a bit of good news from FTD - controversy invited

Status
Not open for further replies.
Man

bloomz said:
Kinda what I meant - this is the way it is - we can choose to deal with it or quit.
Click to expand...
Man, please don't all leave at once. The new owners of FTD haven't had enough time to raise the fees yet. You guys should hang on for a while longer. They will really need the money to pay their bills.

Let's see, From You Flowers can send to 800Flowers, who can send to Florist.com, who can send to bloomz. Man think about it, lots of senders, just a little shortage of fillers. Nothing wrong with that, all the money is made on sending.

Hey, bloomz do you still get your sending rebate even if no one fills the order?

God, it's got to be great to be FTD!
 
It'll do just fine for me for right now Mr Fox, thanks for asking.

Sorry it didn't work out for you.
 
I thought this funny considering the source...

To quote FTD "Orders that either arrive late or are never delivered are damaging the reputation of the industry and , moving customers away from the floral category."

Now this to me, sounds kinda dumb...hasn't FTD been trying to do that for years?

Suspend ON!
 
BOSS said:
I thought this funny considering the source...

To quote FTD "Orders that either arrive late or are never delivered are damaging the reputation of the industry and , moving customers away from the floral category."

Now this to me, sounds kinda dumb...hasn't FTD been trying to do that for years?

Suspend ON!
Click to expand...

No I think FTD "learned" a new word..."OXYMORON"!!
 
FTD's new Quality program

Just wondering what others are thinking about the new FTD "quality" program. More properly called punishment charges.

They are now charging as of 6/1 for not rejecting orders within 2 hours. This includes if you receive the order past the the cut-off time. Also they have come up with some formula to determine quality by a math formula based on your shop rejected order value compared to the FTD network order value filled. I assume we are talking the total value of all orders rejected.

So, I think considering the recent sale of FTD they are instituting a means to assure their .com orders and gatherer orders are filled.

They say the money charged will be paid to the sender. So if the sender is FTD....?
 
ok

bloomz said:
and mine, and any other florist that sends orders.

Sorry amigo your view is a bit too short sighted.

They got the most orders - they'll get the most benefit

But I love it

http://www.flowerchat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16447
Click to expand...
Jonathon-Not at all and you know i love you...However Since they started masking orders hiding themselves and whoever else under that code this has been a problem to florists... Not you and your 55.00 avg order. 19.99,29.99 is what started the prob. I am not going to get into all the crap thats been slung for the past 10 years. Its fact to protect themselves and the profit they make at YOURS and everyother Retail Florist that pays dues to them. Do you really believe that call that was made to the Top Senders was meant for anything but to protect themselves. Sorry Brother that move they did is purely absolutely STUPID. Hypothedical situation you have 50 orders in CO box too busy to handle incoming for whatever reason but yet you send 100% of your orders FTD you should get penalty? That means Loyalty gets screwed today its called watch you arse... Watch yours my friend...
Develop relationships, true recipricol relationships that will honor and trust you and your orders.
 
Sorry,


Did not realize the thread Good News was about this issue. But after reading through some of the replies and the first post, seems there is a general error in reasoning here.


This is not about all the “bad” florist. If in fact there were such a great number of bad florist then the entire concept of “wire service” would have failed already. I would suggest that with as little as 5% being bad the system would be failing. And I do not see that the system is failing. It also belies history. I do not believe the problems today of getting an order filled had been as difficult in the past as is suggested today with such a program FTD is suggesting.


The problem FTD is trying to solve is for the order gather of which they are. And it is a very specific problem: Inability to contact their customer in a timely manor in order to convey that there is a problem with the order. It is their customer. But, being that they are communicating via a medium that does not give as immediate access to the customer as you would have had they called or walked into your shop, the entire concept of order gathering crashes when there is a problem. FTD's solution proposed is nothing more than playing the odds. They are betting they will find a shop to take the order without having to tell their customer that their order was nonprocessable. If they can't, then they are betting that they will find the last shop sent the order standing without a chair when the music stops.


There is only one reputation they are concerned about and it is the reputation of the concept of being able to order flowers online. They have banked their entire business plan on it. But, they neglected to realize that the complete process of the concept of ordering online means actually being able to assess the environment in which that order will actually filled. The computer program has not been built yet that can assess all the variables of an order taken and thus respond to the customer with an order specific expectation of results. Instead there are blanket statements in the form of guarantees that are the lie to the entire business model of order gathering. When that model breaks down, FTD et al no longer want to accept the responsibility for the failure of the way the model has been implemented. They do not want to accept that the customer is still their customer even after they have sent the order to the florist who will complete the order.


In economic terms this is called an externality. Pushing the cost off onto someone else to absorb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
If and I mean IF, they really wanted Quality Assurance, they would have knowledgable Field Service Representatives who knew what true design was and would evaluate their membership as such. Not utilize the words "money was in it" as their award of payment. Anyone can put $20 worth of flowers in a vase (not arranged as shown by Proflowers et al) and call it to value.
Quality Assurance went out the window with the split.
Money is the line was their mantra just before and after they gained control without member input.
Just a # on my list of termination reasons.
 
