people buy them only for the brand name?
>
> Of course I am.
>
> I don't buy into BMW hype any more than I do Apple hype.
>
> Whereas my knowledge of BMWs are only 2nd hand, I do have firsthand
> experience with Apple products that soundly contradicts all of the propaganda.

And your evidence is... ???

And what "propaganda"? Really... you just make things up to please the
herd.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

JEDIDIAH stated in post slrnjgcm0...@nomad.mishnet on 1/5/12 7:10 PM:

>>>> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>>>
>>> Well, some only care about the first thing they find, the color of the box,
>>> or whatever.
>>>
>>> But who cares?
>>>
>>>> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>>>
>>> LOL! This is the excuse the false "advocates" sink to... doing a good job
>>> is just not important in their world.
>
> It's a world dominated by marketing.
>
> Sad but true.
>
> That's not "my" world. That's "your" world.

While Apple does have good ads, those ads do not make my Mac any better. I
do not see why you would think it would.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Kubuntu King]

JEDIDIAH <je...@nomad.mishnet> writes:

> On 2012-01-05, Foster <frankf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:26:08 -0500, DFS wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>>
>>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>>> like?
>
> Anyone that's employed.

Jed, we realise you're an idiot, clearly the context is where the
purchaser has their own choice.

--
ubuntu runs games twice as fast as Windoze

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 9:06 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:

> On 2012-01-05, Foster<frankf...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> You are talking to an idiot who claimed he wouldn't take a free
>> Corvette if it was given to him.
>
> You are not nearly as smart as you think you are.

Someone who claims he wouldn't accept a free $100,000 car has no
standing to question anyone's intelligence.

[DFS]

I think what Jed is trying to say is everyone that has money to spend
buys from companies they don't like. I've asked him for details, but
I'm sure his response will sound like a haiku.

[DFS]

On 1/5/2012 9:09 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
> On 2012-01-05, GreyCloud<mi...@cumulus.com> wrote:
>> On 1/5/2012 1:52 PM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 1/5/2012 3:23 PM, JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>> On 2012-01-05, Kubuntu King<linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> cc<scat...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit<use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> cc stated in post
>>>>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on
>>>>>>> 1/5/12
>>>>>>> 9:22 AM:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right. Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user
>>>>>>> loyalty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
>>>>> importance of consistent UIs....
>>>>>
>>>>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
>>>>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>>>>
>>>> Some customers really only care about the logo.
>>>>
>>>> Actually doing a good job is not really all that relevant.
>>>>
>>>> This goes equally well for BMW as it does for Apple actually. [snicker]
>>>
>>>
>>> Are you actually saying BMW and Apple don't produce quality products,
>>> and people buy them only for the brand name?
>
> Of course I am.

Then you are truly ignorant. Or just as likely, since you can't afford
them or don't want to pay you've convinced yourself they're not great
companies producing fantastic products.

> I don't buy into BMW hype any more than I do Apple hype.

There is no hype. Apple products really/usually are the best at what
they were designed to do. BMWs really are excellent driver's cars. Both
deliver high quality at high prices.

No company becomes the largest in the world based on "hype". No
computers have the highest resale value and highest customer sat based
on "hype". No car makes the Car&Driver 10Best list year after year
after year based on "hype".

You and yours (Homer, Spamowitz, RonG, chrisv, etc) are some sad pieces
of work. Just pathetic, really.

> Whereas my knowledge of BMWs are only 2nd hand, I do have firsthand
> experience with Apple products that soundly contradicts all of the propaganda.

I have firsthand - though dated - knowledge of BMWs. I drove a 1976 BMW
2002 (small 2-door) in college and afterwards, and it was an AMAZING car
to drive. The handling was like nothing else in that price range.

So let's hear all the details of your "experience with Apple products
that soundly contradicts all of the propaganda." This ought to be good...

[GreyCloud]

That part is quite correct.

>
>> Both osx and
>> linux have pretty much the same libs, except for cocoa.
>
> Does this include all of the Core technologies?
>

No. Just the standard libs that work on all platforms... or are
supposed to. You have to realize that the apple libs are written by
apple and conform to nobodies standards.
It is the process of software development using standard tools.

>> I really don't see what they are complaining about. There is one org that
>> provides the same code for linux as for osx and compiles pretty well on osx .
>
>
>
>
>


--

[Homer]

Verily I say unto thee that "Foster" spake thusly:

>
> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they
> don't like?

500 million Windows users, for a start, given that they don't have any
choice of what OS they're forced to pay for whenever they buy a PC, and
what they do end up being forced to pay for is a steaming pile of shit.

Most surveys I've seen are loaded to favour a particular outcome, and
therefore the results are misleading at best, and highly unlikely to be
in any way representative of what people actually want.

In fact I was just looking at a "survey" of sorts tonight. On Dell's
Website it asked what version of Microsoft Office I wanted, and gave
several options, but failed to include the most obvious one: "None".

A lot of surveys are like that. I end up answering "other" to most
questions, with no provision to give any details of what exactly this
"other" is, because the company running the survey has no interest in
"other" answers, and will never make any provision to cater to them.

IME the choices available to consumers are more driven by what the
vendors want, than what the customers want, especially in this age of
marketing gibberish, cartels, myopic and self-serving conferences, and
"IP", so frankly surveys serve very little purpose beyond justifying the
continued existence of marketing dilberts, who are just as out of touch
with what consumers want as the companies that employ them.

--
K. | "You see? You cannot kill me. There is no flesh
http://slated.org | and blood within this cloak to kill. There is
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on šky | only an idea. And ideas are bulletproof."
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 227 days | ~ V for Vendetta.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

GreyCloud wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> So far after buying a new HP i7, I'm having pretty good luck so far with
> VS2010 Pro. VS has a few nice features inside the editor that I like.
> The only thing they need now is code completion, which I hear is going
> to be in their new version out this year.

