Charlie Rose

mc_freeman  06/30/2009 07:43 AM Report

Almost never mentioned by Mr. Seidenberg was the word "customer". Almost all references were made towards either his board or the "network". He talked about adding value to the network but he did not show any direct interest in adding value for customers.

This perfectly reflects why customer service is so bad at Verizon. There is almost no focus on the end user as a priority. VZW reflects a "we are the biggest so deal with it" mentality that in the end will present the biggest challenge to its future growth as barriers drop (4G, device portability, etc...).

The reason why competition has not yet forced better focus on customer service is the fact that all of the network carriers come from semi-monopoly models (for any one user, how many viable choices for TV, voice, data lines are there? Not many) and switching costs for mobile is very high (contract termination, and technology barrier).

Mr. Seidenberg would do VZW a big service, by spending some time studying Zappos.com and their culture.

v-nice  06/25/2009 09:21 PM Report

Too many softball questions in this interview regarding Verizon's business. I was expecting more discussion regarding the net neutrality debate.

nachtengel  06/25/2009 08:44 PM Report

In this interview I saw a very unsure man speaking with a great sense of uncertainty, and I would be shocked if Ivan wasn't relieved of his duties at Verizon within the year.

Apple has created one of the greatest cradle to grave software/hardware structures in the mobile industry, ever. It will never be matched. Not by Verizon/Motorola, not by anyone on this scale ever. Love it or hate it, there are more quality apps, and most importantly the ability to p0wn your phone left open for fanboys. It's the best of all worlds.

I have personally worked with Motorola, and they are 1000% incapable of releasing a device to compete with the iphone hardware and/or software wise, let alone the creation of their distro network. Motorola are a huge, way to heavy company for 2009, and make most of their money selling poorly made (and very very un-green) phones to 3rd world countries. It wouldn't surprise me to see them looking for gov handouts in the coming years as well, particularly as the EU and Asia impose more green standards for electronics in the coming years (and hopefully India/Africa will wise up as well).

And then there is 4th Gen, which is what everyone changes the subject to when someone asks them how will they ever make back the billions spent on the bandwidth/hardware for 3rd Gen. It's a joke. 4th Gen will come not by their pushing pushing pushing some non standard networks, but more naturally from the invention of things that are not even in their mix. People will demand mesh networks, and cloud computing in 4th gen phones, and these things are not even on anyones radar now as they are too open and uncontrollable (for making profits).

As for FIOS, I have been waiting for 4 years in a major part of Brooklyn, but still no word to this day. By the time it comes, I imagine newer technologies will appear on the market.

TridentPRO  06/25/2009 12:05 PM Report

I've been following telco history for a while and clearly recall Bell of PA promising in the late 80's to bring fiber to the curb by 1996, not 2001 as Mr. Seidenberg suggests. And while Verizon is tearing up vast trunks of copper laid but never used under Philadelphia's Broad St. (and passing those costs on to consumers), I still can't get FIOS service to my relatively affluent urban neighborhood, a few blocks from the old B of PA HQ. Let's see. What else can't I get?

It's been raining here and the old copper junction box in the middle of my street is a rat's nest of bad splices that go out when the weather gets bad, so until tonight, my high speed internet had been mostly off 5 evenings running. While I could get a Vodafone chip to use overseas on unlocked Moto phones, there's no Verizon tech solution to get those same phones on to the proprietary Verizon network. Seidenberg's assertion that the phone makers pick and choose their networks is a little disingenuous. Telco(network and device) technologies leapfrog over previous iterations and provide jarring rather than smooth upgrade paths. If computer co's followed the same fitful model, can you imagine how few of today's (taken for granted) computing advances we’d have?

Verizon's tech support and trouble ticket resolution is often infuriating if you're a power user and I can only assume even moreso if you're not. Their upselling on FIOS packages confused the heck out of my senior citizen parents resulting in services they didn't need and hefty charges they didn't expect. It bordered on deceptive.

