Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Perfect Example of crowdSpring customer (Dis)Service

The best part of this post below is the complete disregard for customers. Knowing this is all over the internet crowdSpring does not attempt to seem gracious or write a response that will be mass appealing to future customers to give them reassurance that they are a company that can be trusted.

Rather, in keeping with crowdSpring tradition, they respond to customer complaints with a shortsighted, "I'm right, you're wrong", nanner nanner nanner approach.

This is a perfect example of why YOU THE READER should do business elsewhere. Sure the Spec model raises many concerns, but even more than that is the disregard for customers, the unethical business practices, and as many posts and article point out poor management. Many articles, blogs point to co-founder Mike Samson as setting that tone, we encourage you to read up on crowdSpring before doing any business there. 99designs is a solid alternative.

  1. Audree Rowe says:
    Hi Brian,
    My name is Audree, and I am the community liaison at crowdSPRING. In reading this post,
    I felt it was important that we set the record straight. Kathleen is correct that she
    was removed from our community, however, there are several points in this article that are
    completely untrue and I hope you will publish this comment for all to see.
    Kathleen claims that her account was deactivated for the “heinous crime of questioning staff”
    when in reality her account was removed from crowdSPRING for violations of our user
    agreement after several warnings to her that her behavior was unacceptable.
    She goes on to say that we “threatened to deny [her] recent award selection” when in
    fact we sent her a letter to let her know that if she had awarded entries, we would
    help her to complete those projects and make sure she was paid. And, when one of
    her entries was ultimately awarded, we completed the project for her and she was
    paid on the same day that the buyer gave final approval of the project.
    Quite simply, this article was written by a disgruntled user. There are many angry
    people who like to vent on the internet. What we find most surprising is that you,
    Brian, would give merit to these lies without even contacting us to check if the facts
    were correct. We understand you do not like our business model, but giving a voice to
    false facts is unprofessional and sad.
  2. brianyerkes says:
    If you disagree with giving a voice to disgruntled users as you have clearly stated in your
    comment, then you are simply proving my opinion of CrowdSpring’s dictatorial philosophies
    to be incredibly accurate.
    Your support and argument for your employer would have been much better served if you
    responded to the questions Kathleen raises about the CS staff, the questionable staff awards etc.
  3. JohnT says:
    We understand you do not like our business model, but giving a voice to false facts is
    unprofessional and sad.
    We only have YOUR very vague claim that the facts contained in Kathleen’s letter
    are false. Accordingly, an employee of CrowdSPRING calling out someone else as being
    “unprofessional” is in of itself, unprofessional. And sad.

1 comment:

  1. Excellent Job! Thanks for creating a sensible topic that suits the taste of your readers. Keep up the good Work.

    offshore company