It's time......

[BBJ (Big Bad John)]

for the wire services to send along realistic delivery charges. $5.00 just does not cut it anymore (and it hasn't for a long time) with gas prices going through the roof and you can bet that insurance is going to go up as well after the massive pay-outs that will have to be made due to Katrina.

It's great that they are trying to assist those in dire straits due to the storm (FTD Dollar for Dollar matching funds and Teleflora $2.50 for every Teleflora.com order) but they should not forget about the changes affecting the whole economy, and that includes increased delivery fees for all products which in turn will also increase our cost for product before we add in our real delivery charge.

Oh ya, some FWOAC better look at what they send along for delivery fees as well! I've had the odd one that expects us to deliver for $3.00 or $4.00 in the last month!!!

 

[CHR]

BBJ,

Every florists has always had the option to request more funds if the dollars sent were insufficient to cover the product and delivery. But they usually don't, choosing to include less flowers or eat the difference.

The OG's rely on the complacency of most florists because having to deal with a barrage of price change requests would slow down if not cripple their systems. Florists also know if they continually request more $, an OG will take them off their preferred list (and they think it's a bad thing.)

It's up to each filling florist to communicate their local prices to the sending florist/OG.

Filling undervalued orders is a conscious choice, so the filling shops aren't 'victims.' They/we can ask for more money or say 'no' at any time.

Time for more florists to start standing up for themselves (I know you do already. )

 

[Pam]

Need more for delivery ?

Then ask at the time for more if needed. I always ask "what is your delivery to this area" ... and add it to the price of the flowers.

 

[FlowerDiva]

TF's operators have the authority to give you up to $5.00 more if you ask for it. At least that's what they told me on Thursday.

 

[mcf]

TF's $2.50

(Teleflora $2.50 for every Teleflora.com order)

Where did you hear about this? Is it shown online? Where will the money go?

I heard through the grapevine (sometimes reliable, sometimes not) that TF's collections will go to the Red Cross, not directly to florists.

 

[BBJ (Big Bad John)]

Filling undervalued orders is a conscious choice, so the filling shops aren't 'victims.' They/we can ask for more money or say 'no' at any time.

Maybe I worded my post wrong....I wasn't implying that filling florists are victims!! (we have always been able to ask for more $$ or reject any undervalued order) rather that it's high time the wire services got their act together and sent along more $$ for delivery.....(their standard delivery rate has been $5.00 for at least 10 years!!!!) and what florist is still paying the same for their vehicles, wages, insurance and fuel that they paid in 1995???

Many of us have complained before about the fact that $5.00 wasn't enough.......and now with the new price of fuel, it's time for them to update their delivery pricing!!

I heard through the grapevine (sometimes reliable, sometimes not) that TF's collections will go to the Red Cross, not directly to florists.

Yes the $2.50 goes to the Red Cross to help all victims.

 

[CHR]

BBJ,

I totally agree that $5 WS dollars ($3.65) is quite inadequate to cover delivery expenses. Until each WS agrees to send more across the boards (and I wouldn't hold my breath), it will take florists asking for more - one order at a time - until it's cheaper for them to send the appropriate money than it is to pay for the labor required to respond to the queries. Don't forget that these requests also delay the actual delivery of the product.

Imagine what would happen to Dove and Merc if every shop sent a price change request for every WS and OG generated order (and under-sold florist order as well.)

My comment about 'victims' was directed to those that complain to everyone else but the WSs, OGs and sending florists themselves. I know that's not you.

 

[LORRIE]

lorrie

The delivery charge thing has got me crazy this morning. Is there some way to pressure/suggest/demand wire services to change the standard on delivery charges transmeitted to a more reasonable amount $5 (in discounted dollars) just isn't doing the trick? I am paying my driver 7.95 per local ( in real dollars) and I will bet the ranch that when he comes in this morning he'll be asking for more.

 

[Griff]

So what's the fuss??

Why would changing the delivery amount make any difference to florists?

You people have been telling us for years now that you take YOUR local delivery charge out FIRST of incoming orders. If YOUR minimum is stated at $35 including delviery and you receive a $35 order, the first thing you do is subtract your CURRENT delviery charge of $7 or $8 or $9 or whatever it is, because at least your are going to get FULL VALUE for your delivery, right??Not true. Because the entire order is discounted, $5 delivery on a WS order is really $3.65 <thank you Cathy>. A $7 delivery comes out to about $5.04, so by raising the delivery charge to the customer another $2, the receiving florist still only gets $1.39 more in discounted money. This whole problem all comes back to playing with discounted money. A florist wants to keep raising their minimums in a bad discount program to try and get some "real dollars" to pay real bills. The higher the minimums, the less likely the consumer will send orders for flowers and go someplace else or order something other than flowers.

