Crossovers From SGC's Perspective

[benjulmag]

Brian,

Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful response. I agree that it would be irrational for a business trying to attract new customers to let petty bias come in way of "calling it as you see it", and that often you bear the brunt of the "shoot the messenger" mentality. That said, based on substance of the previous thread, it would seem that maybe SGC, to minimize the prospects of future disgruntled customers, should revisit its practice of making sure customers are aware that they have the option to have the card stay in the original holder and not be downgraded. Something seems to have slipped through the cracks with the previous poster and perhaps with more attention to communication future occurrences could be avoided. Maybe one way to accomplish this is before you execute a consented downgrade, you a second time correspond with the customer to reconfirm that he/she is okay with that. Sometimes people might change their minds when they realize that such an outcome is no longer a hypothetical possibility but instead an imminent real occurrence. Also too SGC should be particularly careful not to inadvertently give a prospective customer a false impression of what to expect. I recognize that SGC is not intentionally trying to do that, but sometimes in the zeal to attract new business, poeple can say things that can be misinterpreted. I'm not saying that happened in this instance, only that you should be particularly sensitive to the issue and err on the side of overly pessimistic assessments. It's always nicer when a customer is pleasantly surprised with the results. Whenever I send things to my conservator, he always downplays what to expect. Maybe that is why I keep going back to him.