• (cs) in reply to Nexzus
    Nexzus:
    5:00 PM every Friday immediately screams environment to me. Maybe I've been reading this site too long, but I would have first looked for some janitor unplugging something to plug in his vacuum or some employee turning off some equipment "to save power" over the weekend.

    I couldn't find it, but there was a WTF article last year about a piece of hardware losing power every night. Turns out it was hooked up to an outlet controlled by the light switch.

  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to Brian

    He didn't admit he was wrong. It was marketings fault. They should have passed the info up to their manager and their manager to him (or however many levels of hierarchy) and this should have happened instantaneously even if the cause was someone forgetting something (which clearly you can't own up to until you discover you forgot it).

    The real WTF is CEOs pretending to know everything that takes thousands of man hours a day to accomplish.

  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to Andy

    Coming soon that is usually what I say after browsing to most web pages on the internet.

  • Mike (unregistered) in reply to Evilteach

    Probably would depend what the source page was supposed to be. Was it supposed to be a list of things on sale? Was it supposed to be an e-coupon game or something? Those you can't really do anything about other than through up an "Opps this page isn't available redirecting to our main site" kind of thing.

    The sad thing is conversion: few people bother to go to the site and those that do are probably your best customers or those really comparison shopping (and might be your first interaction with the customer) and your first impression is screwing up. To make it worse you didn't screw up in a store where a manager can come help out, you can drop what you are doing to help out etc. No you screwed up when the customer was 5s away from browsing your competitors site instead.

  • Jazz (unregistered)

    Tech: "Could there be some mistake on your end?” CEO: “That’s impossible! You buffoons screwed the pooch and don’t want to own up to it!"

    Sounds like standard behavior for upper management. Someday, I'm going to corner one of those people who speaks at management conferences and demand an explanation of why being a self-righteous, over-entitled asshole is a mandatory requirement for being a corporate executive. I've yet to hear a good reason why this sort of thinking (must blame someone else, regardless of where blame ACTUALLY lies) is so common in that demographic.

  • Jazz (unregistered) in reply to Mike
    Mike:
    The real WTF is CEOs pretending to know everything

    I think you mean "pretending to know anything."

  • wonkothesane (unregistered)

    Tim still got fired, right?

  • Jazz (unregistered) in reply to Kaso
    Kaso:
    @Raedwald You can be the one who has to explain to the CEO of the biggest client that he has to ring your level 1 support when he has a problem.

    Nobody should have to explain to a CEO that he's a human like everyone else. One would think that the giant sack of skin, hair, and fluids tucked into the suit would probably tip him off.

  • (cs) in reply to Evilteach
    Evilteach:
    Um. Would it have been possible to create a redirect at the incorrect url?
    The URL in the story didn't just not exist, it was intended to direct customers to non-existent content.
  • Beta (unregistered) in reply to arh
    arh:
    [This story] should have continued with the developer saying "don't worry, we're in this together; I'll do whatever it takes to implement your campaign ASAP", becoming the hero of the day and ensuring many more years of lucrative business with Super Mega Foods.

    I'd follow with "...but before we get started, could I just bring my manager and VP and CEO in on this call, so that we can give them a status update?"

    And if I had time before I woke up from this fantasy, there are things I'd rather do than ensure "years of lucrative business" with this client. Maybe involving hacking a satellite to stop a nuclear time-bomb, with the assistance of Angelina Jolie and/or Wonder Woman.

  • Kasper (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The other WTF is these small fry companies who are almost 100% dependent on one large company to the point where they kowtow to the whims of that company. If you would go out of business if you lost one client, and are therefore unable to fire said client for the inevitable unreasonable demands they will make, chances are you don't deserve to be in business in the first place.
    If a new customer shows up willing to pay you more money than all your other customers combined, would you say no? From a business point of view, the right strategy try your best to secure that customer. But you need to pay attention to the profit. You don't want to secure yourself a deal with high revenue, high expenses but only small profit. If that customer pays 60% of your revenue, but only 5% of your profit, then you are in trouble.

    When you get a deal with such a large customer, you of course need to be prepared to downsize. Committing yourself to ongoing expenses without ensuring the ongoing revenue is a high risk. Don't risk the future of the company just because you want to secure a large customer. If the customer knows they can drive the vendor into bankruptcy, then that customer will have a pretty strong position in future negotiations.

    If the contract gives a good profit and you are still able to downsize should it fail, then saving up some of that profit will allow you to commit yourself to more expenses at little risk. But rather than just saving, some of that profit could be invested in securing an even bigger customer. Hopefully the first big customer can be a good reference.

