Change of Wire Service Commission Structure

[theRKF]

Last time I checked the WS's were not supposed to be acquiring customers. The WS are going to spend so much money acquiring customers that florist will have no choice but to leave because we won't have any 100% paying customers. Most of us do the best we can with the money we have to acquire as many customers as we can.

Do you think that FTD and TF need all the extra 20% of the cash they take ontop of membership, wire fees, book fees, ad fees, web fees to acquire these customers? What will they do with all these customers if there are no more florists to fill orders? (I know that will never happen, and I know I am part of the problem)

Need? Who says what a business needs? I can't say what fees or charges your business needs?

Now, back on topic: The majority of florists are paying their WS dues and fees for the incoming orders. They view it as a way to establish their business or to reduce waste & downtime for an existing business. For some it's viewed as a way to increase market share.

They pay the WS to get them orders, because for the same $$ they can't acquire the orders themselves. If they could, they wouldn't need the WS (I'm not talking about the big senders, at this point, because the sending shops have a different perspective.)

I'm not sure where/what/who you checked, but the typical WS pitch to a florist is: "Sign up with us and we'll get you more orders." #1 reason shops leave a WS? "Not enough orders." Heck, ya, the WS are supposed to be acquiring orders for florists! That's what 90% of the WS customers (florists) want, and that's how they'll keep those members happy.

When you're talking about the WS getting the 20% on top of the 7%, I'm assuming you're referring to consumer-direct activities. The WS pays to attract those customers, and pays to keep them, so why shouldn't they get the 20%? The 7% is a different revenue stream, designated for different use.

Ryan

 

[oaf]

them was us not long go(UK WISE)

Last time I checked the WS's were not supposed to be acquiring customers. The WS are going to spend so much money acquiring customers that florist will have no choice but to leave because we won't have any 100% paying customers. Most of us do the best we can with the money we have to acquire as many customers as we can.

Do you think that FTD and TF need all the extra 20% of the cash they take ontop of membership, wire fees, book fees, ad fees, web fees to acquire these customers? What will they do with all these customers if there are no more florists to fill orders? (I know that will never happen, and I know I am part of the problem)

TOTALY AGREE WITH LORI 100% ON ALL OF THE ABOVE...........
INFINITE SAYS "SHOULD'NT THE COMPANY DOING ALL THE WORK BE PROPERLY COMPENSATED"...WE UK SIDE UNTIL QUITE RECENTLY WAS THAT COMPANY.. AND I PERSONALLY DIDNT GAIN ZILCH(SHAREHOLDERS MIGHT NOW, BUT MEMBERS NEVER DID)WE KNOW GETTING IN CUSTOMERS HAS AN EXPENSE BUT ALSO TRADING ON YOUR NAME(BIG BRAND)YEARS OF STERLING FLORIST SERVICE ,THAT COST'S BANKED.CUSTOMER FOR THIS BRAND, JUST GO WITH THE BRAND SO NO NEED TO ATTATCH MASSIVE CUSTOMER COSTS..SO I STILL STAND BY 10% IS WAY PLENTY + PLUS MONTHLY FEES THEY GET AND ALL OTHER ADD ONS.

 

[sfox]

Just Maybe

Last time I checked the WS's were not supposed to be acquiring customers. The WS are going to spend so much money acquiring customers that florist will have no choice but to leave because we won't have any 100% paying customers. Most of us do the best we can with the money we have to acquire as many customers as we can.

Do you think that FTD and TF need all the extra 20% of the cash they take ontop of membership, wire fees, book fees, ad fees, web fees to acquire these customers? What will they do with all these customers if there are no more florists to fill orders? (I know that will never happen, and I know I am part of the problem)

Lori, just maybe you answered the question as to why the sender should get the 20% now being paid. You posted " Most of us do the best we can with the money we have to acquire as many customers as we can." But you always want more, so you belong to a wire service to get those orders, but you don't want to pay the person that sent you those orders for the work they did.

And you make the comment "Do you think that FTD and TF need all the extra 20% of the cash they take on top of membership, wire fees, book fees, ad fees, web fees to acquire these customers? " My answer is they probably don't but if you are willing to fill orders for them at the fee structure they are paying now, WHY change?

And you go on to say "What will they do with all these customers if there are no more florists to fill orders? (I know that will never happen, and I know I am part of the problem. Your answer tells the story. First, I posted earlier on this string that florists shouldn't fill for any OG's for any reason. That would sure put a crimp on their business model. But as to the the other part about what will happen if there are no more florists to fill orders.....did you ever think that maybe there are too many florists willing to fill and not enough orders to go around. So if many just go away, that would leave more for those left and the model would go back to the orginal idea of florists sending and florists filling.

 

[Bigted]

Since I love arguing on both sides, let's try this.

There is no question that there is a huge florist demand for incoming orders. However, that doesn't mean that the orders have to be gathered by non-florists to keep the industry going. Remember, most OG advertising is focused on getting an order that is already coming in--NOT creating more demand.

Let's say there was a huge plague that killed all the OGs. In a very short time, the consumer would know that they can call their local flower shop and get the order taken care of. The wire services would stay the same, the filling florists would be the same, but it would be real flower shops getting the sending funds.

