Why it's Microsoft to go

I will be the first to admit that I have had a disproportionate response to a bad experience with Microsoft, but I want to write about it because I think it is an example of how big companies are constrained by process, fail to understand their own product set and are nonchalant when it comes to customer attitude. My disproportionate response is never to buy from Microsoft ever again. I'm already transferring the content of a book I am writing from Word onto Google docs and setting up Gmail to replace Outlook. I've cancelled my Family Office account and come October, with the exception of Linked In, I'll be disconnected from Microsoft. Hallelujah. I never used to be like that. It shows how quickly bad service can tip you over the edge.

So what happened? For years I used a service called Skype-to-go. Whilst Skype from the app has been dodgy for some time, Skye-to-go allowed you to call from a landline to another landline in another country. The calls were as good as any local call from the home phone. When I lived in Australia I used it to call relatives in the UK. Now we live in the UK we use it to call relatives in Australia.

The key benefit was that you registered your phone, then had local numbers allocated for each person you wanted to call. To call my mother in law I had a local London number. We had two more London numbers for my two sisters in law. We programmed our phones to call those local numbers and didn't worry about the cost.

The calls were covered in a Skype calling package, that offered unlimited calls to Australia for ￡176 per year. We only ever called using that package from the home phone, using Skype-to-go.

Earlier this year, calls on Skype-to-Go started dropping out, normally after about 15 or 20 minutes. It was annoying, and contacts with the Microsoft help centre did nothing to fix the problem. In fact, an increasing number of people online were also complaining, with some suggesting that Microsoft didn't know how to fix the problem. The Skype product manager who knew all this stuff will have been long gone.

So, how did Microsoft eventually fix the problem. They shut down Skype-to-go, at very short notice. In fact, no attempt was made to contact me. The first we noticed was when my wife tried to call her mum at the weekend and couldn't get through.

I scouted around and found another service, LocalPhone, that does the same thing. I assigned a heap of new local numbers and reprogrammed the home phone to call LocalPhone numbers rather than the old Skype-to-go numbers.

Then I got in touch with Skype for a refund. I assumed it would be easy. After all, they closed the service, I still have half a year of my ￡176 calling package left. I expected they might even pay a bit more for the inconvenience, to keep me sweet. Remember, this is a company that raked in $168 billion last year,

Sadly, Microsoft saw things differently. They say the calling package still operates and I can just use my mobile with the Skype app. If I wanted to do that I wouldn't have programmed all those numbers in Skype-to-go.

The problem is, Microsoft see Skype-to-go and calling subscriptions as two standalone products. They told me so. Yet, you can't use Skype-to-go without buying some sort of calling package. That's hardly standalone.

So, having difficulty making the point, I resorted to an analogy. Imagine you couldn't get out the house, so you signed up for a meal home-delivery service. Then, having paid a year in advance, the home-delivery company says they can't deliver any more, and refuse any form of refund because you can always drive round and pick up the meals. That's my situation. I can't use the Skype app because a) Skype calls are pretty crap over the Internet and b) my wifi and mobile coverage in the house isn't great. And, importantly, c) it's not why I bought the calling package. I want to sit on the sofa, using my landline phone, calling relatives. Just as the person wanted his meals delivered.

Fortunately, the billing person at Microsoft got the analogy. But it didn't help.

Basically, the billing person is telling me, it's the rules. He/she even said he/she didn't make the rules, but has to follow them.

Already we've learnt that Microsoft see products as unique silos and can't comprehend the users interoperability between products. Then they have a defined set of conditions they will not move away from, even if they have moved the goalposts. And customer support staff are not able to show any leniency even if they, supposedly, understand how the closure of one product is impacting the use of another.

There have to be so many take-outs from this experience. Why wouldn't Microsoft say, I understand how that makes it difficult for you to use your subscription package, lets pay you 80 quid for half a year's service? I don't get it. It's as though they are deliberately provoking a customer.

Microsoft have been in the consumer game for some time. Surely they understand churn-events and customer lifetime value. As I said, I have had a, perhaps, over-the-top reaction, in that I will never spend another penny with Microsoft.

To show how dysfunctional this behemoth is becoming, the billing rep suggested I tried a charge back on my credit card. In other words, he can't resolve the dispute, so lets get the bank involved. Let's see what their view is on the interoperability between two Microsoft products. There was no answer to my question as to whether that is Microsoft company policy.

If you are in marketing, or product management, what do you take from this. I am a little angry that I have lost money, but I am more angry about how a company can make so much money treating customers this way with what seems to be an uncoordinated product strategy.

I think cases like this are useful for any business, to deep dive and see how, at grass roots, they are treating their customers and how complex issues can become.

Now, can someone start a LinkedIn alternative. Then my Microsoft connection is severed completely.