  • jay (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The other WTF is these small fry companies who are almost 100% dependent on one large company to the point where they kowtow to the whims of that company. If you would go out of business if you lost one client, and are therefore unable to fire said client for the inevitable unreasonable demands they will make, chances are you don't deserve to be in business in the first place.

    Speaking as an employee of a small company that gets half its business from one client:

    When I was interviewing for the job, I figured this out and pointed out the risk that it entailed. The boss replied that they were well aware of the risk and were actively working to broaden their client base. But in the meantime, this is where they were. I ended up deciding that it was an acceptable risk and taking the job.

    Because it's all well and good to say that there are big problems in being too dependent on one client. But what do you suggest that a small start-up company do? If you're running a candy store, sure, you can get a whole bunch of customers who each buy a few dollars worth of stuff, and you're not dependant on any one customer. But if you're in the sort of business where a typical contract is for large amounts of money -- like the software development business -- then in most cases you are going to have to start out with one contract. It's tough enough to get one contract starting out, it would be the rare company that could start out with half a dozen. That would take exceptional connections, careful planning, and probably a lot of luck on the timing. If you do a good job for that first company, they may come back with more and bigger contracts. Do you look for other clients? Of course. But are you going to turn down a contract because it would be too large a share of your business? That would be dumb.

  • jay (unregistered) in reply to jarfil
    jarfil:
    The problem with these people is they never get punished for their behavior, thus just encouraging them to be obnoxious all the time (50% wrong with no consequence + 50% right having everybody do their bidding = asshole all the time).

    I would just fire that client on the spot.

    Captcha: odio. Yes, I hate those odious people.

    Did you catch the part about this client was half their business? Yes, I'm sure it would make you feel good to call the company and tell them, "You bunch of idiots, blaming us for your own mistakes! We're cancelling your contract and we refuse to do business with you ever again! Moron!"

    The smug, satisfied feeling would probably start to wear off as you walked from the cardboard box you soon found yourself living in to the soup kitchen where you eat.

  • Sam (unregistered) in reply to mightybaldking
    mightybaldking:
    Rule #1 in web marketing. The client doesn't make up URLs. Certainly the client is allowed to request them, but NO URL EXISTS until I give it to you.
    But... but... the URL is part of our branding strategy, and we're your customer and you're just a shit shoveling peon so the URL is going to be "dot com masters" because "dot com" is cool and we are going to be the masters. So just do it. Make it happen. We also want first position on google searches. No matter what they're searching for. And none of that H T T P BACKSLASH BACKSLASH nonsense either. Just "dot com masters". Do it.
  • (cs) in reply to Kasper
    Kasper:
    If a new customer shows up willing to pay you more money than all your other customers combined, would you say no? From a business point of view, the right strategy try your best to secure that customer. But you need to pay attention to the profit. You don't want to secure yourself a deal with high revenue, high expenses but only small profit. If that customer pays 60% of your revenue, but only 5% of your profit, then you are in trouble.
    The real trouble happens when that 60% of revenue isn't leading to profit at all, but actually a net loss. Having a profit, even if slender, from the big client means that the business isn't in great health, but it's still viable: lots of small businesses are in that position.

    Of course, what also matters is exactly how the costs are accounted for. Often, a lot of costs are actually features of the overall business, yet if they're balanced against the account of the big client then that account appears to be leading to very thin profit margins in that part of the business yet elevated profits elsewhere. In effect, one part of the business is cross-subsidizing the others. Within a business, that's (usually) legal: how an incorporated entity manages its internal finances is typically considered not a matter for outsiders. (The exceptions come where it has tax implications, or where it is used to mislead investors.)

    And finally, what matters a lot is not just profit but also cashflow. If there's lots of cash moving in and out of the business, its usually possible for that business to keep its head above water even when it isn't actually currently profitable. Crudely put, a large cashflow makes it much easier to get a loan. (Sure, you want profit as well, but there's quite a few ways to inflate that without it meaning anything much.)

  • History Teacher (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The other WTF is these small fry companies who are almost 100% dependent on one large company to the point where they kowtow to the whims of that company. If you would go out of business if you lost one client, and are therefore unable to fire said client for the inevitable unreasonable demands they will make, chances are you don't deserve to be in business in the first place.

    Demands of a paying client are never unreasonable. Unreasonable demands often indicate, that they're also dependant on you, so it's just a matter of setting a reasonable price on their unreasonable demands in a professional manner.