And no matter how many times and ways we try to tell florists about the difference of real dollars and "discounted" dollars it seems to fall on deaf ears. Like the lady in Rockville, Md last week that told me that she wouldn't accept our direct order at "undiscounted amount including delivery" for an open order in her zip code and on CC. She stated she wants to support her WS and feels that direct orders don't support the system. Hello!

So you keep supporting the program. Keep supporting the idea that as your delivery costs keep increasing, the sender and the WS continue to get a piece of YOUR delivery charge. Continue to tell yourself you can ask for more money, but never question where the money comes from. It is the easy thing to do.

Am I being sarcastic? Yes. But tell us why the WS wouldn't be willing to separate a set amount of all transmitted orders <such as $5 from every order and make that amount discount exempt> to help the rising delivery costs encountered by the receiving florists. Example, an order for $35, $5 is exempt from discount and the receiving florist receives $30 discounted and $5 at full value. I know why they are not going to do it, but maybe the members can tell us why they aren't willing to do it.

 

[RC in Dayton and Cincinnati]

But tell us why the WS wouldn't be willing to separate a set amount of all transmitted orders <such as $5 from every order and make that amount discount exempt> to help the rising delivery costs encountered by the receiving florists. Example, an order for $35, $5 is exempt from discount and the receiving florist receives $30 discounted and $5 at full value. I know why they are not going to do it, but maybe the members can tell us why they aren't willing to do it.

What we have here is a floral welfare system.

The wire services provide orders to florists that can't quite make it on their own. They subsidize the florist's existence but never to the point of independence. These florists are always in need of an increasing amount of orders, but in order to supply that demand, the wire services need to create more orders. That is not an easy proposition as orders don't come cheap. The wire services either have to buy them directly with pay-per-clicks for their own e-commerce sites, or they must rent them, paying huge rebate, from large sending florists and ordergatherers.

To answer your question as to why the wire services wouldn't be willing to separate a set amount of all transmitted orders <such as $5 from every order and make that amount discount exempt> to help the rising delivery costs encountered by the receiving florists.

The answer is simple. There is no need to. Florists can choose to accept the orders or not. Florists can choose to belong to the wire services or not. Sure, florists complain about those orders, but they still accept them. Sure, florists cry about not getting enough money, but they still choose to belong.

Until enough florists go out of business or say enough is enough and drop their memberships, there is no need to do something as silly as making delivery costs exempt.

RC

 

[BOSS]

Exactly Randy.....exactly... I have been told "Why would we" florists still want these discounted orders....

I'm beginning see the end of the train ride resulting in the wreck...judging by the phone calls I have recieved in the last week or two, many from "Top Members" I see the change in attitude reaching higher and higher with many shops with high order volume thinking about taking their orders off the traditional grid and moving them to a new way of doing things.....

Hmmm....Real Florists, working together, with other Real Florists, in an organization run by Real Florists for the benifit of Real Florists.... what a concept....

Stay tuned....

 

[12BucksFor2Dozon]

...And no matter how many times and ways we try to tell florists about the difference of real dollars and "discounted" dollars it seems to fall on deaf ears. Like the lady in Rockville, Md last week that told me that she wouldn't accept our direct order at "undiscounted amount including delivery" for an open order in her zip code and on CC. She stated she wants to support her WS and feels that direct orders don't support the system. Hello!
...

Thanks Griff...this anecdote almost made me blow coffee through my nose this morning. Well one thing for sure...no one has ever accused certain floral "art-TI-sts" of being very good businesspeople.

 

[Griff]

I wondered if anyone was going to tackle this one....

What we have here is a floral welfare system.
The wire services provide orders to florists that can't quite make it on their own. They subsidize the florist's existence but never to the point of independence. These florists are always in need of an increasing amount of orders, but in order to supply that demand, the wire services need to create more orders.
The answer is simple. There is no need to. Florists can choose to accept the orders or not. Florists can choose to belong to the wire services or not. Sure, florists complain about those orders, but they still accept them. Sure, florists cry about not getting enough money, but they still choose to belong.
RC

Thanks RC for your response. I don't agree that this is all the fault of the florists. It may seem to some like a welfare system today, but sending orders through a wire service was never created to be a welfare system for florists that can't produce enough business on their own. I don't wish to start a debate as to who is at fault - the WS or the florist. The original question was why would any wire service be unwilling to change their commission even the slightest to assist receiving florists in covering the increasing costs of delivery. RC, I agree with you when you say, "there is no need to. Florists can choose to accept the orders or not." The real heart of the issue is however, that the WS does not care whether the florist makes money or not on incoming. The WS does not care whether the florist survives or not. If any florist fails, they merely find a replacement. They are not concerned about YOUR delivery costs. It is for this same reason you will never see any change in the current commission program, because they don't care. It works for THEM so why should they worry about you, the florist. Your six digit member ship number is merely an identification number to be looked at as an revenue source. You're are not ON the team anymore, you're just supposed to assist their needs. I'm not trying to be cruel or unfair. This is just modern day business. So don't hope or expect that someday they will change the commission program because it is the FAIR thing to do or find away to compensate florists for added expenses. it's not going to happen!