Seidenberg promised to roll out G4 later this year. I'm waiting to see how long it really takes and what I'll have to give up to get it. Like all of the second/third/fourth generation Baby Bell reincarnates this is still a company that only reacts when spurred by what little competition it gets. But since post-divestiture, it remains a quasi-monopoly and is largely unconcerned about competition, its primary business model is driven mostly by amortization schedules of its aging but expensive infrastructure. Consumer clamor for choice, open architecture and state-of-the-art services take a distant third as a business driver. At least in Europe and Asia, government oversight of and investment in their telco monopolies drives innovation that we stateside won't see for years. Telemedicine and other futuristic bandwidth on demand services that Seidenberg was riffing on are concepts that have been around since the 80's. Though their service is fairly reliable, it used to be better. This not a company on the cusp of the telecommunications revolution, rather it has been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. In this business sector only two things spur innovation—government oversight or true competition. Since Verizon has neither, it is content to stay its uninspired course.

BDABEST  06/24/2009 09:47 PM Report

My VZW services & LG phone has been a life saver as I naviigate unempolyment and its accompanying problems. I rely on it for a host of utilities, internet, sole contact, etc. Therefore, I look forward to Seidenberg's vision. However, as a dislocated Detroiter now living in Flint, MI, it is true that poorer areas are under served by VZW. I am 20 miles out of range for MobileTV, for example. Customer service is powerless and seems disinclined to resolve the problem. Seidenberg should reconsider his inner city/suburban penetration strategy.

neodonald  06/23/2009 10:32 PM Report

Charlie should invite both Motorola CEOs (both Greg Brown and Sanjay Jha) for an interview and ask them what went wrong with this iconic company that actuall pioneered the cell-phone.

msw  06/23/2009 04:58 PM Report

I'm a former Verizon customer. The only reason I'm not a current Verizon customer is due to horrible, horrible customer service. Now there is a nice new Verizon fiber optic cable outside my door that I refuse to hook up until the company gets is customer service act together. There is more to the equation than just having the best technology... I hope they get it.

RWillis  06/23/2009 04:12 PM Report

As someone who travels internationally quite often, I can attest to the problems of cell phone inconveniences in Europe. Things have improved over the last couple of years (I'm a Verizon wireless customer), but it is still insanely expensive to make cell phone calls outside of the US. Hopefully, Verizon will correct this before an even less convenient alternative appears. Buying a prepaid phone just for travel becomes maddening. Renting a phone is another idiotic idea. Business is increasingly international. If Verizon recognizes this, they could capitalize on a huge opportunity here. I'm sure there are many more potential customers out there who encounter this same problem. I've had countless conversations during flights abroad about this very thing.

REMant  06/23/2009 10:48 AM Report

I've been a Verizon internet customer for quite a while and FIOS user since it became available about 4 yrs ago. As was indicated they really had no choice in the matter. DSL was not competitive. They are and always have been a good provider, and a good value, but they have never been able to create a clear, sensible and easily navigated website, and their tech support, which once was very good, is now virtually non-existent and extremely frustrating for knowledgeable users with important questions. They once offered the best UseNet server among ISP's, but about 2 yrs ago, after letting it go to hell for the better part of a year, cut the binary groups on it, ostensibly because of pressure from copyright complaints, but probably as much because they didn't want the competition with their new TV service. I suspect they will continue in this vein, and they have already been making noise about heavy users. This is just, but my download speed fell 5% they day they began "cloud computing" recently, not that I'm complaining, since it still seems to be more b/w than I'm paying for. If I were he tho I'd worry a great deal about what is going to happen when all those lead acid batteries they installed with the FIOS system will need replacement in a few years, which homeowners probably have no idea about, and most, no place to purchase.

I think his health care ideas are good as far as they go, but he needs to figure out how to find the money to cover the uninsured, at least initially, and how to keep health care costs from continuing to escalate. Healthcare is not just a matter of creating a bigger and better "network," as long as insurance creates essentially a flat-fee problem similar to what he has with b/w use. Flat-fees are great when you are trying to create a mkt; not great when you are trying to make it efficient.

As to Charlie's closing remark, I think should be clear to most unbiased observers that we have been slipping behind many other countries in this area the past decade as we had in telecommunications generally for the preceding several. I would also like to point out that Dick Tracy wore an even smaller version of an iPhone on his wrist, but it is only in recent years that we have been able to produce the components to make it possible.