New FAST system at Fidelity

Does anyone hate the new FAST (Fidelity Automated Service Telephone) system
at Fidelity as much as I do?

I used the old FAST for many years and was quite nimble at doing what I
wanted to do just using a touch-tone phone. Now you can't avoid issuing
voice commands and it seems (to me at least) that the computer bitch with
the pretentious accent doesn't understand half of what I say. Also, the old
FAST and I agreed on my total balance down to the penny. The new one is
almost always off slightly or worse, giving yesterday's balance.

One time (of the many) that I was shunted to a service rep he put me back
into FAST but I was in the old FAST Classic. I was wondering if anyone knew
if there was a number I could call to just use the old FAST. I asked the
service rep, last night but he just put me on hold longer than my already
frayed patience could tolerate.

-herb

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Herb wrote:
> Does anyone hate the new FAST (Fidelity Automated Service Telephone) system
> at Fidelity as much as I do?
>
> I used the old FAST for many years and was quite nimble at doing what I
> wanted to do just using a touch-tone phone. Now you can't avoid issuing
> voice commands and it seems (to me at least) that the computer bitch with
> the pretentious accent doesn't understand half of what I say. Also, the old
> FAST and I agreed on my total balance down to the penny. The new one is
> almost always off slightly or worse, giving yesterday's balance.
>
> One time (of the many) that I was shunted to a service rep he put me back
> into FAST but I was in the old FAST Classic. I was wondering if anyone knew
> if there was a number I could call to just use the old FAST. I asked the
> service rep, last night but he just put me on hold longer than my already
> frayed patience could tolerate.
>
> -herb

Use the web, Luke.

Telephone is so last century.

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Herb wrote:
> Does anyone hate the new FAST (Fidelity Automated Service Telephone) system
> at Fidelity as much as I do?
>
> I used the old FAST for many years and was quite nimble at doing what I
> wanted to do just using a touch-tone phone. Now you can't avoid issuing
> voice commands and it seems (to me at least) that the computer bitch with
> the pretentious accent doesn't understand half of what I say. Also, the old
> FAST and I agreed on my total balance down to the penny. The new one is
> almost always off slightly or worse, giving yesterday's balance.
>
> One time (of the many) that I was shunted to a service rep he put me back
> into FAST but I was in the old FAST Classic. I was wondering if anyone knew
> if there was a number I could call to just use the old FAST. I asked the
> service rep, last night but he just put me on hold longer than my already
> frayed patience could tolerate.
>
> -herb

When US Robotics (now 3COM) first switched over it wasn't well-liked
either, but that's the way of innovation. Everyone must follow
innovation in efficient business models: An obsequious valuation of VR
many do find expressive of encumbrance, and in some measure
exasperation will qualify by impersonation, indeed, ingenuously
intended. Synonymous for an artifical identity BestBuy more recently
chose, a frequency modulation of maleness, its pervasiveness is now
inimicably admissible for corporate archetypal gateways that embody
surrogate business acquiescence servicing synoptic wholesomeness and
profitability for all.

'The profitability coefficient of rehabitituation has been adversely
exceeded by recidivism; return loop to normative programming.' -G.
Lucas, THX 1138.

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Herb wrote:
> ...
> I used the old FAST for many years and was quite nimble at doing
> what I wanted to do just using a touch-tone phone. Now you can't
> avoid issuing voice commands ...
>
> I was wondering if anyone knew if there was a number I could call
> to just use the old FAST. I asked the service rep, last night but he
> just put me on hold longer than my already frayed patience could
> tolerate.
>
> -herb

It's fairly simple to use TTMF (Touch Tone (R) Multi-Frequency, aka
"button") commands - when you are given a choice, even if the system
doesn't tell you that you can use buttons, just press the ordinal number
for your selection.

For example, dial (800) 544-6666 or -8888, and when it asks you to say
"Representative" (first choice), or "FAST" (second choice), press 2.

