CloudTalk is cloud-based call center software for sales and support teams of all sizes, looking to improve customer experiences through more personalized, data-driven customer interactions. The vendor aims to help teams communicate clearly and efficiently. With CloudTalk users can get local, mobile or toll-free numbers from more than 140+ countries across the world. The vendor says they offer integration with important tools (such a CRM, Helpdesk, or…
$27
per month per user
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
Score 6.8 out of 10
N/A
Genesys PureConnect was an omnichannel contact center platform that offered cloud-based or on-premise deployments. It featured a SIP-based architecture with VoIP capabilities, allowing companies to connect legacy voice systems and use existing phones. A legacy product, new users are encouraged to investigate Genesys Cloud.
We were recommended CloudTalk basically from everybody in our network so we reached out directly to them at first and since they had everything we were looking for, feature-wise, and also were in our budget, we didn't really consider other vendors on the market. The …
There were several services suitable for our needs. CloudTalk was chosen because of its simplicity, complexity, and brief time needed to use this service. No broad technical knowledge is required to start and operate CloudTalk.
Better value for the money (by far). And besides that, all the features we needed, CloudTalk has them. Shoutout to their support for answering all the questions we had and to their CSM team for giving us a quick demo on the same day when we requested it. Recommended solution!
Cloudtalk is well-priced for what we need from it. The fact that it has many features that we plan to use in the future is a deciding factor, and that gives it a big advantage. So the biggest impact was the comprehensiveness of the solution and the integration with the CRM.
International growth marketing specialist / Lead generation & International PR
Chose CloudTalk
We tried dealing with Aircall, but their solution didn't seem so flexible and the initial adoption cost was way out of our context. We learned later that the solution was in fact more flexible than we thought, but were disappointed by the little quality of their before-sales …
So much better, much cleaner design. Much less complicated setup process. Has a much more up-to-date program. You can use the browser version or the stand-alone app, both are far more fleshed-out pieces of software. It is also much more reliable, haven't had the app crash even …
CloudTalk is a lot more intuitive and provides more features and analytics than 3CX. The fact it allows for integration as well means we can stay on top of all of our missed calls and know exactly what client rang linking them to their company account.
RingCentral has major issues syncing in real-time. The Web app and the desktop app never showed the same numbers. Often I'd have to wait hours for reports to update and then still had no confidence in the information presented.
CloudTalk is significantly more affordable, easy to setup and the trial month was very helpful to ensure it was what we needed. AirCall can probably do a lot more but I cannot tell you what and I don't believe we need more as we are not a complex business that needs multiple …
The pricing is more interesting and the fact they have a product easy to use with integrations with both our Sales and Support CRM's made us chose them. We were also told that a lot of the features we needed would be implemented in the soon future so let's see if it happens.
I have been using WhatsApp quite often for private and sometimes professional usage and in the past Skype and ICQ. WhatsApp is for free but I would say that CloudTalk provides a higher quality while talking so if I should choose between them for messages is WhatsApp very easy …
The first thing is cost. CloudTalk was a lot cheaper than others. The other thing I noticed is that there were a lot of unwanted or unnecessary features with the other ones that didn't really matter to us, but were more [than] able to ask a higher price per seat. However, the …
It was a gamble if I'm being honest, plus this is a very nuanced and intricate topic. We didn't necessarily substitute one for the other, it was a much needed state of affairs where we needed the call monitoring and agent tracking pros of CloudTalk more so than ever before.
The integration of CloudTalk with Pipedrive makes the native Pipedrive call system practically unnecessary. The latter does not allow searching for calls or generating indicators as well achieved as in CloudTalk.
Before CloudTalk, we used Pipedrive. It also works really well, but it does not have the option of analytics. You could not check things like how many calls were made during the day or a specific time period. That, for me, is the most valuable feature of CloudTalk--all the data …
It's the perfect complement to the other services we use as it permits us to get in contact with our clients in order to not only have good communication inside of the company but also outside the company with our clients. It really rounds up the whole package. It's just the …
CloudTalk service is immediately available once a profile is created and payment is made. Five9 indicated it would take up to 2 weeks to have full access to the service.
Though it was not my decision from switching from Circleloop, when we had originally used CircleLoop it gave some issues with internal transfer and taking calls which heavily affected us. With CloudTalk we can now successfully make outbound calls without any problems.
CloudTalk has a better value for the money spent and has been easier to set up than other peers in that regards as well as better overall integration with already existing Software that we have been using for years in our company. At the end, the communication with CloudTalk …
CloudTalk is much more configurable. It is very easy to send proactive SMS messages with CloudTalk whilst with Zendesk Talk this can only be done through a workaround. Zendesk does not provide Chinese virtual numbers either and outbound calls were not working to Chinese numbers …
PureConnect was selected 20 years ago, and it does show its age a little -- but like a high-quality machine tool, it continues to deliver value far longer than anyone expected.
We used PureConnect before moving to Cloud CX. The PureConnect had more features and functions at the time we switched, but Cloud CX has been making up ground to compete feature to feature with their on-premise solutions.
I've only used two other Contact Center software applications in the past years ago that I can't remember the name of right now. But, I do remember years ago when I start to use [Genesys] PureConnect as a [first] level agent that it was way better than the previous software I …
Genesys is for contact centers who are looking for more value-add from their data. Avaya and Cisco traditionally have not had these types of capabilities from my experience. Integrations are much more robust, and many of the functions are customizable.
