One More Eastlink Thing

Here’s the response I received from Eastlink regarding my cable outlet quandry:

Thank you.  Your email is important to us and will be addressed within 3 business days.  If your concern is urgent please call us at 453-2800 or toll free at 1-888-345-1111.

Why is this considered acceptable?

If I telephone Eastlink, which is much less convenient for me (mostly because I’ll have to wait on hold for 10 minutes), and much more expensive for them (because they have to pay for me to wait on hold, and because they have to have enough operators on duty to ensure that I’m not waiting forever), they would respond “immediately.”

However for some reason if I email them, which is quick and easy for me, and presumably much easier for them to handle because it’s cheaper, easier to schedule, and can be routed to a much broader collection of support staff, they need 3 business days to answer.

How come?


Joey Brieno's picture
Joey Brieno on January 29, 2003 - 13:05 Permalink

How come, may I suggest, is the question alright, but it’s too easy for a man of your talents :-)

What should they do? Then perhaps the question would become, “why don’t they do something like that?”

Am I becoming annoying?

lana's picture
lana on January 29, 2003 - 13:25 Permalink

Want some cheese with that whine?

Joey Brieno's picture
Joey Brieno on January 29, 2003 - 13:50 Permalink

What’s whining? The article or the comment?

Joey Brieno's picture
Joey Brieno on January 29, 2003 - 13:51 Permalink

I now realize that I missed a couple of quote marks, it should have read:

How come”, may I suggest, is…

Daniel's picture
Daniel on January 29, 2003 - 17:34 Permalink

Didn’t Peter clearly infer that email should be responded to immediately following receipt? This is the way they deal with you on the phone, so why is the email contact any different. All they need is a computer sitting next to the phone personnel and someone checks the mail every five minutes and responds to the emails. It’s that simple. And yes, Brieno, you are getting annoying.

Kermit's picture
Kermit on January 29, 2003 - 21:07 Permalink

Of course he is Daniel — it is what he does.

Joey Brieno's picture
Joey Brieno on January 30, 2003 - 00:53 Permalink

Hey Pete, have you ever finished that ‘grade level’ filter? Seems the boyz’d like it set for luke warm.

Flimbel's picture
Flimbel on January 30, 2003 - 00:56 Permalink

Lie down JB, they miss your point…n ot worth it..

Fuddle Duddle's picture
Fuddle Duddle on January 30, 2003 - 01:49 Permalink

A better filter would delete arrogrance.

Joe Brieno's picture
Joe Brieno on May 21, 2003 - 20:07 Permalink

Hey Joey Brieno. My name is also Joe Brieno and I am doing research on this last name. If you have any information that could help me on this task you can email me at Thank you.