  • Sherman (unregistered) in reply to jay
    Poor Planning:
    The smug, satisfied feeling would probably start to wear off as you walked from the cardboard box you soon found yourself living in to the soup kitchen where you eat.
    Cardboard box? Soup kitchen? Luxuries. Back in the day...oh, nevermind.
  • Webdev (unregistered)

    There's no WTF there. In marketing, that's Standard Operating Procedure - first draw up some pretty ad for something that doesn't exist, slap on an arbitrary URL (whether or not you can even create it or something else already exists there), send it to the printers, and distribute it to the public. Actual planning and implementation of the webapp is somebody else's problem. When consumers start complaining, you needn't worry, you've done your job.

    Besides, why plan and build something when there's no demand for it? Once people start calling complaining that the URL isn't working, THEN there's a demand for it. Only then is it time to come up with a concept, begin gathering requirements, and start the initial planning phase.

  • Kevin S (unregistered) in reply to operagost
    someone who can't be bothered to enter a meaningful name: I was expecting the ending to be slightly different: that the site was up and running just fine, but the 200000 flyers had been printed with a slightly wrong address for the site.

    Probably because it happened to a company I worked for 15 years ago. Although there the company noticed the error in printing and fixed it. Well, had their employees (including me) apply a sticker with the real address on top of the wrong one. On each separate flyer.

    Nothing screams good publicity like a flyer with a corrective sticker on it. Hey, at least we didn't use corrective fluid.

    TRWTF is not using rewrites, which I think existed in Apache even then. Or, at the least, just a holder page with a redirect.
    What if the typo was in the domain and the mis-typed domain was owned by somebody, and was not purchasable?

    What if the wrong URL pointed to an existing page on the site, but it wasn't the right one, and they still needed older links to this page to work?

  • Kasper (unregistered) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    The real trouble happens when that 60% of revenue isn't leading to profit at all, but actually a net loss. Having a profit, even if slender, from the big client means that the business isn't in great health, but it's still viable: lots of small businesses are in that position.
    If that profit makes the difference between a bankruptcy and survival of the company, then you of course want to take it. But if the company could survive without it, then it may not be worth the risk. A tiny profit out of a huge revenue can easily change to a modest loss. A small percentage change in revenue or expenses can make a huge difference.

    You could also turn it around and look at it like an opportunity. If you can make a small cut in the expenses, while still delivering, then there is money to be made.

    But you definitely shouldn't plan for a tiny profit on a huge revenue, without already knowing how you can increase that profit to a larger percentage of your revenue. If you plan for a tiny profit and hope you'll be able to find a way to cut expenses without having planned in advance, chances are unexpected expenses eat up your profit.

    If you planned for a reasonable profit out of the huge revenue, and you end up with only a tiny profit, consider yourself lucky, that it didn't go just a bit worse, and then start looking for ways to improve the profit.

  • James Rose (unregistered)

    What I often see is those in higher management get upset as they have no idea of the level of difficulty of technology and I have often seen them go agro because "it should just work" or "just push a button" and their ignorance leads to a high level of frustration. I'm not forgiving this sort of attitude, just explaining what I have seen over the years.

  • (cs)

    Angry uninformed customers ranting at higher-ranking managers and innocent techs? So this was a slightly more drawn-out version of most of the stories I see on NotAlwaysRight.com

    Cool.

  • Ryusui (unregistered) in reply to RandomGuy

    The WTF is that the marketing people apparently believed all the necessary backend would just magically generate itself through the power of wishful thinking.

    "Nah, man, the Internet is magic! We just point them to 'http://supermegafoods.com/sale' and presto, the sale page is already there!"

    Captcha: vulputate. Surgical removal of a fox from one's person.

  • A Nerd With a View (unregistered) in reply to Wody

    I assume you're being sarcastic. I've had jobs in the past where the boss never backs down... even when he's wrong. A few CEO's I've known would have had their secretary call to apologize... or would have accused someone at the IT company of having lost the order.

    But I've also known many, many people in business who will stand up and admit it when they make mistakes. Personally, I've tried to follow that model: when I screw up, I come out and say so, and I don't try to hide it. Mistakes get fixed much more quickly when you come clean right away.

    My response, after reading this article, was "Well, at least the boss had the decency to call back and apologize in person," because that's the hallmark of someone with some actual integrity.

