VocaLabs SectorPulse: Mobile Phones XV

VocaLabs SectorPulse: Mobile Phones XV July 19, 2007 This Report Covers: Based on data collected during the three months ending June 30, 2007 952-941-6580 www.vocalabs.com

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 1 Introduction VocaLabs SectorPulse reports compare the customer service quality for different companies in the same industry, using data and call statistics from the companies customers. This report is based on data collected between April 2007 and June 30 th, 2007. SectorPulse reports for the Mobile Phone industry are published quarterly. This Executive Summary provides an overview and historical context for some of the key statistics we track on the companies we cover. We do not attempt to discover the root causes for any particular trend or score, or make specific recommendations about how individual companies can improve. Such an analysis would require much more data than we gather for this product, and a much deeper understanding of the particulars of each company s operations. On Top was the only company of the four we track which didn t slip this quarter, and the company landed at the top of our ranking by virtue of not falling behind., which held top honors in the March quarter, dropped from all A s to all B s. Letter grades are based on a company s relative ranking as compared to all companies in VocaLabs historical benchmark database, and range from A to D. In this study, raw scores for Caller Satisfaction varied from +10 to +34, and raw scores for Call Completion varied from 63% to 85%. These differences are statistically significant, and indicate a substantial variation in the quality of customers experiences from the four companies. Changes in letter grades from our prior SectorPulse Mobile Phones report are: 180 Customer Responses 81 Customer Responses 95 Customer Responses 123 Customer Responses Caller Satisfaction C D B B Call Completion B D B (formerly Cingular) dropped to a C in Caller Satisfaction from an A, and was unchanged in Call Completion with a B. slipped from a C to a D in Caller Satisfaction, and remained at a D in Call Completion. earned all B s, a drop from all A s last quarter. dropped to a B in Caller Satisfaction, down from an A in our last report, and improved in Call Completion from a B to an A. Common customer complaints we observed across all companies include difficulty in connecting to an agent and automated systems that were difficult to use and navigate. Long hold times and poorly trained agents were common complaints in most of the systems. Process Overview Vocal Laboratories Inc. draws participants for SectorPulse from about 80,000 individuals recruited from across the U.S. and Canada. VocaLabs panelists who are customers of one of

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 2 the companies included in this study were asked to participate by completing a survey before calling their wireless company s customer service; calling customer service through VocaLabs server to record call statistics; and then completing a second survey after the call. The data in this Executive Summary is primarily statistical data from the questionnaires and phone calls. Some of our discussion relies on qualitative analysis derived from free response answers. The complete raw data from this study are available by subscription from VocaLabs. Survey Responses The number of responses we ve been receiving for our surveys have been volatile for the past several quarters, and were lower in the June quarter than in the March quarter. We don t have a good understanding of this volatility yet, though the number of surveys responses for is worryingly low. We re confident, however, that s grades fairly reflect the company s performance in our survey, given the wide gap which exists between s performance and the other three companies. Cingular/ Reflecting the company s rebranding, this quarter we changed Cingular to in this report. Given that there used to be a separate company called Wireless which we tracked, this could result in some confusion for our readers. On all our historical graphs, the line labeled represents Cingular up to the time of the Cingular/ merger, and combined data for Cingular and after the time of the merger. Historical data for the independent Wireless is used to calculate industry averages, but, for clarity, is not shown on the graphs. iphone Introduction The highly-anticipated iphone went on sale in the last two days of this survey period, and we anticipate that this launch could cause some customer churn, service issues as works to absorb the new subscribers, and possibly changes to customer service at other companies as a competitive response. The data for this quarter doesn t include enough survey responses post-iphone to see any effect from this product; however, we will be watching future reports to see what impact, if any, it has on the industry.