You can have it now, with vi(m). :-)

--
What fact? MS does not have and never had a monopoly. Linux is free for
anyone to download. Lots of people have tried selling Linux systems and
failed. What you MEAN is that until Windows users decide they don't want
Windows anymore they will continue to buy it.
-- "Hadron" <088ca7-...@news.eternal-september.org>

[cc]

On Jan 5, 5:26 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> e977ec9e-91d7-40d0-b3d6-d174431e5...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
> 2:58 PM:

>
> > On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
> >> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>
> >>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>
> >> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>

> >> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
> >> like?
>

> > Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers.
>

> Ah, in your world customer satisfaction is important but knowing how
> satisfied your customers is not.  At least now.  Before customer
> satisfaction itself was not even important.
>
> You are completely lost.  As is your norm.

"But as a leading computer software company has learned to its
surprise, satisfied customers aren’t necessarily good customers.
Indeed, the company discovered in a recent survey that there was no
correlation between customers’ satisfaction scores and their actual
purchase behavior."
http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8

--
"what is the harm in, say, letting two 80 year old siblings have sex
if they want?" - Snit, advocating elderly incest
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0fdbdb?=hl=3Den&dmode=3Dsource

[cc]

On Jan 5, 7:02 pm, Kubuntu King<linuxrox...@gmail.com> wrote:

Well done surveys measuring loyalty and not satisfaction, yes. Did you
read any of the links, or were you too busy being a faggot and
claiming to know about C programming?

[cc]

On Jan 5, 5:32 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 50d6cdb3-1f45-4bb3-90f7-0ba984c63...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
> 2:56 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 5, 3:58 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> Kubuntu King stated in post lkobuiymk1....@news.eternal-september.org on
> >> 1/5/12 12:30 PM:
>
> >>> cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:

>
> >>>> On Jan 5, 1:59 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >>>>> cc stated in post

> >>>>> 6525c17f-9812-4365-b097-16792b3e9...@32g2000yqp.googlegroups.com on 1/5/12
> >>>>> 9:22 AM:
>
> >>>>> Right.  Apple has very high user satisfaction and very high user loyalty.
>
> >>>> And we've shown user satisfaction is meaningless.
>
> >>> LOL! What a moron you are! The same guy who doesnt believe in the
> >>> importance of consistent UIs....
>
> >>> User satisfaction is a HUGELY important metric as it bring customers
> >>> back. If they dont like your product they buy elsewhere.....
>

> >> As is his norm, cc is showing he is functionally illiterate, unable to make
> >> a reasoned argument or follow one, and is just going to lie to try to
> >> obfuscate these facts.
>
> >> Take his completely bizarre assumption:
>
> >>     100% Samsung customers could be loyal vs. 20% of HTC which
> >>     when grouped together would give a 60% loyality rating for
> >>     Android.
>
> >> And he denies understanding how this is less likely than Samsung and HTC
> >> having *roughly* the same customer loyalty (give or take, say, 10%)... which
> >> would mean, at a reasonable best, they have 50% loyalty each as a top (some
> >> users switch from Samsung to HTC or vice versa - or some other Android
> >> company).  This is just common sense... and being generous, really.  And
> >> completely beyond cc.  What a boring fool he is.

>
> > You're an absolute moron. Samsung has 73%, HTC has 75% and Apple has
> > 93% according to this (US numbers):

> >http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-05/apple-beats-htc-samsung-as-n...

> > stomer-loyalty-falls-for-first-time.html
>
> > So your "50% loyalty each as a top" is so fucking off as to be
> > laughable, as I pointed out originally. You were basing it on NOTHING!
>

> A *lot* closer than your "guess" of "100%" for Samsung and "20%" for HTC.
>
> A whole lot closer.

A lot? Can't do simple math can you? Also, I pointed out that both of
our examples were useless.

> But, sure, you showed I was wrong... with evidence.

I showed your fucking stupid guess "based on data and common sense"
was clearly not based on either.

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-06, Homer <use...@slated.org> wrote:
> Verily I say unto thee that "Foster" spake thusly:
>>
>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they
>> don't like?
>
> 500 million Windows users, for a start, given that they don't have any
> choice of what OS they're forced to pay for whenever they buy a PC, and
> what they do end up being forced to pay for is a steaming pile of shit.
>
> Most surveys I've seen are loaded to favour a particular outcome, and

Someone is paying the bill.

That company likely has an agenda.

Been there. Did that. College job.

[deletia]

--
Truth is irrelevant as long as the predictions are good. |||
/ | \

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-01-06, Kubuntu King <linux...@gmail.com> wrote:

No it isn't.

You trolls just love to whine about "hypocrisy" in contexts where
the user has no power when it comes to purchasing.

[cc]

On Jan 5, 5:07 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:

> On 1/5/2012 4:58 PM, cc wrote:
>
> > On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS<nospam@dfs_.com>  wrote:

> >> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>
> >>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>
> >> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>
> >> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
> >> like?
>

> > Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers. So
> > I left out a word, sue me.
>

> Not necessary.
>
> How about a $100K wager on a round of gold?</sarcasm>

How about a round of golf instead?

>
> > There is no correlation between customer

> > satisfaction surveys and returning customers. It's a meaningless
> > phrase.
>
> This doesn't make sense, assuming customer sat is reflected in the
> surveys people complete.

Did you read any of the links I helpfully posted?