This will activate voice prompts that give you button choices, but this
FAST doesn't seem to help you navigate back up. You have to remember
that *M(ain menu), or *6, gets you to the beginning.

I guess one has to be sufficiently stubborn to get buttons to work with
the new FAST. Are you sure you really got "FAST Classic"?
--
Mark Freeland

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

I've had an annuity with American Skandia for years. They have been
promising online trading for over 5 years, and to their credit, they are
still promising it.

They have a new, advanced 'speech recognition' system.... every answer I
give, they repeat my answer and ask if they are understanding me correctly.
Then I have to answer 'yes' or 'no'. Quite often, she says "I'm sorry, I did
not understand your answer". So, it can not tell the differernce between yes
and no...

Again, though, when I swear at her, she doesn't seem to get offended. Some
times I get switched to a real person. If I trade with a person, it can cost
money over 20 trades per year, so I explain I got kicked to them by their
stupid, antiquated, speech recog system..... I am nice about it, though, I
tell them not to take it personally, but they are the only people I deal
with (trading) that do not have an online system set up..... they are
polite, understanding, and apologetic... but they have not caught up with
real life yet..... I do have to say that most annuity owners probably don't
trade much.

Happy Guy, "Laissez les bons temps roulez"
..
..
>> Does anyone hate the new FAST (Fidelity Automated Service Telephone)
>> system
>> at Fidelity as much as I do?

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

PeterL wrote:
>
> Use the web, Luke.

How 1995-ish.

> Telephone is so last century.

What was old is new again - Fidelity Anywhere(SM):


(I don't use these toys, but if one wants to stay current ...)
--
Mark Freeland

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

I wonder how many get this .... stuff (I almost said 'crap') because it is
available... not because they need it. They bury themselves in monthly
bills..... My NPJL neighbor pays extra for the higher speed version of cable
modem, which he doesn't need, carries his internet capable cell phone around
with him so he can check the weather and impress people..... Oh, did I
mention they have no money in the bank and can barely make it from his
wife's paycheck to paycheck....? He isn't working, unless you call spending
money, work... They got their daughter and son their own cell phone accts
because the daughter was constantly going over their 800 minutes/month....

Most people I know have $60/month cell phone bills.... (I use tracfone for
about $8.00/month). Most people I know also have a ton of credit card
debt.... All these 'wants' that have become 'needs'.....

Happy Guy, "Laissez les bons temps roulez"
..
..
"Mark Freeland" <> wrote in message
news:
> PeterL wrote:
>>
>> Use the web, Luke.
>
> How 1995-ish.
>
>> Telephone is so last century.
>
> What was old is new again - Fidelity Anywhere(SM):
>
>
> (I don't use these toys, but if one wants to stay current ...)
> --
> Mark Freeland
>

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Mark Freeland wrote:
> > Use the web, Luke.
> How 1995-ish.
> > Telephone is so last century.
> What was old is new again - Fidelity Anywhere(SM):
>

Well, technically, Fidelity Anywhere is using the web. I'm sure Peter
meant "listening to a menu and using numbers to navigate the menu is so
last century". =)

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

"PeterL" <> wrote in message
news:

[snip me]

> Use the web, Luke.
>
> Telephone is so last century.

So am I. ;-)

I only use fast to enter quotes into a spreadsheet. It's a lot quicker than
using the Internet.

-herb

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

"Mark Freeland" <> wrote in message
news:

[snip me]

>
> It's fairly simple to use TTMF (Touch Tone (R) Multi-Frequency, aka
> "button") commands - when you are given a choice, even if the system
> doesn't tell you that you can use buttons, just press the ordinal number
> for your selection.