  • A Nerd With a View (unregistered) in reply to someone who can't be bothered to enter a meaningful name
    someone who can't be bothered to enter a meaningful name:
    Probably because it happened to a company I worked for 15 years ago. Although there the company noticed the error in printing and fixed it. Well, had their employees (including me) apply a sticker with the real address on top of the wrong one. On each separate flyer.

    I once worked for an web hosting company that had a fairly large party supply store chain as a client. In preparation for setting up an e-commerce site, we had purchased their name as a domain name maybe 2 years before.

    It came time to set up the site. Our designers did a great job with the graphics. Our programmers did a great job making it run. In fact, the site performed flawlessly, so we went live with it.

    This was about 2 weeks before this store's busy season.

    The day after the site went live, the owner of the store called us to complain that the site still wasn't working. Our guys went to their browsers and checked - it was working fine.

    This escalated to the hosting company's other partner - the money guy. He went to his web browser and typed in the domain name for the web site... and got a cybersquatter.

    As it turned out, the partner who had signed up the store chain, done the initial site design, and purchased the domain had been misspelling the company's name for two years and no one caught it until it until days before the busiest season of the year.

    Fortunately, the cybersquatter that owned the correctly spelled domain was willing to part with it for a mere $2,000.

    So yeah. It happens. =)

  • (cs) in reply to microcoder
    microcoder:
    Once I received an email from quite an important customer that he has made mistake in several URLs in a an already sent mass-mail... it was Friday evening... spent some time adding rewrite rules for Apache

    At least they used the correct domain? I've seen clients not understand they can't use, say, WWW.Google.com/specialpromotion

  • (cs) in reply to Sam
    Sam:
    We also want first position on google searches. No matter what they're searching for.
    I've had a client like that. It took about two years to persuade him that a small-fry company was not going to be the number one hit for 2000 different search terms.
  • (cs) in reply to Kevin S
    Kevin S:
    What if the wrong URL pointed to an existing page on the site, but it wasn't the right one, and they still needed older links to this page to work?
    Add a RewriteRule which only applies the rewrite if there's no Http-Referer header and accept that a very small minority of users will be following links with browsers which don't send it.
  • Kent (unregistered) in reply to pjt33
    pjt33:
    Add a RewriteRule which only applies the rewrite if there's no Http-Referer header and accept that a very small minority of users will be following links with browsers which don't send it.
    Please try to show some sensitivity. My son was a very small minority and let me assure you, it was no laughing matter.
  • (cs) in reply to Jazz
    Jazz:
    Sounds like standard behavior for upper management. Someday, I'm going to corner one of those people who speaks at management conferences and demand an explanation of why being a self-righteous, over-entitled asshole is a mandatory requirement for being a corporate executive. I've yet to hear a good reason why this sort of thinking (must blame someone else, regardless of where blame ACTUALLY lies) is so common in that demographic.

    This kind of behavior isn't a requirement for being an executive, but it's a requirement for rising through the ranks of a large-sized organization (corporation, government, etc.). To make your way up through the strata you have to be adept at attaching yourself to successes and distancing yourself from failures. By the time you've reached the upper tiers of management, you've internalized the concept that you alone are responsible for the successes of the organization, and any failures are someone else's fault.

    Exceptions being: Cronyism/nepotism - Potentially the same symptoms as above, over-compensating for a lack of merit. Entrepreneurs - I've usually worked for small businesses. While the owners expect a lot, they've probably been in your position before and can empathize.

  • pbean (unregistered) in reply to Evilteach
    Evilteach:
    Um. Would it have been possible to create a redirect at the incorrect url?

    Since the content was never created, probably not...

  • Norman Diamond (unregistered) in reply to OldCoder
    OldCoder:
    The Real WTF is anyone who thinks up URLs and sends them out to the world without testing them out first.
    Nah, anyone who dared to suggest that code be tested before release obviously failed their team player test and was released long ago.
  • JustSomeGuy (unregistered)

    Actually, I've been on the receiving end of a call like that as well. You know what I did? I gave the yeller my direct extension then told him to ring back when he'd settled down.

    Then I hung up on him (the look on my superior's face was truly enjoyable). Then I waited.

    The next time he rang back, ranting even louder, I let him go on for a bit then I stated that, as long as he continued to act like a tantrum-throwing child, I would treat him as such. Then I hung up again.

    I think it took about four phone calls before he realized his behavior was self-defeating. Once he'd settled down, I said "Now we can get to the source of the problem rather than ranting about things".