> > Satisfied customers switch all the time. Loyalty is what
> > you're looking for, and even that is fleeting.
>
> You may need to learn the Venus Butterfly Technique.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
52311ade-ed0f-47f7...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12
11:45 AM:

From your own links:

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

And based on your links, you concluded:

cc:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

Face it - you are functionally illiterate and a liar.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
efab6326-f57a-4d24...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12
11:48 AM:

> On Jan 5, 7:02 pm, Kubuntu King<linuxrox...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> writes:
>>> On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/5/2012 2:22 PM, cc wrote:
>>
>>>>> Customer satisfaction is useless, as you have been shown.
>>
>>>> This is the dumbest thing you've ever said (that I've read).
>>
>>>> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
>>>> like?
>>
>>> Customer satisfaction surveys are useless, not satisfied customers. So
>>> I left out a word, sue me. There is no correlation between customer
>>
>> And you're still an idiot.
>>
>> Well done surveys are VERY revealing and important to companies who
>> value their customers.
>
> Well done surveys measuring loyalty and not satisfaction, yes. Did you
> read any of the links, or were you too busy being a faggot and
> claiming to know about C programming?

You clearly did not understand your own linked articles:

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

And based on your links, you concluded:

cc:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

Face it - you are functionally illiterate and a liar. I mean, it is not
like that is just one sentence from one link. Here is more:

<http://goo.gl/87I65>
-----
The most common corporate metric of customer satisfaction is
the "top two boxes" score, which measures how many customers
are satisfied or very satisfied with the company's product or
service. However, research shows that the distinction between
the top two boxes is extremely important. The customer
responding with the highest possible score is an advocate -
the ideal customer. As a result, moving customers up a box,
from the second to the first, can have a huge impact on
future sales.
-----

And from that you deny customer satisfaction surveys are important? What?
Even though the article *you* pointed to said the difference in the two
"boxes" on such surveys is "extremely important".

Hint: "extremely" =/= "not"



<http://goo.gl/9XnFp>
-----
Customer satisfaction is concerned with attracting, keeping,
and enhancing customer relationships. ... Measure behavioral
intentions and correlate them with actual behavior over time.
-----

But you claim measuring that is useless. Just daft on your part. Once
again: you have taken one claim from one reference and are pretending to be
an expert, even though your own sources show how wrong you are.

You simply are wrong. Deal with it.

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be

valuable. ... Good satisfaction measurement can help identify
what's broken in your business today (although fixing it is
up to you).
-----

But you claim that is not valuable... because, as is your norm, you are
functionally illiterate. Only you could read: "There's no question that
satisfaction measurements can be valuable" and conclude "Customer
satisfaction surveys are useless".

Really, do you want to turn this into another debate like your UI debate
where you make a complete and total fool of yourself repeatedly? You are
starting down the same line of BS... taking snippets of articles you do not
understand and pretending to be knowledgeable. You are not and it shows.




--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 6, 5:00 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 52311ade-ed0f-47f7-87dd-799cd3d46...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12

> >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0...

> > =3Den&dmode=3Dsource
>
> From your own links:
>
> <http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
>     -----
>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>     valuable.
>     -----

"They allow customers to vent frustrations. They can highlight
problems with product quality and customer service." Yay.

> And based on your links, you concluded:
>
>  cc:
>      -----
>      Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>      -----
>

I consider ZERO correlation with customer purchasing behavior to be
useless. Since there is ZERO correlation, not having the customer
satisfaction surveys (or even getting back a survey with a different
result for this quarter) would NOT change how many customers purchased
your product, so it would NOT impact your business. That's the
definition of ZERO correlation. So yes, I consider something like that
useless.

Apple's high customer satisfaction rating has ZERO correlation on
their customers' purchasing habits, so the survey tells them NOTHING
important about customers purchasing their products. I say nothing
important because the satisfaction surveys have ZERO correlation with
customers purchasing their products in the future, and the only
important thing for a publically traded company is to make money for
shareholders. Apple's high customer loyalty rating on the other
hand... now that is shown to have correlation with customers'
purchasing habits. Therefore that is useful.

Do you understand what having ZERO correlation with customers
purchasing products means for customer surveys?

[cc]

On Jan 6, 5:06 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> efab6326-f57a-4d24-9d4d-48f63d394...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are useless"
http://copernicusconsulting.net/why-customer-satisfaction-surveys-are-useless/

Perhaps you should tell Dr. Sam Ladner she is functionally illiterate.

[Kubuntu King]

It does seem that way.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2012-01-06, Kubuntu King <linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
> You trolls just love to whine about "hypocrisy" in contexts where
> the user has no power when it comes to purchasing.

It's amazing how long the trolls will push a dead tack.

--
So you can post a link to one of his posts where is lying?
Don't be in the COLA "herd" Rick. Try to think for yourself for a
change. Being the last runt of the litter snuffling around at the back
of the COLAtard "Herd" is no place for a grown man to be - you'll get
defecated on by them.
-- "Hadron" <h4cmb0$hsn$4...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Foster]

On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:33:33 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> It's amazing how long the trolls will push a dead tack.

It beats pushing a dead desktop operating system like Linux.
You Linux freaks have been doing that for 20 years.

[Kubuntu King]

Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@xzoozy.com> writes:

> JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2012-01-06, Kubuntu King <linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>> You trolls just love to whine about "hypocrisy" in contexts where
>> the user has no power when it comes to purchasing.
>
> It's amazing how long the trolls will push a dead tack.

What are you talking about now? Its as if you feel no need to keep
context or back your claims you dishonest little weenie.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
f525d317-d8d0-4787...@r5g2000yqc.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12
3:19 PM:

...

>> From your own links:
>>
>> <http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
>>     -----
>>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>>     valuable.
>>     -----
>
> "They allow customers to vent frustrations. They can highlight
> problems with product quality and customer service." Yay.