Of course, just to play this scenario to its conclusion, in a short while, some shops would become way better at getting orders than others, and they would realize that setting up a seperate call center would save them money, and voila! we're right back where we started.

Bottom line, wishing things were different gets you nowhere.

 

[lori042499]

Lori, just maybe you answered the question as to why the sender should get the 20% now being paid. You posted " Most of us do the best we can with the money we have to acquire as many customers as we can." But you always want more, so you belong to a wire service to get those orders, but you don't want to pay the person that sent you those orders for the work they did.

And you make the comment "Do you think that FTD and TF need all the extra 20% of the cash they take on top of membership, wire fees, book fees, ad fees, web fees to acquire these customers? " My answer is they probably don't but if you are willing to fill orders for them at the fee structure they are paying now, WHY change?

And you go on to say "What will they do with all these customers if there are no more florists to fill orders? (I know that will never happen, and I know I am part of the problem. Your answer tells the story. First, I posted earlier on this string that florists shouldn't fill for any OG's for any reason. That would sure put a crimp on their business model. But as to the the other part about what will happen if there are no more florists to fill orders.....did you ever think that maybe there are too many florists willing to fill and not enough orders to go around. So if many just go away, that would leave more for those left and the model would go back to the orginal idea of florists sending and florists filling.

The model will never ever go back to the way it was as long as there are OG's period....Unless there is give and take in the WS it will remain broken. The reason so many florists feel that they should get an extra 10% is because the WS lure the "senders" with the big rebates, and 20% and then they charge a service fee on top. I do not have TF so that I can get tons of orders. I have TF because Most florists that I want to send my WO to have TF. I feel that I get a better quality florist through TF and I don't fill for OG's through any wire service because of the immenent problems that can and do occur. I fill for other florists like myself. I use 800 orders as my source of heafty incoming. Again I do not fill for OGs other than 800 through them either because they bite.

You are right I do not want to pay someone for getting their customer. They should be paying to get their customer. Just like I pay to get my customers. I provide WO as a service of my business. My customers pay for that service because they want me to take care of their order. All I want out of life is a service that I can send and recieve void of scum sucking scumbags who could care less about the industry or the people who love it....There I said it...

 

[Buzz]

I'm trying to start a war. The wire services should PAY US a monthly fee for the privilege of getting their orders filled.

My thoughts exactly! In fact, the last time someone from TF called me and tried to get me to sign up, that is the first thing I asked them. How much will you pay me each month? The rep tried to tell me how much it would cost, and I said, "wait, I'm not paying you anything, how much will you be paying me? I'm the one that's doing you a service, why would I pay you?" the rep was so taken off guard he didn't know what to say and hung up. I got a good chuckle out of that one.

Also, as several people said above, the reason most shops belong to a wire service is to send & receive orders. Especially when your a new shop. A WS can be a good way to get your product out to the consumers. Everyone is wanting an affordable WS. One that doesn't have outrageous monthly fees and one that doesn't take such a huge cut out of every order that you can't make any money. I've tried TF. FTD, 800, floral source, & FSN. I dropped every one of them except FSN, because for my shop, I found that Flower Shop Network provided the most affordable WS. The sending & receiving florists get a real 20/80 split. When you wire an order you just charge a $3.99 relay fee which goes to FSN. Thats all they get. There is no rediculous 13 or 14 dollar service charge like some of the other WS's. They do a very good job of not letting OG's sign up so I've never had a problem receiving orders from some OG trying to rip me off.

 

[bloomz]

Sorry, but this thread is at best a pipedream. The WS need orders to keep the system going. They are not going to take actions that will reduce the flow of orders. It just isn't going to happen.

None of the established wire services would be the first to do this.

Bottom line, wishing things were different gets you nowhere.

I wish taxes were lower, health insurance were cheaper.

Can't the US Government lower taxes? And give us free medical care? (You Canadians don't qualify with this part you lucky dawgiez)

ahh, wishing

How about we toss in some world peace too?

I THINK - the IRS doesn't need so @@@@ much of our money to squader, and squander it they do, shamelessly.

Pass the pipe Ted.

 

[Joe Mioux]

I wish taxes were lower, health insurance were cheaper..

Vote for a Conservative.

Can't the US Government lower taxes? And give us free medical care? (You Canadians don't qualify with this part you lucky dawgiez)

ahh, wishing.

Vote for a Conservative.

How about we toss in some world peace too?.

Vote for a Conservative.

I THINK - the IRS doesn't need so @@@@ much of our money to squader, and squander it they do, shamelessly.

they just collect the money and hand it over to Treasury. The House of Democrats spend it. vote conservative. :tongue

 

[bloomz]

Vote for a Conservative.

Vote for a Conservative.

Vote for a Conservative.

they just collect the money and hand it over to Treasury. The House of Democrats spend it. vote conservative. :tongue

Like W aka el Dumbo? (aka largest "deficit in US history" conservative? My cost of health insurance tripling conservative?)

That conservative? That's a fiscal conservative you betcha.

PS - who spent all the money in the last 6 years? It wasn't a house of demos then.....