Those recent claims (won't bother quoting them) would be true - IF THIS RULE APPLIED ONLY TO THEIR ORDERS. (I'm a bit surprised it doesn't)

But it doesn't - it applies to yours and mine just as much (fewer numbers is all)

And that shoots a hole in that "they're only doing this for themselves" theory.

I'm quite glad to know my orders will be "protected" (?) under this new rule.

I really wish it would have started May 1, cuz I could have used it on a couple of problem orders.

I'd like to see it extent to unanswered asks as well.

Real life situation - customer claims non delivery - 3 or 4 days later you finally get a response?

What do you tell your customer about their order? I hate to categorically refund (until I hear from the florist) because there are often extenuating circumstances and reasons (like the recip wasn't home) - but it sure makes you look bad (non-professional) in the meantime to your customer to put them off. Like as in "what kind of florists are you dealing with, anyway?"

opinions vary - mine is/are - it rocks.


Hal's right on this one tho - there is a better way in use in my shop and 109 other ones - right now!
 
The real truth...

bloomz said:
And that shoots a hole in that "they're only doing this for themselves" theory.
Click to expand...

Not so fast my friend, I was too the drinker of their cool aid and I have never faulted anyone for making money for their business, however doing this for the membership was only a seed in the idea to sell this to the large senders to gain more orders through their system.
Let see how this is managed and paid, to me it is a unmanageable audit nightmare. The mercury system is older than you my friend, and that is OLD, and you think they can reprogram it to catch times and if something is rejected or not. NO CHANCE. There is only one of two ways this can go. Every REJ will get a $10 fee or there is some slob up at HQ tracking all of this, GOOD luck. The calls will start for sure on July 5th when everyone gets their online statements. Don't expect to see the money until the next month unless they are looking out to give free money only to take it back the next month.


bloomz said:
What do you tell your customer about their order - I hate to categorically refund (until I hear from the florist) because there are often extenuating circumstances and reasons (like the recip wasn't home) - but it sure makes you look bad (non-professional) in the meantime to your customer to put them off. Like as in "what kind of florists are you dealing with, anyway?"
Click to expand...

Dude you collect what ever exorbitant Transaction fee, give them the money right back ... don't wait for the florist. Either way, they will not like what answer you give them so you are better off building the customer relationship even if the flowers you sent were delivered. It doesn't make good sense to question a customer and fight over a pittance of money. Customer service Bro, Customer service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Bloomz,
It may apply to yours and mine, but the few orders we have that have problems is insignificant as compared to what FTD et al are running.

When we take an order to wire, we explain the circumstances. For instance, we know that if the customer wants it to go to Florida, they need to cough up about $20 more plus a delivery. If it is a holiday and going to Florida, we let them know there is a possibility we may not be able to complete the order and then give them the option of calling a florist them self. We supply the phone numbers. This more than covers us if something goes wrong. And it protects the receiving florist if the fault is the customers information.



But, this policy is not about your order being messed up by the receiving florist after they accepted it. It is about not giving you time to re-send the order such that the delivery can be made as desired and on the date stated.
Sure, we get a few that you can't please. That's business. FTD et al wants to push this off onto the filling florist as if it is no longer their customer. That is why they are calling for compensation. You will collect occasionally for a few orders that get messed up. It amounts to squat.
Assume I collected $1K in screw-up compensation. Somewhere around 20 orders for the year. Well, that's about 0.002% of the gross of my business. I doubt I have 20 screw-ups a year. I can recall but one order in the past yr that was messed up as it relates to the florist not rejecting it. One. Certainly it's not worth my energy to spend a lot of time thinking about what it will take to make the customer happy. Give them their money back, do it for free, what ever and move on.
But, FTD et al need their orders accepted and they have no way to know if they can fulfill the order before the order is accepted by them. You and I can say no after the customer gives us the info, but an order gather can not. And that is their problem. Not ours.
That means, your perspective would be acceptable as the reason why FTD is doing this if not for the other part of the program which is a rating of how much in dollar volume of orders you reject and also that FTD is selling the business. That they are going to rate on rejected volume means they are putting the pressure on to accept what is sent to you.
Nope, this is typical big business today. It's only about grabbing hold of a much of the dollars that are in play, taking your cut and assuring any costs against the cut are passed on with as little responsibility for the resultant product.
 
HERO said:
Dude you collect what ever exorbitant Transaction fee, give them the money right back ... don't wait for the florist. Either way, they will not like what answer you give them so you are better off building the customer relationship even if the flowers you sent were delivered. It doesn't make good sense to question a customer and fight over a pittance of money. Customer service Bro, Customer service.
Click to expand...

You do make a good point (for an asshat):drunk:

And I do try really really hard to give good customer service.

New case in point - sent cyclamen plant no subs delivered on the 8th - customer called next day - they did not send a cyc and whatever plant they did send the recipient claims is "dying".