    And, yes, he probably could have gotten me fired but it's amazing how effective you can be when you don't give a damn :-)

  • Friedrice The Great (unregistered) in reply to Mike
    Mike:
    Coming soon that is usually what I say after browsing to most web pages on the internet.

    Still using that dialup internet connection, I see.

  • Norman Diamond (unregistered) in reply to A Nerd With a View
    A Nerd With a View:
    As it turned out, the partner who had signed up the store chain, done the initial site design, and purchased the domain had been misspelling the company's name for two years and no one caught it until it until days before the busiest season of the year.
    They should have Googled it.

    (Due to the unfortunate likelihood of "whoosh"es, here's a hint. The suggestion verbs Google's name with a different meaning from the usual verbing.)

  • Bill C. (unregistered) in reply to Friedrice The Great
    Friedrice The Great:
    Mike:
    Coming soon that is usually what I say after browsing to most web pages on the internet.
    Still using that dialup internet connection, I see.
    Way to miss the point. If you have a pointer (or if someone near you has one), you don't need the internet.
  • Zaphod (unregistered) in reply to Evilteach
    Evilteach:
    Um. Would it have been possible to create a redirect at the incorrect url?
    Great, let's Redirect to this Story.
  • Gibbon1 (unregistered) in reply to Andy
    Andy:
    So the ad ran, and thousands of potential customers flocked to our shiny new web site to see a page that said only "Coming soon".

    What no triage? I mean no slap something together to minimally meet requirements and internally bill the living crap out of the marketing department. Really?

  • meh (unregistered) in reply to Sam

    It's a forward slash, not a backslash.

  • Cheong (unregistered) in reply to Wody
    Wody:
    Totally fake. The first rule of business: Do everything to make profits, no matter how right or wrong, ethics do not apply. Second rule: Never admit you're wrong or make mistakes, or you get sued out of business.

    Since those rules aren't used in this story, it can't have happened like this at all.

    captcha: jugis. Justice in small containers to apply twice daily.

    I doubt it'll work. All changes that carries charge will have invoice number (We need them to pay the first installment before we start do some real work, so invoice always exist for anything told to be done). I'll tell him to tell me the invoice number, and if he can't, the work order doesn't exist.

  • fungua (unregistered) in reply to meh

    there is no forward slash only slash and backslash

    capcha transverbero: any action done by the subject to a mexican hat

  • Kyzneg (unregistered) in reply to Evilteach

    @Evilteach if the problem was simply an incorrect URL, yes. The problem here was that the client never asked for the page to be created in the first place, there was nothing to redirect to.

  • chris (unregistered) in reply to no laughing matter
    no laughing matter:
    Doodpants:
    The work order was supposed to be submitted by the vice president's daughter, but she got sick.
    +1. Also fixed it for you.
    Topical...
  • This must be the only comment I ever make (unregistered)

    What does this have to do with curious perversions IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY? The CEO's an idiot, big deal, no fun factor, nothing to do with IT.

    This site began well, and is now living on its laurels, not on this trash.

  • CruftRemover (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi

    No. Narcissists are attracted to roles that allow them to abuse people.

  • repair_drone_3000 (unregistered) in reply to Brian
    Brian:
    TRWTF is the client's president admitting he was wrong. That is absolutely unknown. It's time to proceed straight to the punishment of the innocent!

    QFT!

  • (cs) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The real issue is, as always, with these morons who think that screaming and ranting like a lunatic is the correct way to address problems. Does owning a company really give you this narcissist attitude that makes you talk down to people?

    Yes is the short answer.

  • A Gould (unregistered) in reply to Pock Suppet
    Pock Suppet:
    Client (and/or executives) apologizing for their mistake? *crickets*

    I've seen and heard it happen, but generally only if followed by "So, we need this done ASAP and we're your big customer so suck it up."

  • L.P.O. (unregistered) in reply to fungua
    fungua:
    there is no forward slash only slash and backslash

    There is no slash. Only inverse backslash and uninverted backslash. Just like there are only nonfixed-width and unproportional fonts.

    CAPTCHA: gravis (ultrasound?)

  • L.P.O. (unregistered) in reply to Kent
    Kent:
    pjt33:
    Add a RewriteRule which only applies the rewrite if there's no Http-Referer header and accept that a very small minority of users will be following links with browsers which don't send it.
    Please try to show some sensitivity. My son was a very small minority and let me assure you, it was no laughing matter.

    ITYM your son was created with a small minority?

Leave a comment on “Poor Planning”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article