Entry 16: Four Jags (Part 1)

I wrote up four jags, so I am posting two today and two at a later time.

Jag 1

The other day we made our first utility payment at our apartment here. It was automatically deducted from my credit card, and it looked high, very high, something-must-be-wrong high. S and I went back and forth over Skype about who should call to try to figure out what’s going on. I said she should call, because I hate calling about things like this (admittedly a weak argument) and because she’s the one who set it up, and undoubtedly some sort of information is going to be needed (customer number, date the account was opened, etc.) that I don’t know or have access to (a slightly stronger argument). She said I should call because she would have to do it over Skype at an inconvenient time, and I could just call from my office whenever I wanted (sadly the best argument). She won, so I called.

I’ve already been dealing with tons of crap concerning accounts in the US (Try closing and paying the final bills for six different accounts in the same month. It’s like trying to sort through a giant amorphous mass of ineptitude and incompetence.), so I was especially unexcited about making this call. I was pleasantly surprised that the automated system was easy to follow, my hold time was short, and the woman on the other end was nice. I explained my situation, gave her my and S’s names, she pulled up my bill, and then we had the following exchange:

Her: Oh… I see the problem.
Me: OK, what is it?
Her: Well, it’s… wait… I’m sorry, I’m actually not seeing your name on the account.
Me: It’s in my wife’s name.
Her: Oh… I’m afraid I can’t give you any info on this account then. Is your wife there?
Me: No she’s not, but the payment is deducted from my credit card. You have the billing info. You’re saying that you can’t give me any information about a charge from your company on my credit card?
Her: [Apologetically] I’m sorry sir… It’s just… secrecy laws. If your wife is in, I can just have a quick chat with her.
Me: [Thinking this is exactly why I didn’t want to call in the first, but much too annoyed with the issue at hand to be annoyed with that.] She’s out of the country right now, but I don't see why I can't... I mean, it's my ca-... OK, OK, if she calls, you could tell her the problem?
Her: Yes.
Me: Over the phone?
Her: Yes, and she could add you to the account.
Me: OK. So she can just call you guys, just like I did, and you’ll tell her what’s going on.
Her: Yes, and she could add you to the account.
Me: OK. Bye.

About any hour later I gchatted with S, she called the company on Skype, and the whole thing was resolved in a matter of minutes. She didn’t have to give them any security information, beyond what I had given them. This is just completely nonsensical. Who is the company protecting? If I had disguised my voice, or hell, even if I hadn’t, if I would have just said my name was S--- from the get go, they would have given me the information. That’s the policy? The honor system? If that’s the case then why not just believe me that I'm S's husband and she told me to call?

Also, S did nothing special in setting up the account. She could have given them any name she wanted, there might not even be an S---, for all they know. And of course, they had no problem with the credit card name not matching the name on the account, as long as it’s valid. Apparently this type of inanity is not just an American phenomenon.

I don’t blame the woman, well I do, but only as much as I blame myself. We all just put up with this bullshit, even though we know it’s bullshit. She doesn’t want to get in trouble with her job, and I don’t want go on a frustrating, time-consuming crusade against this company’s ridiculous policy. It’s easier for both of us just to abide by it. The problem is that these things then just continue, and pretty soon we are doing more and more things that are completely contrary to common sense. Think about how much of your day you spend doing things or dealing with things that don’t make sense to you. I’ll bet it’s remarkable high. We would probably be better off in the long run if we all said “screw this” and stood up to all the annoying nonsense we endure, but we almost never do. I know I almost never do (unless bitching about it on a blog with a readership in the high single digits counts as standing up to it.)

Jag 2

ESPN has a series of 30 short documentaries for their 30th anniversary, appropriately called “30 for 30”. The first one aired some months ago and every so often they broadcast a new one. They are up to film 20 or so. I have seen a few of them and they are pretty good. (This is somewhat surprising since over the last 10 years or so ESPN has devolved to the point of near-un-watchability*.) Last night I thought to myself, hey, wouldn’t it be cool if I could watch some of them online? Not the new ones of course, ESPN would never let me watch those, but maybe the older ones that are rerun all the time on ESPN2 in the States.

So, I went online and checked things out and of course, you can’t watch them online, at least nothing more than a two minute teaser. Then I thought maybe they are on iTunes, so I looked and they are – for $5.00 a pop. Seriously? I’d have to pay $150 to download every episode. That’s ridiculous. We are talking about hour-long shows that they air for free all the time on their network. They can’t let people stream the older episodes online, or download them for a nominal fee from iTunes? I mean, I’d pay a dollar or two, but I’m not laying down a fin an episode. Throw in a few ads if you need to. You could even promote the upcoming shows (because that’s what ESPN needs, more self-promotion). This is exactly why people pirate things, by the way. Well, okay, not completely. Some people just want to steal stuff, and it wouldn’t matter if it costs $5.00 or $0.50, but I have to think it severely exacerbates the issue if your consumers feel like they are being ripped off when they buy your product.

*The trajectory of ESPN is somewhat similar to that of MTV. They both were cool when they first came out, because they had decent products (good sports coverage and music videos). Then they got really big and multiplied and spread their actual good content eggshell thin over all their networks and filled in the gaps with crap and hype. Now they both suck. I don't even think they show music videos on MTV anymore, and on ESPN there are way too many non-stories (Brett Favre), way too much faux-hipness, and way too many idiots yelling at each other.