The wrong way to "personalize" your startup's welcome e-mail
blaketech.wordpress.com
blaketech.wordpress.com
First, is it really that big a deal you got an email that looked like it was from someone personally but may have been automated (in fact you never proved that it was automated)?
Second, are you really that bothered that a company whose product is helpdesk ticketing software uses helpdesk ticketing software to manage customer correspondence?
Third, are you really that bothered by the informality of a web company?
The only mistake I saw here was using staff that are probably outsourced and certainly not native English speakers to handle sales questions.
(2) Again, related to the point above. I'm not bothered by the fact that they are using their software to manage their correspondence, I'm bothered that they tried to pretend they weren't. If I had sent an unsolicited e-mail I would have expected a prompt automated reply. But I didn't send an unsolicited e-mail, rather they reached out to me with questions and a misrepresentation of their knowledge of my company's website.
(3) I made it clear that it wasn't my style but that I understand how others may like it. And I don't agree with the implication that all "web companies" should be measured on different standards/metrics than brick-and-mortar companies.
I guess with point (3), you can't have your cake and eat it too - you either have formal but impersonal or informal but personal. Web companies often opt for the latter, because engagement with customers as real people has proved to be a great long-term strategy.
That by itself is not the big deal - plenty of emails are automated yet written in a personal manner (Dear Mr. Smith, etc etc) - but this one was deliberately deceptive. It purported to have looked at the customer's website, when it all likelihood nothing of the sort happened.
That's what left a bad taste in my mouth from the whole thing - it's scummy and misleading, hardly something you'd want to project onto your potential customers.
I don't disagree with the sincerity issue, but again, it only appears insincere to you.
It's about the fact that they practically lied in their communication about what they have done - sure, this isn't especially scandalous, but it is low.
If they had some canned stuff like "we're sure you're doing great things, and would love to work with you individually to tailor our product to your needs... yadi yada" that'd be a-ok.
But they had a bot pretend that they actually visited my site and looked at my company's offerings... that's pretty lame.
Calling a response to any sort of support mail a "ticket" is pretty common as well and certainly not worthy of offense.
Then again, I don't run a business, so the costs of localizing customer support and "fit and finish" for Zendesk may be justified by the benefit.
The Grand Finale was pretty weak though. I have no idea what ICE Webinar is, and whether it relates to the poster's business. That's a separate issue. But to choose poor (OK, really poor) grammar as the Grand Finale is ungracious. There are many non-native speakers working on the web and in cube farms; cut them the same slack you'd mostly get if you were walking around in their country.
Not surprised they're using gutter tactics like faux personal emails.