Yet you claim they are useless.

You are wrong.

As noted: you like to pretend to be knowledgeable in areas you are clearly
clueless in. Maybe that is what "cc" stands for?

>> And based on your links, you concluded:
>>
>>  cc:
>>      -----
>>      Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>>      -----
>
> I consider ZERO correlation with customer purchasing behavior to be
> useless.

Again: you took one claim from one of the several links you pointed to and
have shown you have no understanding of the broader picture. Nobody is
denying that the sentence you keep referring to exists - but your reading of
that sentence does not make you knowledgeable - just as your BS claims about
UI stuff, largely made up in your own brain but sometimes based on a
misreading of something you read, only served to show how lost you are.

You are doing the same thing here as you did with the UI debate (and your BS
claims about what it means to "advocate" something, for that matter). You
are simply without any reasoned argument but you are too lost to understand
that - you know so little about the topic you cannot even begin to
understand where you have gone wrong.

You are functionally illiterate. Time and time again you prove this.

...

> Apple's high customer satisfaction rating has ZERO correlation on
> their customers' purchasing habits

So you think but you say that without decent support. Again: nobody is
denying you found a sentence for a single source that, when taken from
context, can be twisted to mean what you claim... but keep in mind how
amazingly clueless you are. Your "understanding" is nil. You are lost. You
are functionally illiterate.

The sad thing is you really seem to not get that. You think you are
knowledgeable. Just amazing how delusional you are.

> , so the survey tells them NOTHING important about customers purchasing their
> products.

In your opinion. Sure. But recall your own links suggest other
possibilities. You have glommed onto an idea you like and no matter how
much counter evidence or other views there are, even from your own links,
you are not able to let go of your idea. You are not *rational*, and thus
there is no way to convince you of your errors. Think about this: you are
so far gone in terms of your ability to use rationality that you cannot be
convinced by data and evidence, even from your own links. This speaks very
poorly of you.

...


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
d30e8e82-e7e7-49fc...@n39g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12
3:23 PM:

...

>> You clearly did not understand your own linked articles:
>>
>> <http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
>>     -----
>>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>>     valuable.
>>     -----
>>
>> And based on your links, you concluded:
>>
>>  cc:
>>      -----
>>      Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>>      -----
>>
>
> "Why customer satisfaction surveys are useless"
> http://copernicusconsulting.net/why-customer-satisfaction-surveys-are-useless/
>
> Perhaps you should tell Dr. Sam Ladner she is functionally illiterate.

Why change the topic from your own illiteracy? If your goal here is to do
as you have done in the past and lie about correspondence you have with
others outside of COLA I am not interested.

So let us get back to the topic - how do you read what I quote, above and
from your own link, and the conclude the opposite and not admit you are just
wrong? How can you be so arrogant and wrong? Why are you so heavily
against reason and intellect?

--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

Kubuntu King stated in post bdboqgq...@news.eternal-september.org on
1/6/12 3:30 PM:

Time and time again, cc will look at one or two sentences from one or two
sources, ignore the context, and insist he is know knowledgeable about the
topic. He is doing this here, and he did so in a debate about what it means
to "advocate" something, and he did so in terms of a UI debate. The less
information he has the more sure he is of himself and the more he claims he
is an expert. Just bizarre. I wonder if he thinks anyone falls for it?

Now he feels he has to defend himself because he has been called out on his
BS. He would be better off letting it drop and just not repeating the same
error. If and when the topics come up again, as they often do in COLA, he
should just admit he has now learned enough to understand his past claims
were not based on broad evidence... and even apologize for those he has lied
about or forged quotes from.

But cc will not - he is not enough of an adult.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[DFS]

On 1/6/2012 5:33 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> JEDIDIAH wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2012-01-06, Kubuntu King<linux...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>> You trolls just love to whine about "hypocrisy" in contexts where
>> the user has no power when it comes to purchasing.
>
> It's amazing how long the trolls will push a dead tack.

No doubt. It was just the other day that Dumb Willie Poaster was
whining about Hadron mistaking PCI-X as the short form of PCI Express.
In May 2007.

It's 4.5 years later, and the Dumb Willie idiot still bleats about one
tiny mistake which was immediately disavowed by Hadron.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/0f0894403a8cdee4?hl=en



That's the kind of pathetic troll lusers you "advocates" are.

[Tattoo Vampire]

Foster wrote:

> It beats pushing a dead desktop operating system like Linux.

Linux has grown to much more than a desktop operating system, you twittering
twat.

--
Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.

[tv]

[William Poaster]

Here is a facsimile from Tattoo Vampire who, on 7/1/2012 06:46, wrote:

> Foster wrote:
>
>> It beats pushing a dead desktop operating system like Linux.
>
> Linux has grown to much more than a desktop operating system, you twittering
> twat.

Idiot wintrolls still chanting about "a dead Linux desktop system" when
more governments & large organizations are increasingly using Linux.

And even *IF* the linux desktop "a dead desktop operating system", there
would be NO need for the wintrolls to be here, would there. So their
very actions in trying to decry Linux belies their words.

--
XT at 8 Mhz. = 386 at 25 Mhz. + Windose !!!

What IS remarkable, is that a well developed ape has come
to realise that he lives on a planet, circling a sun, in a
planetary system, within a galaxy, within a universe.
- Professor Michio Kaku - Theoretical Physicist -

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Tattoo Vampire wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Foster wrote:
>
>> It beats pushing a dead desktop operating system like Linux.
>
> Linux has grown to much more than a desktop operating system, you twittering
> twat.

And even as a desktop, it is thriving, much as Samuel Adams brewery is
thriving.

