It really depends what the issue is. There are countless issues that managers and even non-managerial employees can solve for you. If they weren't able to, there would almost be no need for their jobs to begin with. For example, we can compare CS Agents to the initial customer service agents that you talk to on the phone when you call other companies. They aren't managers, but can still help you with things. Managers have even more power than them. I've had managers adjust plans for me, apply loyalty discounts, give direct compensation for issues, etc.
Managers have a lot of power, and they use these powers in steps too (i.e., they try and help/satisfy the customer without using all of the power they have, because it's almost always more beneficial for the company that way). It's very rare to have a problem that requires going above a manager actually. It's only happened to me once with Rogers. I signed up via a third party service, and they promised a certain monthly price. When I received my first bill, that price was a lot higher. So I had to speak with a regional director or something, and send them the evidence (paperwork) of what I agreed to, and then he was able to honor it.
I've had good moments, and I've had bad moments (when it comes to dealing with PM). I'm not saying that every single customer experiences "bad" customer service, but everybody's standards are not the same either. I just know that objectively, the way that PM handles their support (through a non-live ticket system), is already worse than their live counterparts (which is what most telecoms appear to have). When people have a problem, they usually want it fixed immediately (and sometimes they NEED it fixed immediately), so having to wait even a day for example (because of a non-live service), can be frustrating. The "not knowing" when you're going to receive help, isn't fun either.
But yeah, some people just see it as PM taking away their $7 monthly discount, and then look at their competitors who have nearly identical pricing + live customer service + this, and plus that, and some see that the benefits of having those things are far better than what they'll be receiving with the new points system. They also see this $7 discount being taken away, but the money not being spent on improving the service (at least not outwardly). The decision is objectively negative for the customer in nearly every single way, and is seemingly bringing in no added benefits. So the balance starts to lean towards exploring other options (which many have been doing). How many people feel this way though? We don't know of course.