I asked them nicely to please replace - five messages now running over one week - today (Friday) they finally answered the message that they will call recipient - who know what that means? I've had problem orders before where the florist told the recipient they were wrong and alienated the piss out of them - but what's the oxymoron of it all is - their name is on the order. And probably 90% of the time the sender makes some statement to us like "I know it's not your fault" (which I correct - always, and assume full responsibility for it)

Dan5602896 said:
Bloomz,
It may apply to yours and mine, but the few orders we have that have problems is insignificant as compared to what FTD et al are running.

That they are going to rate on rejected volume means they are putting the pressure on to accept what is sent to you.
Nope, this is typical big business today. It's only about grabbing hold of a much of the dollars that are in play, taking your cut and assuring any costs against the cut are passed on with as little responsibility for the resultant product.
Click to expand...

But I only care about MY orders and it affects mine.

They probably do more orders in a day than all the florists in the US combined do in a month - separate issue.

Rating schmating - I give two forks less about their rejection rating - whadda they gonna do - send me less ftd.con orders I don't take anyway?
 
Well I'm just glad that asshat..

bloomz said:
You do make a good point (for an asshat):drunk:
Click to expand...

has such a great friend in AssClown ( You bro! )

Asshat, OUT ! :iamwith:
 
A couple of thoughts:

I believe that the real reasons this rule is being implemented are that 1. There are florists that deliberately sit on orders until it's too late and then reject them. 2. Put fear into fillers so they will stop rejecting so many as it represents a serious threat to the online order gathering model.

I have no problem with the first part. Those florists that sit on orders are hurting this business and should be penalized.

The second part won't work. It will just encourage more game playing and give another source of undeserved revenue to the OGs.

We fill a fair number of orders. However we don't reject that many (although we don't accept orders from skimmers/scammers). If the money isn't there we don't hesitate to ask for more. It's only right that we do that within a reasonable amount of time.

In my opinion it will be the implementation of this rule that will make it or break it.
 
Why continue to play by their rules

It was stated in this thread that we shouldn't let them tell us the rules to play by, but if your going to play with my ball in my court then you play by my rules. If you don't like it leave. We can place blame however and wherever we widh, but if we are still on the "love boat them we just need to suck it up and comply.
It was initially stated and never discussed much further that this fee would cause compliance and respect to return to the industry. People don't buy flowers because they got burned. I haven't quit eating at the fast food burger places cuz they had e-coli in their meat and kids died. I haven't given up eating out because I got a bad meal. I may have become more selective about where adn how I dine, but I haven't stopped. I think the same goes in the floral industry.
The Ivory towers have created a monster where people have been burned numerous times and and for whatever reasons(consumers could really care less why the flowers died etc.) They only remember there was a negative associated with WS flowers. They have been so inundated with marketing about discounts, free delivery, free vases and such they (the ivory towers) have significantly decreased the percieved value of professionally designed flowers of any kind. People have been programed to look at price first and quality is not so important until they get a bad apple.
I think as long as florists are riding the OG fence, and sleeping with the Ivory towers then they are contributing to the problem in the industry. It's time to work together as a group of professional florists within the floral industry to change this perception. People are still buying flowers. Just not from us.
The WS are killing the industry and this is just one more nail in the proverbial coffin. Mark my words there will be a division in the industry, and it will be wide. You will either have to be for or against.
WS should make a formula that you must fill a certain % of what is sent, or help the filling florist more instead of those going for the easy out, and send, send, sending. I think it should be all or nothing send and fill equally or don't belong at all. but I choose not to play the game. Just looking at things without rose colored glasses. The industry is in trouble and if we con't work together as brick and Mortar shops then we can't complain when we nail the plywood over our windows. just food for thought. mrflowermarket
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I'm gonna guess that an ASK will freeze the action on it.

But I got another real life example today.

Non delivery yesterday for a birthday - 3 messages sent today they answer "sorry our printer wasn't working and we didn't get the order yesterday".

I'm refunding the order and I lost the customer.

Customer aquisition isn't free. I usually guess around $5 to get a customer, and twice the sender called my FAH and left me messages that cost I think it's $1.75 each.

Think they should be fined? :dunno:

Isn't part of being professional knowing if your software is working?

On the rare instance we've had a software outage (internet connection or whatever - fyi - ecommerce is a quite fragile combination of many ingredients and systems that all have to work hand in hand) you should see the hoops I had to jump thru to retreve and rebuild those orders. I had an issue MD week Thursday at crunch time that took me about 3 hours right at the wrong time going thru order logs and picking missing orders (about 5 of them) out of gobbledegook code - it were not fun, but it wuz the responsible thing to do.

I'm pleased to say I found them all.

EDIT: The plot thickened more - On closer examination...They sent me an ask for more money and I sent them more money 4 days ago but they didn't deliver cuz their printer was down yesterday. HUH?

I'll answer this myself YES they should be fined and double the cost of the order could possibly have saved my customer.

It was a FlowerRama Store in Dallas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back