--
But doing what the
wanker chrisv wants, which is to FORCE Open Office on them , for
example, is nothing short of criminally insane. Just because its "Open"
it doesnt mean it puts them in any better light than someone conversant
with the clear market leader. In fact, anyone with at least half a brain
might think that the person who has mastered the market leader is in a
better position because the market NEEDS people skilled in that SW ...
-- "Hadron" <ihsn6q$64k$1...@news.eternal-september.org>, adopting the position
that education must support the "market leader".

[chrisv]

Tattoo Vampire wrote:

>> It beats pushing a dead desktop operating system like Linux.
>
>Linux has grown to much more than a desktop operating system, you twittering
>twat.

That tired old troll still gets a response?

[cc]

On Jan 6, 6:13 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> f525d317-d8d0-4787-8cf9-ea6636c97...@r5g2000yqc.googlegroups.com on 1/6/12

> 3:19 PM:
>
> ...
>
> >> From your own links:
>
> >> <http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
> >>     -----
> >>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
> >>     valuable.
> >>     -----
>
> > "They allow customers to vent frustrations. They can highlight
> > problems with product quality and customer service." Yay.
>
> Yet you claim they are useless.
>
> You are wrong.
>
> As noted: you like to pretend to be knowledgeable in areas you are clearly
> clueless in.  Maybe that is what "cc" stands for?
>
> >> And based on your links, you concluded:
>
> >>  cc:
> >>      -----
> >>      Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
> >>      -----
>
> > I consider ZERO correlation with customer purchasing behavior to be
> > useless.
>
> Again: you took one claim from one of the several links you pointed to and
> have shown you have no understanding of the broader picture.  Nobody is
> denying that the sentence you keep referring to exists -

Exists in multiple documents, I assume is what you meant.

>
> > Apple's high customer satisfaction rating has ZERO correlation on
> > their customers' purchasing habits
>
> So you think but you say that without decent support.  Again: nobody is

"An even less reliable means of gauging loyalty is through
conventional customer satisfaction methods. Our research indicates
that satisfaction LACKS A CONSISTENTLY DEMONSTABLE CONNECTION to
actual customer behavior and growth."
http://www.netzkobold.com/uploads/pdfs/the_one_number_you_need_to_grow_reichheld.pdf

Hmmm no connection between customer satisfaction and actual customer
behavior or growth.

"To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade companies
to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
information. EMPIRCALLY, however, IT CAN BE OF LITTLE WORTH."
http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/jun2009/ca20090619_272945.htm

Hmm, empircally customer satisfaction surveys can be of little worth,
or worthless.

"But as a leading computer software company has learned to its
surprise, satisfied customers aren’t necessarily good customers.

Indeed, the company discovered in a recent survey that there was NO
CORRELATION between customers’ satisfaction scores and their actual
purchase behavior."
http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8

Hmm, no correlation between customer satisfaction and actual purchase
behavior.

"MYTH: Customer satisfaction influences business performance.
FACT: Market-perceived relative quality, NOT CUSTOMER SATISFACTION,
is correlated to profitability."
http://www.geonorth.com/blog/marketing/exploding-the-myths-of-customer-satisfaction-measurement-0

Hmm, customer satisfaction does not influence business performance.

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are useless"
http://copernicusconsulting.net/why-customer-satisfaction-surveys-are-useless/

Hmm, customer satisfaction surveys are useless.

So I have five sources so far and you have none. If you have a problem
with the sources, please state the reason and I will be happy to
provide more.

So who should I listen to, Snit (The Prescott Computer Guy, ya'll!),
Hadron (limp-wristed, self-proclaimed C expert who doesn't know what
undefined behavior, an intro level concept, is), and DFS (too busy
posting bugs to read links, on another hiatus pretending like someone
gives a shit, or molesting his poolboy), OR the multiple sources from
actual researchers who disagree with them?

You can call me functionally illiterate all you want, but the fact
remains that there is no correlation between customer satisfaction and
purchase behavior, and two of the sources I posted called customer
surveys either empirically worthless or useless. Feel free to post
some research that contradicts the above.

[cc]

On Jan 5, 4:26 pm, DFS <nospam@dfs_.com> wrote:
>
> Who shops or eats or drives or uses the products of a company they don't
> like?

Comcast customers:

Rating by the ACSI surveys indicate that the company's customer
service has not improved since the surveys began in 2001. Analysis of
the surveys states that "Comcast is one of the lowest scoring
companies in ACSI. As its customer satisfaction eroded by 7% over the
past year, revenue increased by 12%."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast

Who loves a company, but doesn't shop there? How about customers of
Walmart?

"Walmart made a common mistake repeated hundreds of times in the
business world: they relied on what customers said in a survey versus
what they actually do in the stores (and online)"
"What was the result of Project Impact?
- $1.85 billion in potential revenue lost - my conservative estimate
of lost revenue in U.S. Stores (see chart below)
- Same-store sales flipped negative (see chart above) at about the
time many stores were remodeled to reduce clutter
- Customer satisfaction "soared" (i.e. went up)"
"What is Walmart now doing?
- They have reversed Project Impact and are adding products back to
the stores
- They fired the senior executives in charge of the failed strategy"
http://dailyartifacts.com/walmarts-185-billon-dollar-mistake


Sooo, how useful are these customer surveys again? Walmart actually
fired the people in charge who listened to the customer survey!

[Snit]

cc stated in post
74e0889e-ed4e-4411...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
1:42 PM:

What I mean is that you are clueless and completely unable to understand
what you read. You are functionally illiterate:

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

Your interpretation:

-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

And you cannot even admit you are wrong! You are simply ignoring facts.

