Sometimes customers are more bother than they're worth.

The latest example of a company coming to that conclusion is wireless provider Sprint Nextel Corp.'s decision to hang up on subscribers that it claims kept calling -- and calling and calling -- its customer service line long after representatives resolved their problems.

In this networked generation, it didn't take long for spurned consumers to post complaints and copies of their rejection letters on the Internet, leaving Sprint to face the quips and criticisms of the chat boards.

"It sounds bad," said Peter Boatwright, associate professor of marketing at Carnegie Mellon University. And, without knowing the specifics of each case, there's no way of knowing whether everyone on the termination list deserved to be there.

But, in the big picture, there is a case to be made for winnowing out customers who run up a company's costs with excessive demands and abuse of the system. "In some ways, it's better for all the rest of us for the costly people to be shunned," he said.

As improved technology has allowed companies to better analyze which customers bring in the most profit and to identify areas of the businesses that drain resources, there's been a move away from the customer-is-always-right attitude.

Consumers began learning a few years ago that some retailers had installed systems to identify "serial returners." Those who took advantage of return policies too often might find themselves unwelcome.

Other retailers moved to tighten overall return policies after discovering they cut too deeply into profits. This spring, warehouse club chain Costco Wholesale Corp. said it would no longer take back televisions, computers, MP3 players and other electronic items after 90 days. The company said it expects the new policy will improve its bottom line.

Sprint had a similar defense for its recent actions. "In order to execute toward our long-term goal of delivering better top line growth and profitability, at times we need to take action by tightening our policies while continuing to serve our existing customers," said company spokesman Jack Pflanz.

Specifically, the Associated Press reported the company sent letters June 29 to about 1,000 subscribers saying the relationship wasn't working out. Their accounts were to be terminated. They wouldn't owe anything on their final bill or be required to pay early termination fees. But if they wanted to keep their phone number, they needed to switch to another wireless provider by July 30.

Sprint has about 53 million customers, according to Mr. Pflanz, so this decision affects a relatively small minority. The bulk of its clientele are much less demanding.

"On average, these customers have called Care [customer service] 50 times more a month than the average customer," he said. When that happens over an extended period of time, he said, it indicates the company won't be able to resolve issues to the customer's satisfaction.

Edgar Dworsky, a lawyer who runs an advocacy site called ConsumerWorld.org, isn't buying it. "I think it's absolutely outrageous."

He noted some states have laws protecting tenants who make complaints to their landlords from retaliation and this feels like a similar situation. "There's kind of some notion of the right to complain," he said.

If Sprint is getting too many complaints, he said, the company should look in the mirror to see if it needs to make changes.

The case should be an interesting test for those trying to find ways to reduce the cost of customer service, said Dr. Boatwright. "A call to a real live person is much, much more expensive than having a Web site that thousands of people can visit for free," he noted.

He pointed out the tightened retail return policies applied to everyone, whether they were the type who rarely took anything back or the ones who knew every loophole in the system. He said Sprint's action might be more palatable because it appears to apply only to those who seem to be demanding in a way that raises costs.

There's never just one side to any breakup. The blogs and the message boards offer charges that Sprint's customer service was sometimes guilty of those things that drive consumers crazy, such as putting people on hold and then transferring them more than once. Others said they were unfairly included in the pest category.

Dr. Boatwright will be watching to see whether the market decides Sprint has made its case or whether there's a backlash against the wireless provider. "I'm kind of interested to see how people react."