You had me goin there til you mentioned whirled peas.....that's when the buzzer sounded.

BZZZZZZTTTTT


Now about them TFTD commissions???

I know - vote conservative.

 

[sfox]

Like W aka el Dumbo? (aka largest "deficit in US history" conservative? My cost of health insurance tripling conservative?)

That conservative? That's a fiscal conservative you betcha.

PS - who spent all the money in the last 6 years? It wasn't a house of demos then.....

You had me goin there til you mentioned whirled peas.....that's when the buzzer sounded.

BZZZZZZTTTTT


Now about them TFTD commissions???

I know - vote conservative.

bloomz, you sure you didn't have a closed head injury on that motorcycle?

 

[goldfish]

Is it possible?
Could a wire service give the receiving florist 81-83%, the sending 10%, and the rest for clearinghouse.

Not possible, for the reason mentioned by Bigted.

Mathematically, the actual partition of commissions, whether it's 80-20 or even 50-50, wouldn't make any difference in your gross profit, IF the number of incoming you fill and the number of outgoing you gather were the same. Commission-out and commission-in would cancel out each other.

 

[RC in Dayton and Cincinnati]

What makes you think the number of incoming you fill and the number of outgoing you gather would ever be the same?


Bottom line, the commission split is controlled by supply and demand. The demand for incoming wire orders out ways the supply of orders. Therefore, a premium is paid to those supplying the orders, and a premium is charged for those receiving them.


RC

 

[Joe Mioux]

What makes you think the number of incoming you fill and the number of outgoing you gather would ever be the same?


Bottom line, the commission split is controlled by supply and demand. The demand for incoming wire orders out ways the supply of orders. Therefore, a premium is paid to those supplying the orders, and a premium is charged for those receiving them.


RC

Randy,

Can "anytown USA Florist", reject enough low dollar incoming orders to counterbalance their outgoing WS business' commssions? Yes they can.

In other words, every month, WS florists receive a statement. That statement shows inbounds and outbounds. If a flower shop is predisposed to send more than the receive, all they have to do is forward the unprofitable orders.

What do you mean the commission split is controlled by S & D?

Randy, we are not obliged to accept any inbounds, so simple Econ101 economics do not apply.

joe

 

[Joe Mioux]

To continue, the worldwide flower market doesn't dictate the price of flower bouquets. Individual florists do.

 

[Joe Mioux]

Like W aka el Dumbo? (aka largest "deficit in US history" conservative? My cost of health insurance tripling conservative?)

That conservative? That's a fiscal conservative you betcha.

PS - who spent all the money in the last 6 years? It wasn't a house of demos then.....

You had me goin there til you mentioned whirled peas.....that's when the buzzer sounded.

BZZZZZZTTTTT


Now about them TFTD commissions???

I know - vote conservative.

I didn't say "W" was a conservative did I?

 

[RC in Dayton and Cincinnati]

To continue, the worldwide flower market doesn't dictate the price of flower bouquets. Individual florists do.

That's what you think! Try selling your little bouquet for $1,000 and see where it gets you.

 

[Joe Mioux]

That's what you think! Try selling your little bouquet for $1,000 and see where it gets you.

Every flower shop can adjust their inbounds and outbounds to compensate for the WS commission schedules.

 

[RC in Dayton and Cincinnati]

Randy,

Can "anytown USA Florist", reject enough low dollar incoming orders to counterbalance their outgoing WS business' commssions? Yes they can.

Actually they can't because many of the costs are tied to membership fees and miscellaneous charges you pay whether you receive the order or you reject it.

...but you already knew that.


RC

 

[Joe Mioux]

Every flower shop can adjust their inbounds and outbounds to compensate for the WS commission schedules.

And that has nothing to do with macro economics supply and demand.

joe

 

[goldfish]

What makes you think the number of incoming you fill and the number of outgoing you gather would ever be the same?

If we look at the whole WS industries, the number of wire-ins and wire-outs must necessarily be the same.

If we just look at the retail-florist sector, the number of wire-ins must necessarily be greater than that of wire-outs, because of the existence of sending-only companies.

So, if there is no sending-only companies (a scenario which I know won't happen), the ratio of wire-ins vs wire-outs among retail florists will become close to 50:50, if we look at a large enough pool (say all the florists in Long Island). Of course, if we are just looking at a single shop, the numbers won't always be equal.

Bottom line, the commission split is controlled by supply and demand. The demand for incoming wire orders out ways the supply of orders. Therefore, a premium is paid to those supplying the orders, and a premium is charged for those receiving them

I agree to a degree. On the other hand, I think the desperate "demand" for incoming orders by small florists is the consequence, rather than the cause, for rampant Order Gathering by WS's.

A long time ago in this forum, I proposed a system of flexible commission split. At that time, no one responded, but I can repeat it here.

Instead of a fixed split, like 80-20, why not make the split a kind of bidding system? If your shop is so desparate for orders, you bid, say, 30% commission for incoming orders. A central computer automatically route an order to the higest bidder.

For a small town, this system won't work for obvious reasons. But for a large city with many potential fillers, it could work. Let the market decide the equilibrium point for commission split.