There is no way the conversation can move forward until you accept reality.
You simply are too illiterate and ignorant to have a discussion with.
...

--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:01 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 74e0889e-ed4e-4411-b4ed-8ebeb33d8...@m11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

Valuable as predictors of purchasing behavior? Do any of the links say
that high satisfaction scores will increase your revenue, or that low
satisfaction scores will hurt your revenue? Or do they say that there
is zero correlation between satisfaction and purchasing behavior?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
c170b710-178f-422a...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
1:58 PM:

Please remember you are functionally illiterate and completely clueless on
this topic - as you were with the GUI debate and so many others.

Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure it are important... which
does not mean they are the only things that are! You live in such a black
and white world and are so amazingly lost it is not possible to help you get
from your ignorant position to one of even basic knowledge - you *actively*
seek to be ignorant and lie when you feel threatened by facts.

<http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8146?gko=183f8>
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

cc, on reading that, concludes:

-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

Face it, cc, until you can admit you are wrong about things as obvious and
basic as that you will remain an ignorant fool... by choice.

Good day!


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Goblin]

On 01/09/2012 09:08 PM, Snit wrote:
> Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure it are important...

Well if the claims that Windows Phone 7 customers are "happy" is true,
then I'd say the surveys are next to worthless....alleged happy WP7
customers haven't managed to drag its sales out of the proverbial
bargain bin section in stores have they? Last time I checked people
wanted Android phones or Apple products.....

I would suggest a rephrasing of that sentence to:

"Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure CAN be important..."


--
Openbytes the Linux/FOSS Blogazine! - http://www.openbytes.tk
or if you prefer: http://www.openbytes.wordpress.com
"Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui."
Catch me in #techrights on freenode.net

BytesMedia: www.bytesmedia.co.uk

Email: bytes...@googlemail.com
Diaspora: https://joindiaspora.com/u/goblin
Identi.ca: identi.ca/openbytes
Twitter: twitter.com/_goblin

Skype: tim.openbytes

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:08 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> c170b710-178f-422a-8e74-135d4457e...@v14g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure it are important...

So tell me which part you disagree with:

There is zero correlation between customer satisfaction surveys and
customer purchasing behavior.

Zero correlation means the result of the surveys do not impact how
customers purchase.

Since there is no impact on customers' purchasing behavior, then your
revenue is unrelated to the customer survey results.

Given that customer satisfaction does not correlate with purchasing
behavior, and given the two examples above, should you base any
business decisions on customer satisfaction surveys?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
05828f34-ad76-403e...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:08 PM:

>> What I mean is that you are clueless and completely unable to understand
>> what you read.  You are functionally illiterate:
>>
>>   Your links says:
>>     -----
>>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>>     valuable.
>>     -----
>
> Valuable as predictors of purchasing behavior?

Valuable as in not useless, but you will not admit that because you *never*
admit when you are wrong... esp. when having a discussion with people who
have repeatedly proved you wrong... as I did in the GUI disucssion.

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

Your interpretation:

-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

I mean, really, why not just admit you were wrong? Then we can look to
educate you about what the value is... but until you can show you can admit
something so amazingly basic as your obvious error you will just remain the
ignorant fool you are.

By choice.

You like being ignorant.

> Do any of the links say that high satisfaction scores will increase your
> revenue, or that low satisfaction scores will hurt your revenue?

Who would even think that this is the case? I mean I suppose it could be if
customers look to such scores to make their purchasing decisions, but your
question, as is so common for you, shows how completely lost you are on the
topic.

...



--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

Goblin stated in post PMIOq.208876$WC5.1...@newsfe09.ams2 on 1/9/12 2:14
PM:

> On 01/09/2012 09:08 PM, Snit wrote:
>> Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure it are important...
>
> Well if the claims that Windows Phone 7 customers are "happy" is true,
> then I'd say the surveys are next to worthless....alleged happy WP7
> customers haven't managed to drag its sales out of the proverbial
> bargain bin section in stores have they? Last time I checked people
> wanted Android phones or Apple products.....
>
> I would suggest a rephrasing of that sentence to:
>
> "Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure CAN be important..."
>

OK, sure... or at least understand that they are not the *only* things that
are important.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:15 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 05828f34-ad76-403e-b4c3-207e3b7ee...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 2:08 PM:
>
> >> What I mean is that you are clueless and completely unable to understand
> >> what you read.  You are functionally illiterate:
>
> >>   Your links says:
> >>     -----
> >>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
> >>     valuable.
> >>     -----
>
> > Valuable as predictors of purchasing behavior?
>
> Valuable as in not useless, but you will not admit that because you *never*
> admit when you are wrong...

Please quote where one of the links says that customer satisfaction
surveys are valuable (or not useless) predictors of purchasing
behavior. Your current quote of choice does not say that in the least.

>
> > Do any of the links say that high satisfaction scores will increase your
> > revenue, or that low satisfaction scores will hurt your revenue?
>
> Who would even think that this is the case?

So if customer satisfaction results do not impact your business, how
important are they?

From the source I posted where Walmart lost billions and fired
executives even though customer satisfaction soared, they say:
"Walmart made a common MISTAKE repeated hundreds of times in the
business world: they RELIED on what customers said in a survey versus
what they actually do in the stores (and online)" Do you believe that
it is a mistake to rely (note: they didn't only rely on it) on
satisfaction survey results?