Call Manager, you had to buy all the components that are out of the box for PureConnect. The licensing model is more expensive on the Cisco side vs the Genesys PureConnect side. Lastly was on the Cisco side since you have to connect/integrate all the components on the cisco …
Much better features than competing products, and better overall stability and support. Evidenced by being a smaller company that has risen fast in a crowded marketplace to be a solid and fierce competitor.
Cisco, a big competitor just does not have great call center …
In our perspective these players were no where in the same league as Genesys and yes I recognize that Genesys eventually bought Echopass. The only thing better was that we could get line by line interaction data on any inbound or outbound answered or abandoned interaction.
I was not involved in the purchase of Genesys PureConnect, so I do not have anything to compare it to. I have been using the product for over 5 years and so far haven't hit any shortcomings within the product.
You cannot compare PureConnect to the Nortel 11C that I used to support. They are completely different animals. In regard to the ShoreTel system that I supported, PureConnect was considerably more mature with vastly superior support, documentation and functionality.
Cloudtalk is by far the best value-for-price software out there for call center solutions. Packed with features, very accessible, kind and accessible customer support, and cheap, especially when compared with their competitors for the same range of features. Easy entry-level software, especially if you're a startup that doesn't want to make big initial commitments but needs a solution that scales with the business.
CIC is best suited for business models that rely on heavily leverage Data Integration especially one like ours that require real-time and high-speed data access for billing and customer integration. CIC is not well suited for small organizations < 50 where they are only answering phones in the course of doing business VS. the business is the phone.
We are so embedded on Pure Connect that we like to progress with it. For instance, we are looking into ways to provide different solutions to our customers, help our business to succeed, and work in a better CX.
One of the biggest advantages is that all is in one platform.
CloudTalk is super easy to use and has a great quality. It helps to communicate with the clients easily and we can feel that the sound quality is high, while speaking to the client and while listening to the recordings. This is for our department essential in our day to day work.
The interface is only semi user-friendly on almost every front. Agent experience is lacking and we have found many limitations within the system. Workforce forecasting is not as robust as expected. Quality continues to be a struggle. Interaction searches are not robust.
The application itself uses a hub and spoke model that can help isolate errors in one section of the application from the rest, creating a much more stable overall program. Of all of the outages that we've had with our contact center platform, I can count on one hand how often it was truly a Genesys issue rather than a network issue, server issue or issue with a platform relied upon for an integration (web services, db calls).
Some of the client applications take a bit of time on initial load, but with the move towards web based applications that issue is alleviated. You can tell that effort really isn't putting into the desktop apps any longer and that the client development effort is being put into bringing Interaction Connect closer to feature parity with the desktop (and bringing wholly new features to Connect). As far as IVR operations, web service calls, database operations: they all operate reasonably.
They are skilled, experienced, and anytime I need something and contact the support time, I get the right person who understands my needs and reacts to them accordingly. So far I was only pleasantly surprised by the level of support these guys provide and coming from a customer service oriented background myself, I can only say keep it up guys, you are doing a fantastic job!
This really depends if/who your Vendor is or if you purchase directly from Genesys. I would say that whenever I deal with Genesys directly they've always been able to answer my questions and find a resolution to my issues. Unfortunately being on an older version means that answer is usually that you need to spend money to upgrade or move to the cloud
I liked the setup of the whole class. The instructor knew the topic well enough to answer questions from entry level to a more advanced one.
Instructor encouraged participation of the whole class and was able to engage every one. Also provided "real live" examples so everyone can relate to it.
The online training itself is good. You are provided resources and can self study to a certain point, but the pacing always felt off. Either snails pace or like trying to drink from a fire hose. I think this easily could have had to do with course material and my personal preparations, though. I would say my main gripe is that since the acquisition the team responsible for actually booking training is very unresponsive and often not knowledgeable about the courses they offer. Booking my last training was a real chore.
Don't try to go the perfect solution as a first target. Work on answer the more needs with a simple solution. Then analyse and try again to answer the most needs with adding a bit if complexity only if require. No needs to customise straight from the beginning or deployment takes too long.
It was a gamble if I'm being honest, plus this is a very nuanced and intricate topic. We didn't necessarily substitute one for the other, it was a much needed state of affairs where we needed the call monitoring and agent tracking pros of CloudTalk more so than ever before.
Call Manager, you had to buy all the components that are out of the box for PureConnect. The licensing model is more expensive on the Cisco side vs the Genesys PureConnect side. Lastly was on the Cisco side since you have to connect/integrate all the components on the cisco side you have to have so many vendors to install those parts. This drives the cost up even more so it was not worth going that route for our organization.
Genesys PureConnect's core and adjunct model allows for fairly easy growth in satellite locations via off site session managers, remote located media servers, remote content servers, etc to allow you to spread the infrastructure out while not pushing as much network traffic to your core data centers.
We're improving our CX by optimizing our call centers, using additional attributes and keys to identify the best rep for the job.
We are also streamlining the journey of each individual customer by using PureConnect as the central interface for omnichannel interactions, allowing us to pick up the conversation where we left off.
Using additional attributes that start with the contact center interaction, we're able to track a student journey and proactively step in - increasing our individualized support to focus on the student outcome.