I pressed "6" to advance to the next postion (as it constantly reminds me I
may); it didn't understand; I pressed it again and it shunted me to a
representative. I think it gets really confused if you press more than once
(to advance to a position).
>
> For example, dial (800) 544-6666 or -8888, and when it asks you to say
> "Representative" (first choice), or "FAST" (second choice), press 2.
>
> This will activate voice prompts that give you button choices, but this
> FAST doesn't seem to help you navigate back up. You have to remember
> that *M(ain menu), or *6, gets you to the beginning.

Isn't this the same new FAST that I'm getting by dialing directly? It seems
to be.

>
> I guess one has to be sufficiently stubborn to get buttons to work with
> the new FAST. Are you sure you really got "FAST Classic"?

Oh, I'm stubborn but perhaps not sufficiently. Yes, I am sure: it was the
same menu and the same recored voice.

-herb

PS: I'm very disappointed. I was sure that you would know the secret phone
number. ;-)

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

"Bucky" <> wrote in message
news:

[snip]

> Well, technically, Fidelity Anywhere is using the web. I'm sure Peter
> meant "listening to a menu and using numbers to navigate the menu is so
> last century". =)

Most people prefer sight to sound, but not everyone.

-herb

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Flasherly wrote:
> Herb wrote:
>
>>Does anyone hate the new FAST (Fidelity Automated Service Telephone) system
>>at Fidelity as much as I do?
>>
>>I used the old FAST for many years and was quite nimble at doing what I
>>wanted to do just using a touch-tone phone. Now you can't avoid issuing
>>voice commands and it seems (to me at least) that the computer bitch with
>>the pretentious accent doesn't understand half of what I say. Also, the old
>>FAST and I agreed on my total balance down to the penny. The new one is
>>almost always off slightly or worse, giving yesterday's balance.
>>
>>One time (of the many) that I was shunted to a service rep he put me back
>>into FAST but I was in the old FAST Classic. I was wondering if anyone knew
>>if there was a number I could call to just use the old FAST. I asked the
>>service rep, last night but he just put me on hold longer than my already
>>frayed patience could tolerate.
>>
>>-herb
>
>
> When US Robotics (now 3COM) first switched over it wasn't well-liked
> either, but that's the way of innovation. Everyone must follow
> innovation in efficient business models: An obsequious valuation of VR
> many do find expressive of encumbrance, and in some measure
> exasperation will qualify by impersonation, indeed, ingenuously
> intended. Synonymous for an artifical identity BestBuy more recently
> chose, a frequency modulation of maleness, its pervasiveness is now
> inimicably admissible for corporate archetypal gateways that embody
> surrogate business acquiescence servicing synoptic wholesomeness and
> profitability for all.
>
> 'The profitability coefficient of rehabitituation has been adversely
> exceeded by recidivism; return loop to normative programming.' -G.
> Lucas, THX 1138.
>
And they said Stanley Unwin was dead!

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

David Wilkinson wrote:

> And they said Stanley Unwin was dead!

I suspect the goodly predicated professorship, at age 90, had outlived
all chance of being properly seated aside Queenly benedictions bestowed
namesakes and collegiate obeisances; for, alas, it appears to me, it is
most a common commerator within his native tongue that bespeaks,
allusively erstwhile, in deference to one Professor Dodgeson. Speaking
as a correspondent, one may first note what logical proclivities lend
their bent to the commonsensical: Said an attentive Stanely [of when],
"General Patton's bright and brotherly briefings were well attended. .
.. . While a concerned daughter of the homefront queried, "Do you
think that there are many more Tiger tanks in the area?" "Not unless
the present ones are reproductive tanks," George assuredly quipped by
way of rejoinder. ['But, what about] de-nazifying of prisoners to use
them for counter espionage': "Trying to do that, ma'am, would be like
trying to fertilize a forty acre field with a fart." Obviously,
obliviously, Stanley's correspondence did not then encompass Patton's
arcnemesis, General Eisenhower; another, Bertrand Russell's, should be
irrefutably no less electrifying, if only I could find the transcript.

"They say you are a man of good ... taste." -Bram Stoker.