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 3 Caller Satisfaction VocaLabs Caller Satisfaction benchmark is based on participant responses to the question, How Satisfied were you with your overall experience? The raw score is calculated as the percent of Very Satisfied callers minus the percent of Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied callers. The Caller Satisfaction benchmark can theoretically range from +100 to 100, and negative scores mean that more callers were dissatisfied than very satisfied. The best score in our historical database is +64, and the worst score is -63. The median Caller Satisfaction score is 21. Raw Satisfaction Score 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Current Caller Satisfaction 0 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0-5 Jan. 2004 Mar. 2004 Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 All four companies lost ground in their Satisfaction scores this quarter, after an improvement in all four in the March 2007 quarter. Industry average scores have improved substantially since we first started collecting data in 2004, but there s very little overall change since the beginning of 2006. Raw Satisfaction Score Caller Satisfaction History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 4 Call Completion VocaLabs Call Completion benchmark is based on the percent of callers who were able to complete the task they set out to do in a single call. It is the percentage of callers who both reported being able to accomplish their goal in the call, and who made only one call during the study. The Call Completion benchmark can range from 0% to 100%. In our historical database, Call Completion scores range from 29% to 94%, with a median of 80%. Single Call Completion 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% Current Call Completion Verizon,, and all posted nearly identical Call Completion scores in the high 70 s to low 80 s. The changes from last quarter are not statistically significant. lags far behind the other three companies, as it has done since mid- 2005. 65% 60% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% Jan. 2004 Mar. 2004 Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 Overall, we have not observed any statistically meaningful trend for the industry average in call completion since we began tracking the industry. Single Call Completion Call Completion History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 5 Automation Rate Encouraging callers to use self-service systems is a common strategy for reducing the operating costs of a customer service operation, and when done well, it can also lead to an improvement in overall satisfaction and call completion. Our calculated automation rate is the percentage of customers in the study who reported that they did not need to talk to an agent and also reported completing their task. This customer-centric measure is distinct from common call-centric measures like IVR containment which simply measure the percent of calls which remain inside an automated system. We do not issue letter grades for call automation, but this quarter s automation rates between 49% and 62% of calls. This range is statistically significant, though the gaps between,, and represent a statistical tie. We note that significantly reversed its trend towards declining automation this quarter. 65% 63% 61% 59% 57% 55% 53% 51% 49% 47% 45% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 Automation Rate Current Automation Rate Automation Rate Automation Rate History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 6 Caller Frustration Many customer service operations intentionally place roadblocks in front of callers attempting to bypass automated systems and talk to a live agent. Our research has shown that this leads to customer dissatisfaction and multiple calls to resolve the same problem, while having only a small impact on a company s automation rate. We asked each caller how difficult it was to talk to a live person, and calculated the Caller Frustration Rate as the percentage of callers who reported it was Difficult, Very Difficult, or that they could not reach an agent at all. Callers who reported that they did not need to talk to an agent (that is, they were able to accomplish their task through automation) are excluded from this calculation. A lower frustration score means that callers found it easier to reach a live agent. Because of the way the Frustration scores are calculated, this tends to be a noisy measurement which can vary a lot from quarter to quarter due to statistical fluctuation. Over time, the industry average Frustration Rate has been fairly consistently around 20%, and the fluctuations at Frustration Rate 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 Current Frustration Rate individual companies this quarter are generally not statistically significant. Frustration Rate Frustration Rate History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 7 Average Call Time The Average Call Time is the time it took callers to either complete their tasks or give up. When the same person made multiple calls, we added the call times together in order to provide the most accurate measure of the resources each company spends handling each customer contact. Industry average call times have generally been between four and six minutes, though in the December 2004 quarter Wireless average call time soared to well over ten minutes (note that the graph no longer shows Wireless pre-merger with Cingular, though the old data is still used for calculating historical industry averages). The long-term trend has been toward shorter average call time. When we first began tracking this statistic at the beginning of 2004, the average call time was about 6.5 minutes, and this quarter it was about 4.5 minutes. Call times this quarter were generally similar to those observed in the March quarter, with no significant change at individual companies or in the industry average. 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 Jan. 2004 Mar. 2004 Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 Average Call Time (minutes) Current Average Call Time Average Call Time (minutes) Average Call Time History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 8 Customer Loyalty We measured customer loyalty both before and after the phone call by asking study participants how likely they are to switch mobile phone providers in the next year. There were five choices, ranging from Very Likely to Very Unlikely. The numerical loyalty score is the average of all customers responses, with +2 being Very Unlikely to switch carriers, and 2 being Very Likely to switch carriers in the next 12 months. The data shown on this page is based on data collected before the phone call. Loyalty can be influenced by many things, including how satisfied a caller is with their service, how long a customer is locked into a contract, and what options are available from competing carriers. and (formerly Cingular) have consistently scored highest for customer loyalty, though this quarter posted a large gain and tied with for second place. Historically, has often posted relatively low customer loyalty despite its generally good satisfaction scores. 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0-0.1 Jun. 2004 Sep. 2004 Dec. 2004 Mar. 2005 Jun. 2005 Sep. 2005 Dec. 2005 Mar. 2006 Jun. 2006 Sep. 2006 Dec. 2006 Mar. 2007 Jun. 2007 Customer Loyalty (pre-call) Current Customer Loyalty Customer Loyalty (pre-call) Customer Loyalty History Industry Average