Please describe how the customer satisfaction survey Walmart used, was
useful to them.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
e3e365ed-582c-4642...@f11g2000yql.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:23 PM:

> On Jan 9, 4:15 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 05828f34-ad76-403e-b4c3-207e3b7ee...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
>> 2:08 PM:
>>
>>>> What I mean is that you are clueless and completely unable to understand
>>>> what you read.  You are functionally illiterate:
>>
>>>>   Your links says:
>>>>     -----
>>>>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>>>>     valuable.
>>>>     -----
>>
>>> Valuable as predictors of purchasing behavior?
>>
>> Valuable as in not useless, but you will not admit that because you *never*
>> admit when you are wrong...
>
> Please quote where one of the links says that customer satisfaction
> surveys are valuable (or not useless) predictors of purchasing
> behavior. Your current quote of choice does not say that in the least.

There can be *no* discussion until you admit you are wrong:

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

Your interpretation:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

Until you do, cc, you are just showing you are going to be your normal
dishonest self. I am *not* going to be pulled into your BS games - you are
wrong. Period. Admit it like an adult and move on!

>>> Do any of the links say that high satisfaction scores will increase your
>>> revenue, or that low satisfaction scores will hurt your revenue?
>>
>> Who would even think that this is the case?
>
> So if customer satisfaction results do not impact your business, how
> important are they?

My goodness, you are illiterate!

Nobody said they did not (or should not) have an impact on your business.
What I was noting was your idiotic comment about satisfaction scores
increasing your revenue... other than to the extent that customers base
their purchases on such scores they likely do so very, very little if at
all. You are, as you do so with such regularity, completely missing the
point of the surveys! They are not done, primarily, to alter customer
behavior but to better understand your business and your relationship with
customers. Your question shows you got this backwards - you are simply
lost.
...


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
3e156222-7600-4a54...@y2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:13 PM:

>> Customer satisfaction and the surveys that measure it are important...
>
> So tell me which part you disagree with:

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

Your interpretation:

-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

I disagree because anyone who is not a complete idiot can see you are wrong.

Seriously, you work to be ignorant and dishonest... it is just amazing to
watch you squirm.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
3e156222-7600-4a54...@y2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:13 PM:

> Zero correlation means the result of the surveys do not impact how
> customers purchase.

That is not what the surveys are even meant to do, at least not primarily.

Again: you are getting things backward and just flat out wrong. How many
times do you need to be told how wrong and ignorant you are?


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
3e156222-7600-4a54...@y2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:13 PM:

> Since there is no impact on customers' purchasing behavior, then your
> revenue is unrelated to the customer survey results.

This is so amazingly stupid it is hard to know how to respond. It is like
saying measuring height does not alter height so you should never desire to
measure it.

Really, are you *trying* to be stupid?


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:44 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> e3e365ed-582c-4642-b6b8-929b754f0...@f11g2000yql.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 2:23 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 4:15 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> 05828f34-ad76-403e-b4c3-207e3b7ee...@q7g2000yqn.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
> >> 2:08 PM:
>
> >>>> What I mean is that you are clueless and completely unable to understand
> >>>> what you read.  You are functionally illiterate:
>
> >>>>   Your links says:
> >>>>     -----
> >>>>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
> >>>>     valuable.
> >>>>     -----
>
> >>> Valuable as predictors of purchasing behavior?
>
> >> Valuable as in not useless, but you will not admit that because you *never*
> >> admit when you are wrong...
>
> > Please quote where one of the links says that customer satisfaction
> > surveys are valuable (or not useless) predictors of purchasing
> > behavior. Your current quote of choice does not say that in the least.
>
> There can be *no* discussion until you admit you are wrong:

What if I'm not wrong?

>   Your links says:
>     -----
>     There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
>     valuable.
>     -----

A single line in a single link I posted says that. And what they refer
to after that has nothing to do with purchasing habits. I posted many
links, one of which specifically called satisfaction surveys useless,
and another which called them empirically worthless. Neither of those
statements contradict that single line taken out of context.

>  Your interpretation:
>     -----
>     Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>     -----

Not just my interpretation:

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are useless"
http://copernicusconsulting.net/why-customer-satisfaction-surveys-are-useless/

> Until you do, cc, you are just showing you are going to be your normal
> dishonest self.  I am *not* going to be pulled into your BS games - you are
> wrong.  Period.  Admit it like an adult and move on!

Would you like to concentrate on more than a single line in a single
link that has nothing to do with purchasing habits? What does
satisfaction surveys are empirically worthless mean?

> >>> Do any of the links say that high satisfaction scores will increase your
> >>> revenue, or that low satisfaction scores will hurt your revenue?
>
> >> Who would even think that this is the case?
>
> > So if customer satisfaction results do not impact your business, how
> > important are they?
>
> My goodness, you are illiterate!
>
> Nobody said they did not (or should not) have an impact on your business.

Do satisfaction survey results (or a business's response to them)
change revenue, given that there is zero correlation between
satisfaction survey results and purchasing behavior (see: Comcast
getting worse in customer satisfaction every year, and increasing
revenue, or Walmart listening to satisfaction surveys and losing
billions, for examples)?

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:45 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> Seriously, you work to be ignorant and dishonest... it is just amazing to
> watch you squirm.
>

Let's see: Complete dodging of the questions, check. Ignoring all
other sources to concentrate on a single line in a single link taken
out of context, check. Unable to comprehend what zero correlation
means, check. It looks like you're the ignorant, squirming, moron.

Why is it a COMMON MISTAKE for Walmart to use customer satisfaction
results?

If it is a COMMON MISTAKE to use customer satisifaction survey
results, then would you call the surveys useful?

All sources point out that there is zero correlation between
satisfaction surveys and purchasing habits of customers, and some even
specifically call the surveys useless or worthless, why are you
ignoring those?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
6350e629-a292-4377...@k10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:54 PM:

>> There can be *no* discussion until you admit you are wrong:
>
> What if I'm not wrong?

LOL!

