From an IT perspective, that sounds a lot like cost cutting, but could simply be a move to eliminate a source of negative PR.

---

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think those are likely key reasons for the decision, but part of my point is there is no way to know as Polar has been pretty incomunicado as of late.

I think their strategy seems to take sudden shifts and is more than a bit curious to me?

---

Founder of THE TRIATHLON COLLECTIVE (Closed Facebook Group). A SBR discussion group without the white noise/trolling!

I was looking at the V800 to replace my Garmin when it (inevitably) dies. The fact that I'd have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get it to read my Quarq is a no starter. I'm not impressed when a company decides to ignore an established base of potential customers. And using a bridge isn't a real solution.

---

---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"

This must be something specific to that region as until recently, both Polar and Tacx, always chose to re-invent the wheel rather than adopt existing/open standards.

---

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Hey Fred..

First things first: We realize closing the discussion forum wasn't ideal for many people. The decision was really really difficult, but it was necessary. Put simply, we couldn't manage the bandwidth to be active - and the platform didn't allow for any further development within our ecosystem of products. I promise, closing "it" down isn't an indicator of an overall strategy re-calibration.

The thing is we made a big shift in how product development happens, and the nature of updates, features, constant development/advancements is quick and always moving. Obviously we're having to match that speed equally(or better) with communication. That's sort of what's happening.

We're putting systems in place to make that happen. Some examples include:
- Making a new website/blog for communication on updates: http://updates.polar.com/
- On Flow web the notifications feature with constant updates on communication

And of course we have a global customer care team that's available via email, livechat and phone..

That's not to say that will be it - this is a work in progress.

Hey Chris,

I understand the reasons for centralisation and standardisation of customer relations but really, through Facebook?

I've expressed my dismay here in Europe at the losing of this resource, I've also on the soon-to-be-dead-forum suggested retaining it as a resource for Polar fans moderated by fans. I think it is a bandwidth issue in terms of human resources and having a voice as communicating on so many platforms here, Facebook, Twitter etc it is hard to keep a uniform voice and you simply can not be in all places at once.

I think choosing Facebook is wrong & I have communicated this through channels. I understand why, obviously the new generation of customer profile is more active on Social Media that forums. The direction of apps and activity monitors show this is a massive target that Polar as a business are chasing. However, the instant gratification and neediness of your average FB user along with the short attention span is going to be interesting to manage.

I wish you luck!! :)

---

_______________

#GottaRun
http://twitter.com/runningmatters_
http://www.feileacanmor.com

That's some serious corporate guff right there. I might have to send in a nomination to Lucy Kellaway ;)

http://www.ft.com/...0.html#axzz3J39aLLBK

.

There are some who have turned their back on Facebook or don't uses it.......I used to be a big fan of polar, but like Facebook I've turn my back on your equipment. Just not user friendly.

My take on Chris' statement was more in terms of the economics of providing the internet/network bandwidth to host global web forums for which there is no effective means to recoup the cost of the services.

---

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Possibly true, but everyone knows customer service and communications is a cost that just has to happen, business has to SIU and get on with it.

In this day and age (and what I allude to ) is the profile of people who post a 10 second update or query on Facebook is a long way away from those who communicate in full sentences over fora and expect a considered reply. I can't see how the economic cost of providing a server is that prohibitive to enable the forum or even to allow it to sit there hosted by Polar archived.

Some tech IT person can straighten me out on this but how much internet bandwidth would it need? Definitely think the limiting factor is HR.

---

_______________

#GottaRun
http://twitter.com/runningmatters_
http://www.feileacanmor.com

The IT cost is negligible. So laughably small you could only buy two fancy Starbucks drinks in Europe with it. For something of this size/scale, a single cloud-based Virtual Machine is more than sufficient (small category on most service providers). So an Amazon or Azure cost would be about $10/month. More than enough capacity for the number of people hitting that forum site.

But, I'm also pretty sure that's not what Chris was talking about. He's likely talking about the human cost of monitoring those posts. It's a piece that other companies have struggled with. For example, Garmin has/had the same issue. They ended up doing something similar in terms of appointing non-employee volunteers to help moderate (Polar did too), and then some product teams have actual employees check in and help too.

Ultimately though, the trend I see is that companies without forums tend to have more unhappy customers. The reason is simple: Forums actually allow self-help. They lower support costs for the company (less phone calls/e-mail calls), by leveraging 'free' community resources. Further, they typically get people back to using their devices again. Next, they lower return rates, again, due to self help. For whatever reason, consumers hate calling support (seriously, I see it all day, every day with questions to the blog).

Of course, those are direct interaction impacts. The other impact is that negative feedback/troubleshooting go to secondary avenues. They end up clogging up their social media channels, and then spill onto other locations. For example, review posts (from anywhere). People then air their grievances there instead of a support channel. I've overwhelmingly seen that companies without forums have far more "this product doesn't do what it says" type feedback on review posts, than those with. That's because people can generally find the answers and don't give up. Once they give up, it's the spiral of: Negative feedback posted somewhere, product returned, competitor product bought.

---

-
My tiny little slice of the internets: dcrainmaker.com

I was referring to human bandwidth. My post above is all I can really say.

But those of you that know me know that I'm a forum guy - I've owned (and sold), moderated, managed advertising on close to 2 dozen forums in my lifetime. Totally understand & agree on the importance in the overall scheme of things.

Again, this is a work in progress...

I quite agree really. I was hoping (what exactly gave me that "hope" beyond wishful thinking I don't know) that they'd change their tune for this product as it seemed to be a cut above others. Personally though, if a product requires any additional hardware to read my Quark Power Meter, it's a deal breaker. So I'll, rather reluctantly, stick with Garmin for now.

---

---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"

Good to see that Polar has changed their mind on this and reversed the decision.

I can only speak for myself, but they probably hate calling those support numbers and going to support websites because those calls/sites are frustrating, generally give generic answers, and take FOREVER to get results.

I can speak specifically to Polar as I've had to deal with them multiple times in the past two years over several problems I've had with one of my watches. The first was a premature battery drain issue which took multiple (LONG) calls to them and multiple trips back for service. Then I just wanted to simply replace the watch band that had broken (don't blame them for it breaking, just the HORRID process for replacing it). It took 4 or 5 more long phone calls and again shipping it back for service. JUST TO REPLACE A WATCH BAND. Meanwhile, I couldn't use the watch, short of taping it to my wrist, for almost 2 months while they tried to sort things out. And no, the band was made such that you couldn't just go out and buy a replacement at the local store.

In the end, I would have been better off, and probably cheaper once my time was included, just buying a new, non-polar watch to replace it. Once upon a time, in the past, I've had great customer service from Polar, but for the past year and a half, on the two issues I've had with one of their products ... it was horrible. And because of it, I will likely never buy a Polar product again. Every company will have some problems, but it's how they handle those problems that really makes the difference to me.