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 9 Reasons for Calling We asked each study participant to provide us the reason why he or she needed to call customer service. Several different options were given to the participants, as well as the opportunity to volunteer more information or a reason other than the ones supplied. The reasons were similar for each company, with the majority of calls in all cases being informational: either to get account-specific information (such as minutes available, account balances, etc.) or rate and plan information. Historically, the top two reasons for calling have been consistent across all the companies we track, and have changed little from quarter to quarter. shorter and less complicated call than resolving a technical problem. We also note that at three of the four companies, Resolve a Billing Problem is the third most common reason for calling. These are likely to be long, complex, and expensive calls, and it may be wise for the major carries to invest in discovering why so many consumers seem to be having problems with their bills. Because the reasons for calling were similar among the four carriers, we are satisfied that it is reasonable to compare the data on the four companies gathered in this report. The type of call can affect many of the comparisons we make, since some types of calls are inherently more difficult to handle than others. For example, getting an account balance is always going to be a Reasons for Calling Get Account Information (39%) Get Plan/Rate Information (30%) Resolve a Billing Problem (8%) Pay a Bill (8%) Get Account Information (48%) Get Plan/Rate Information (19%) Resolve a Billing Problem (15%) Get Account Information (51%) Get Plan/Rate Information (22%) Pay a Bill (8%) Get Account Information (54%) Get Plan/Rate Information (22%) Resolve a Billing Problem (8%)

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 10 Common Complaints In the survey after the phone call we provided callers with a free response section where they could volunteer additional information about their experience. Participants offered both positive and negative feedback, and the bulk of complaints across all four companies fell into three distinct categories: Poor Agent Training/Skills The person was overly bubbly.. to the point of annoying The person could not help me with my service question and did not offer any further suggestions. He was ready to say goodnight without resolving my issue or referring me to someone who could help. have a dept. that could handle all problems instead if switching you repeatedly and still not get to speak to correct person Can t Use/Understand/Navigate Automated Systems Make the automation more user-friendly. I had to repeat my cell phone 3xs. Finally, I had to put my number in manually. and then asked me again. This seemed redundant. Difficulty in Connecting to an Agent There was no option to speak to an operator to ask questions right away. They just sent me to a website to answer my questions. they should add customer service to their list of numbers to push in the beginning; it seems to take forever before you re able to get to a person... I have to say customer service repeatedly before the automated service transfers. I attempted to talk to a person twice and the first time was disconnected and heard a dial tone, the second time went to the wrong menu. Waited too long for live person. I live and work in a noisy environment so it would be very helpfull if I could simply use the keypad of my phone to get the information I need from the automated system. I would like it to be so I don t have to enter my phone number twice. I don t know why it asked me for my phone #, connected me to a new system,

SectorPulse Mobile XV, July 19 2007 Page 11 Conclusion The mobile phone industry has been bringing up its overall customer satisfaction scores over the past several years, as our long-term trendlines show, but things can still be better. The introduction of the iphone at the tail end of our survey period may have an impact on future quarters scores, as this highly anticipated product could stir up churn and induce carriers other than to rethink their customer service as a competitive response. In particular, we think that there is a lot of room to improve single call completion rates, since the industry as a whole is below the median in our historical database. This hurts both expenses and customer satisfaction, since customers who have to call back tend to rate the experience lower. Industry Recommendations This Executive Summary is not intended to provide specific suggestions for improving the customer service at the companies we cover. That said, there are some suggestions which we think can be generally applied: Make Live Agents More Available Long hold times and difficulties reaching a live agent are the biggest driver of poor satisfaction scores, and this problem needs to be attacked through a combination of better automation (see below) and proper staffing. In the final analysis, there is no replacement for warm bodies answering the telephone. they are as effective and enticing for callers as possible. This will also help reduce hold times (see above). We have consistently found that customers prefer to use self-service for routine questions. Related VocaLabs Products VocaLabs SectorPulse: Mobile Phones Survey Data Complete survey data from this and/or future studies. VocaLabs SectorPulse: Mobile Phones Custom Survey Client-defined questionnaire on future studies; data is proprietary to the client. VocaLabs Express Feedback Ongoing monitoring of a customer service operation with real-time call recordings and survey data. VocaLabs Custom Studies Client-defined evaluation of a customer service operation VocaLabs Automation Evaluation Client-defined evaluation of a prototype automated system Improve Automated Systems All the companies we studied have invested in automated systems to help answer routine questions and reduce the call volume for live agents. These systems are generating a significant number of complaints, and should be tuned up to ensure that