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----

Your interpretation:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

If you cannot see you are wrong you are a complete and total idiot. That is
what.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 4:47 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 3e156222-7600-4a54-9f7f-7a9cd0bd5...@y2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 2:13 PM:
>
> > Since there is no impact on customers' purchasing behavior, then your
> > revenue is unrelated to the customer survey results.
>
> This is so amazingly stupid it is hard to know how to respond.  It is like
> saying measuring height does not alter height so you should never desire to
> measure it.
>

That is not what the links are saying at all. If height had zero
correlation with how fast you can type, then it would be useless to
use measurements of height to help choose who to hire for your
secretary, or to compare the height of your secretary to someone
else's to see who had the better secretary. That's what the links are
saying.

[cc]

On Jan 9, 5:02 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 6350e629-a292-4377-8c2f-5aa2bbe31...@k10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 2:54 PM:
>
> >> There can be *no* discussion until you admit you are wrong:
>
> > What if I'm not wrong?
>
> LOL!
>
>   Your links says:
>     -----

"To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade
companies
to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
information. EMPIRCALLY, however, IT CAN BE OF LITTLE WORTH."

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are USELESS"

>     -----
>  Your interpretation:
>     -----
>     Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>     -----
>
> If you cannot see you are wrong you are a complete and total idiot.  That is
> what.
>

Looks like I'm just restating and/or copying what someone else wrote.
Why should I believe you over them?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
7efbf93e-ccff-46ce...@f33g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
3:03 PM:

> On Jan 9, 4:47 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>> cc stated in post
>> 3e156222-7600-4a54-9f7f-7a9cd0bd5...@y2g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
>> 2:13 PM:
>>
>>> Since there is no impact on customers' purchasing behavior, then your
>>> revenue is unrelated to the customer survey results.
>>
>> This is so amazingly stupid it is hard to know how to respond.  It is like
>> saying measuring height does not alter height so you should never desire to
>> measure it.
>>
>
> That is not what the links are saying at all.

Right! And you are a complete idiot for not only making your claim but
insisting you are right no matter how many times you are told how wrong you
are.

Nobody is making the claim you are "refuting" there - namely that user
satisfaction surveys are done primarily to influence customer behavior...
much as how people do not measure height with the hopes that the mere
measuring of it will change it.

Good to see you finally admit you were wrong. But then again, you will try
to twist this to make it seem like you were not making that admission. You
*never* come right out and admit to your mistakes, esp. when you have been
proved wrong so many times.

...


--
🙈🙉🙊

[Snit]

cc stated in post
9da451da-1af6-4015...@24g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
2:59 PM:

> On Jan 9, 4:45 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>>
>> Seriously, you work to be ignorant and dishonest... it is just amazing to
>> watch you squirm.
>>
>
> Let's see:

Your links says:
-----
There's no question that satisfaction measurements can be
valuable.
-----
Your interpretation:
-----
Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
-----

Yeah, I see it. You are wrong.

And stupid.

....


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 5:07 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 9da451da-1af6-4015-a62a-ba21e542e...@24g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 2:59 PM:
>
> > On Jan 9, 4:45 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
>
> >> Seriously, you work to be ignorant and dishonest... it is just amazing to
> >> watch you squirm.
>
> > Let's see:
>
>   Your links says:
>     -----

"To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade companies
to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
information. EMPIRCALLY, however, IT CAN BE OF LITTLE WORTH."

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are USELESS"

>     -----
>  Your interpretation:
>     -----
>     Customer satisfaction surveys are useless
>     -----
>
> Yeah, I see it.

Finally! I'm glad you finally focused on more than a single line taken
out of context and realized I was right. But then again, you will try

to twist this to make it seem like you were not making that
admission. You *never* come right out and admit to your mistakes,

esp. when you have been proven wrong so many times.

[Snit]

cc stated in post
a534771d-ff29-4894...@f1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
3:06 PM:

Please try to actually respond to what you read and not babble off topic.

Thanks!


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 5:18 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> a534771d-ff29-4894-b71e-4869cdb80...@f1g2000yqi.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> 3:06 PM:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 5:02 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> >> cc stated in post
> >> 6350e629-a292-4377-8c2f-5aa2bbe31...@k10g2000yqk.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
> >> 2:54 PM:
>
> >>>> There can be *no* discussion until you admit you are wrong:
>
> >>> What if I'm not wrong?
>
> >> LOL!
>
> >>   Your links says:
> >>     -----
> > "To address the loyalty question, consultants often persuade
> > companies
> > to spend time and money trying to ensure that they know precisely how
> > pleased their customers are. Theoretically, this is vitally important
> > information. EMPIRCALLY, however, IT CAN BE OF LITTLE WORTH."
>
> > "Why customer satisfaction surveys are USELESS"

Are the people who wrote that customer satisfaction surveys are
empirically worthless and useless, wrong?

[Snit]

cc stated in post
70139536-96f0-415e...@f33g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12
3:21 PM:

As noted, *YOU* are wrong.

Until you can accept that there is no point discussing if others are also
wrong. You will just lie and twist and scream and make up quotes and do all
the other BS you do.

Just admit you were wrong because anyone who is literate can see you are.

But you will not. You prefer to remain an ignorant fool.


--
🙈🙉🙊

[cc]

On Jan 9, 5:26 pm, Snit <use...@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> cc stated in post

> 70139536-96f0-415e-b778-b4136dc2b...@f33g2000yqh.googlegroups.com on 1/9/12

> >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/cda6a0283f0...

> > =3Den&dmode=3Dsource
>
> As noted, *YOU* are wrong.

"Why customer satisfaction surveys are useless"
"Customer satisfaction surveys are empirically worthless"
"Customer satisfaction surveys are uesless."

How does my statement not match?