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Ya, right... what you said, bro..

Happy Guy, "Laissez les bons temps roulez"
..
..
"Flasherly" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> I suspect the goodly predicated professorship, at age 90, had outlived
> all chance of being properly seated aside Queenly benedictions bestowed
> namesakes and collegiate obeisances; for, alas, it appears to me, it is
> most a common commerator within his native tongue that bespeaks,
> allusively erstwhile, in deference to one Professor Dodgeson. Speaking
> as a correspondent, one may first note what logical proclivities lend
> their bent to the commonsensical: Said an attentive Stanely [of when],
> "General Patton's bright and brotherly briefings were well attended. .
> . . While a concerned daughter of the homefront queried, "Do you
> think that there are many more Tiger tanks in the area?" "Not unless
> the present ones are reproductive tanks," George assuredly quipped by
> way of rejoinder. ['But, what about] de-nazifying of prisoners to use
> them for counter espionage': "Trying to do that, ma'am, would be like
> trying to fertilize a forty acre field with a fart." Obviously,
> obliviously, Stanley's correspondence did not then encompass Patton's
> arcnemesis, General Eisenhower; another, Bertrand Russell's, should be
> irrefutably no less electrifying, if only I could find the transcript.
>
> "They say you are a man of good ... taste." -Bram Stoker.
>

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

happy-guy wrote:
> Ya, right... what you said, bro..

No, no. . .miss the tense with a shift to the accent on fool. The cue
follows in Minstrel Colloquialism as:

"What you say, honky sucker pig head jive turkey fool?" -Gene Wilder &
Richard Pryor: Stir Crazy, 1982.

'An' I fust seed her a'smokin a wak'n white cheroot.' -Rudyard Kipling,
1892.

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

No, listen up, I don't need someone else pea..... else there woulda been
quotes, hear.?

Happy Guy, "Laissez les bons temps roulez"
..
..
"Flasherly" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> happy-guy wrote:
>> Ya, right... what you said, bro..
>
> No, no. . .miss the tense with a shift to the accent on fool. The cue
> follows in Minstrel Colloquialism as:
>
> "What you say, honky sucker pig head jive turkey fool?" -Gene Wilder &
> Richard Pryor: Stir Crazy, 1982.
>
> 'An' I fust seed her a'smokin a wak'n white cheroot.' -Rudyard Kipling,
> 1892.
>

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

I assure you, that to preclude a point of view one ought not overlook
for lack of decisiveness is only a measure of one born in bigotry
intolerance shan't affect.

happy-guy wrote:
> No, listen up, I don't need someone else pea..... else there woulda been
> quotes, hear.?
>
> Happy Guy, "Laissez les bons temps roulez"

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

Herb,

You might do well to send an e-mail to the company. This will give them
something tangible to look at and work with. This way somebody can get back
to you rather than keeping you waiting on hold. Also, if your complaint is
verbal to a rep, it might head out the door with the rep at the end of the
day. Who knows? I don't think you would hear that they are returning to
the old system unless they experience a universal backlash, but they might
want to hear your ideas about fixing the new system.

Re: New FAST system at Fidelity

"Terry Milan" <> wrote in message
news:iJWof.6211$
> Herb,
>
> You might do well to send an e-mail to the company. This will give them
> something tangible to look at and work with. This way somebody can get
back
> to you rather than keeping you waiting on hold. Also, if your complaint
is
> verbal to a rep, it might head out the door with the rep at the end of the
> day. Who knows? I don't think you would hear that they are returning to
> the old system unless they experience a universal backlash, but they might
> want to hear your ideas about fixing the new system.

Terry:

At one point, one of the reps definitely entered several comments from me
into something but I don't know what.

I guess, so far, I'm the only one who objects. That surprises me. Perhaps
everyone else here is satisfied with using the Web.

I was just hoping that someone would know how to get to the old FAST which
seems, based on my one experience, to still be up and running.

-herb