Announcement FTD releases new rules for members and the send only shops

[steve]

It may be caused by the combination of many things going on in the industry. Everything from Google losing the case in the Down under to all the various states passing or working on legislation as it pertains to deceptive advertising, Florist orgainizing via Florist For Change, all the bad press from Valentines day with more about to happen come Mother's Day . Maybe they can read the hand writing on the wall and are trying to get out in front of the power curve???

 

[Simon Says]

I think it is probably an element of all the things Steve mentions but, IMO, Boss has it right. The parent company needs FTD to be even more cash flow positive and profitable as it seems the other businesses in its' portfolio struggling. Got to keep those rapacious Wall Street bods happy, chasing the Quarter after Quarter results.

 

[CHR]

Agree about FTD's parent company struggling. The stock hit a 52-week low this week.

I believe FTD is also getting a fair amount of heat about the dOGs who display their logo. Mark at FlowerComplaint.com added an email address to FTD near the top of the complaint pages about WB, Avas, JF and BloomsToday so surely the corporate staff is loudly hearing from unhappy shoppers.

Some ripped-off consumers are also discussing the dOGs on FTD's FB page, like this WB customer:


The newest wrinkle in OGing is companies like WB refusing to fully refund shoppers when the flowers aren't delivered. WB is retaining the 'service charge' and 'handling fee' claiming their small print discloses this 'company policy'. Shockingly, the BBB is backing them up on the policy. And this kind of policy puts a big black mark on sending flowers - period.

Long-term, FTD should be concerned about shoppers choosing flowers as a gift as consumer satisfaction continues to decline across the channel - and much of that has been caused by FTDs polices over the last decade.

 

[bootcampguy]

.....Long-term, FTD should be concerned about shoppers choosing flowers as a gift as consumer satisfaction continues to decline across the channel - and much of that has been caused by FTDs polices over the last decade.

This is what get my panties in a curl, they do choose other gift avenues with all the bad press..............sad

 

[anytimeflowers]

Some ripped-off consumers are also discussing the dOGs on FTD's FB page, like this WB customer:
View attachment 15827

The newest wrinkle in OGing is companies like WB refusing to fully refund shoppers when the flowers aren't delivered. WB is retaining the 'service charge' and 'handling fee' claiming their small print discloses this 'company policy'. Shockingly, the BBB is backing them up on the policy. And this kind of policy puts a big black mark on sending flowers - period.

This is outrageous! Simply outrageous. Thinking as a consumer, I would be so ticked off my eyes would have popped out of my head from the steam and boiling blood. I would probably be making a road trip to Mich.......I just cannot believe this could be legal, I don't care whether "policy" states it or not. That's liking punishing the victim and rewarding the villain!

Long-term, FTD should be concerned about shoppers choosing flowers as a gift as consumer satisfaction continues to decline across the channel - and much of that has been caused by FTDs polices over the last decade

This is the key right here ~ perhaps a couple of stockholders got their heads out of their quarterlies long enough to see where the problem is and decided they need to do something about it. There will be no quarterlies if this keeps up ~ like I said before ~ social media is going to bring back the golden rule in business. I'm all for that!

 

[BOSS]

Gotta love it when a plan comes together

Just say'n~!

 

[Simon Says]

This is outrageous! Simply outrageous. Thinking as a consumer, I would be so ticked off my eyes would have popped out of my head from the steam and boiling blood. I would probably be making a road trip to Mich.......I just cannot believe this could be legal, I don't care whether "policy" states it or not. That's liking punishing the victim and rewarding the villain!

Linda, while I completely agree with you, I suspect -and no doubt some-one will correct me if I am wrong- that such practice (or a very close variation of it) has been picked up from airlines, hotels and parts of the travel industry. This is precisely where legalisation is needed -along with deceptive advertising- because if more see airlines and hotel bookers get away with fees despite no use, the practice will spread.

Mind you, perhaps it is a good idea....if WB did more of the referenced behavior perhaps the sooner they'll bite terra firma.

 

[anytimeflowers]

Linda, while I completely agree with you, I suspect -and no doubt some-one will correct me if I am wrong- that such practice (or a very close variation of it) has been picked up from airlines, hotels and parts of the travel industry. This is precisely where legalisation is needed -along with deceptive advertising- because if more see airlines and hotel bookers get away with fees despite no use, the practice will spread.

Mind you, perhaps it is a good idea....if WB did more of the referenced behavior perhaps the sooner they'll bite terra firma.

Not the same, Simon. The airlines do this when a traveler tries to change their ticket. This particular consumer didn't cancel, they waited for three days for the delivery which NEVER HAPPENED! If a flight gets canceled, the airline doesn't get to keep the ticket money. If the hotel burns down, they can't keep the room rental.

 

[Simon Says]

Linda: Book a hotel...reservation calls for check-in time by 6pm. Check-in after...room may not be available and, if so, and you have to find somewhere else, your on-line order fee is not paid back to you, especially if made through a third party hotel room booking company. Had it happen to me. Delay checking-in due to delayed flight arrival.

 

[Clarabella]

Linda: Book a hotel...reservation calls for check-in time by 6pm. Check-in after...room may not be available and, if so, and you have to find somewhere else, your on-line order fee is not paid back to you, especially if made through a third party hotel room booking company. Had it happen to me. Delay checking-in due to delayed flight arrival.

Yes, but the room was available to you until 6pm just as the terms of the reservation/booking stated. What WB did would be like you showing up at the hotel and 4pm and them saying "sorry" we decided not to give you your room but are going to keep the fee. It sounds like your experience was bad customer service....but they followed the agreement.

 

[Simon Says]

Clarabella, Clearly I failed, regardless of how, to live up to the contract with the hotel. I just fear that more companies are seeing various actual or potential avenues for revenue that they exploit. As I said when I first commented, the OG practice in question is "outrageous".

 

[CHR]

Well.... the deadline for adding addresses to landing pages has passed (April 21) and I see no changes in any of the usual suspects' sites.

Was this new rule sent out to all members or were they just left to discover it on their own on the FTDI site? It's meaningless unless implemented & enforced.

 

[Mikey the Flower Guy]

Well.... the deadline for adding addresses to landing pages has passed (April 21) and I see no changes in any of the usual suspects' sites.

Was this new rule sent out to all members or were they just left to discover it on their own on the FTDI site? It's meaningless unless implemented & enforced.

any "minute" changes will alter the landing pages, not just addresses added, or altered

 

[BOSS]

It's simply a sham to placate the lemmings....

Epic Fail on the way...starts May 7th...

Sadly, it could all be avoided.

 

[Mikey the Flower Guy]

It's simply a sham to placate the lemmings....

Epic Fail on the way...starts May 7th...

Sadly, it could all be avoided.

In that we all agree......<shudder>.....

 

[Clarabella]

Clarabella, Clearly I failed, regardless of how, to live up to the contract with the hotel. I just fear that more companies are seeing various actual or potential avenues for revenue that they exploit. As I said when I first commented, the OG practice in question is "outrageous".

Simon, I agree with you that the OG practices are outrageous. You also were the victim of hoRRIBLe customer service from the hotel. My point was just that WB is the scumiest of scum that lives on scum. They are far past the point of horrible customer service and into a territory that IMO should be illegal.