"The telemarketing industry estimates the do-not-call list could cut its business in half, costing it up to $50 billion in sales each year. Implementing the list could also eliminate up to two million jobs, the ATA said."
"The free government registry for blocking telephone sales pitches has grown to more than 28 million numbers since it was opened June 27. The FTC has predicted registration to grow to 60 million numbers by next summer."
cry me a fucking river
Parasitic nuisances sue over do-not-call list:
Tags: corporations, security, spam
Current Music: S.I.N.A. -- Schranz 'n' Noise ♬
16 Responses:
Well, they could always cut me a check and I'll consider
letting them call me during sex, dinner, sleep, etc again.
Wait wait, this is the same drug-fucked rationality that says suing your own music fans is a good idea, right?
This is startlingly akin to Dracula suing over a do not bite list.
Actually no...
It would be only if the telemarketers were suing the people that pay them to telemarket.
No. That's suing people who want your product and are willing to steal it. This is suing a third party because people don't want your product and have told you to stop telling them about it.
Intriguingly they really don't have any idea. If they thought about this at all correctly they'd love it. Basically you've merely cut out those people who will NEVER buy your products. The people who went to the time and effort to sign up for a list do not care. Instead, you're now able to save money by calling only those people who still might have some interest. In effect you've culled your lists down to the best options and can likely reduce staff and overhead as a result. I doubt (although I must say I'm interested in a great deal of data about this entire endeavor) that it will have any effect on sales at all.
Many telemarketers make their money off of old, lonely, confused people. If their children put them on a no-call-list then the companies can no longer swindl^H^H^H^H^H^Hsell to the old people.
I imagine that their sales *have* gone
down by a significant amount. You are making
the assumption that someone on a "do not call"
list *would actually not buy any
telemarketed product, ever*. This is not
necessarily true. For instance, most people
prefer not to be called for, say, surveys,
but most of us have actually participated in
one or two over the years.
Telemarketing calls are a form of advertising;
to claim that advertising doesn't work is
untenable. Remember that they play a spam
game--there is a low probability that someone
on a "do not call" list will buy a product,
but the revenue generated by those who do, minus the cost of making all those calls,
still results in profit.
I'm sure they know the stats better than we do. If they're making this much of a noise they probably see it as a bad thing.
And anyway I'd be surprised if your theory is correct.
Wouldn't this lawsuit be defined as frivolous, technically speaking? We're talking about twenty-eight million people who have pretty much declared unto the darkness that they will not listen to telemarketers: these are people who will not buy those replacement windows you're asking about, no matter how charming you try to be over the phone. That is, if they'd even give you the time of day.
That being said, how, then, does this impact telemarketing businesses at all? One would think they'd even be grateful for this marvelous tool; now they know before they even think to call whether or not the person who picks up on the other end gives a rats ass about whatever you're selling. You'd think that, with all these automatic "Fuck Off And Die, Parasite" numbers removed from their list straight off the top, their sales numbers would go up, because their callers have a higher probability (perhaps) of contacting an interested buyer.
That should be, "how does this impact telemarketing businesses negatively at all."
It seems that what they're basically saying is that they'll lose sales they would have made from people who don't to hear from them. i.e. they resent losing the chance to bludgeon, con and harrass unwilling people into buying. Which sounds pretty much in character to me...
On one hand, it makes their business -harder- in that they cannot tell their employer (the person who actually has the thing that they're trying to sell) that they contacted all 250 million residents of the country (or however many there are nowadays).
On the other hand, like you and somebody else have already mentioned, their sales figures should go through the roof, called 40 million homes, made 18 million sales. They should be able to cut their staff to shreds (that whole "loss of jobs" thing...) and still make the same number of sales. Now, since they're probably paid by the call rather than by the sale their revenue is going to drop until they figure out that anal sphincters do not a good necklace make, and start taking a cut of sales, rather than just showing how much work they had to do.
There are those who would consider the original law as frivilous.
I mean, here are people who pay for phone service that allow incoming calls from strangers and *gasp!* get called by strangers!
I'm so sick of people whining to the federal government at every slightest inconvenience.
I mean, here are people who pay for phone service that allow incoming calls from strangers and *gasp!* get called by strangers!
The fact the service allows you to be called by strangers don't necessarily means that you want to be called by strangers.
By the way, would you like to buy replacement windows?
There are those who would consider the original laws as frivilous.
I mean, here are people who walk down a street where they could get shot down by strangers and *gasp!* get shot down by strangers!
I'm so sick of people whining to the federal police at every slightest inconvenience.