[nanoservices]

There is zero incentive for a company to invest in tooling and tech to make processes that lose them customers more efficient. This is something that has to be regulated and enforced. I just don't see a c-suit clamoring to spend money on making it easier to leave.

[tialaramex]

There is a reason to invest in this, the rationale goes as follows: Some of my customers will legitimately need to cancel, unsubscribe, stop using, or whatever, but they like the product. If I piss these customers off, they may recommend against using it, and refuse to ever use it again so I should accept that they're leaving with grace and maybe they'll return later. You can offer to "pause" a subscription for example, "Posted to Amundsen-Scott† for six months? Alas Swim Fun Inc don't have a pool there, but when you get back just hit resume and you can keep the same pricing, meanwhile we won't charge you".

But far too many "business leaders" are focused on short term gains at any cost and so this doesn't compute for them. They don't care that you currently like the product and would resubscribe when you get back from the pole, because that's a year or more away, they care about next quarter, and if you aren't income next quarter you're irrelevant to them, fuck you.

† Amundsen-Scott is the name of the base at the South Pole of the planet. It's a cool place. But lots of services aren't available there or would make no sense. You can't live there permanently, so those people are coming back.

[usrbinnooo]

I was pretty sure we'd abandoned the "but it would hurt the business and they'd change their ways" fantasy years ago, because a) it doesn't, and be) they don't. How's Equifax doing these days? Oh yeah, totally fine.

[mau013]

This.

In my case I enjoy reading The Economist and do not mind paying for it, but some years back I had to cancel my subscription (I was cutting back on expenses) and honestly I found that experience so much against the business values they preach that it has made me not subscribe again, even if it means not reading their publication.

(Every few years I go to check if they have made it easier to unsubscribe, but last time I checked they still had the same practices)

Edit: I can also imagine that I’m a minority and so it really pays off to keep doing this.

[acdha]

I have a good example of this dynamic using Comcast: when we left New Haven, I had to spend a couple hours in line at a dingy, poorly staffed office terminating my account (the dude working there was fine, he needed coworkers) and then a couple months of “accidentally” still billing me. They could afford to be sloppy on billing and cancellation where I’d lived because in 2008 the competition was (I am not making this up) 128kpbs ISDN and 768-1Mbps DSL since the phone company had badly neglected its wiring.

In addition to being illegal, this was short sighted because they’re a national company. Comcast/Xfinity is one of three gigabit choices in my neighborhood and they periodically send offers with competitive pricing but each time I remember what dealing with them was like and toss it into the shredder. I’m sure the regional office would say they’re better run than the New England one, or that they have a better system, but I’m not going to find out, and there’s no way they skimped enough to save more than they could have made with over a decade of service in a new region.

[unsupp0rted]

The harder they make leaving, the less % chance that I'm ever coming back.

But I suppose they know and don't care.

[intended]

I am also very surprised that this is the case in the UK. From my experience, it was very easy to cancel internet in the UK. As in nearly dead simple.