The only thing you can come to rely on is the cost of belonging to either WS is going to continue to increase almost every month with some dues or fees being increased or some new charges that wil be created. As RC says. "florists continue to cry about not getting enough money, but continue to belong." NOW that is the fault of the florists and not the WS!

Thanks RC for being the one to step up to the plate. Didn't look like anyone else wanted to touch this subject.

 

[Tom Carlson]

Tom Carlson

Griff wrote: "Like the lady in Rockville, Md last week that told me that she wouldn't accept our direct order at "undiscounted amount including delivery" for an open order in her zip code and on CC. She stated she wants to support her WS and feels that direct orders don't support the system."

This florist lady in Rocville, MD's religion is "Wire Service". She has been B&R [born and raised] in the florist religion of Wire Service.

What will it take to get an individual to change their religious affiliation, I mean in their real life? Scandal? I doubt it, they might stop going to church or quite contributing, but leave it? Not many will. Why? They are B&R and until they study and evaluate, they will not change. They just let it go on.

Are florists ever going to "study and evaluate" the wire service concept? A few of us have and we quit that religion.

I attended a funeral today and at the luncheon visited with a total stranger and when she found out we did the flowers I thought I would "inform her about the hazards of ordering flowers on the Internet." I did not have to. She had that figured out a long time ago without anyone telling her the workings of a wire service when you order on the Intenet. And her comment was, "My system works wonderful. I just find a florist in the zip code where the flowers will be delivered and I ask the florist I select if they have a cooler, designers and delivery vans. Haven't been burned yet. Florists are nice, honest people."

Back to the religion of the florist. Remember how every new shop just had to get affiliated wtih FTD but took Florafax, AFS, Redbood or Teleflora first because it was quicker to get in.

 

[Griff]

Yes, I remember, Tom

And I also remember when before I opened my business in 1986 that I was visited by a TF rep who told me that one of the first things customers are going to ask is, "can you send orders out of town?" and convinced me that I need a WS just to do that. He didn't try and convince me I needed a WS to get incoming orders or that those orders would help me get "some of my work" into local homes. He sold me on the need to SEND orders out of the area.

When I finally did get approved by FTD and I started to go to the local district meetings, many florists strongly suggested that I get a mercury just as quickly as I could afford to do so. Not because they wanted to send ME orders, but because it would make it easier for ME to send orders to them.

I honestly don't know if florists think of WS as a religion or not. I am of the opinion it is becoming more like a disease, not a drug. A disease is defined as "an alteration of a living body that impairs it's function." In some cases the WS disease is impairing business owners' thinking where in they are actually thinking how they can sustain or even tolerate the disease rather than how it is restricting their business.

The good thing is, Tom, people like you and Jerimiah's and Michael and Judy and others like myself no longer worry about the increasing dues and fees of a WS or how difficult it is to make money on discounted incoming orders anymore. We cured ourselves of that disease and although I can appreciate that some florists will have to fight harder than we did to get cured, they all have the opportunity to at least try. However, I have very little tolerance for florists that openly turn down full value orders <undiscounted, for you Bloomzie> in favor of WS discounted orders and try to convince the industry that they are doing this for the good of the system.

 

[RC in Dayton and Cincinnati]

Thanks RC for your response. I don't agree that this is all the fault of the florists. It may seem to some like a welfare system today, but sending orders through a wire service was never created to be a welfare system for florists that can't produce enough business on their own. I don't wish to start a debate as to who is at fault - the WS or the florist. The original question was why would any wire service be unwilling to change their commission even the slightest to assist receiving florists in covering the increasing costs of delivery. RC, I agree with you when you say, "there is no need to. Florists can choose to accept the orders or not." The real heart of the issue is however, that the WS does not care whether the florist makes money or not on incoming. The WS does not care whether the florist survives or not. If any florist fails, they merely find a replacement. They are not concerned about YOUR delivery costs. It is for this same reason you will never see any change in the current commission program, because they don't care. It works for THEM so why should they worry about you, the florist. Your six digit member ship number is merely an identification number to be looked at as an revenue source. You're are not ON the team anymore, you're just supposed to assist their needs. I'm not trying to be cruel or unfair. This is just modern day business. So don't hope or expect that someday they will change the commission program because it is the FAIR thing to do or find away to compensate florists for added expenses. it's not going to happen!

The only thing you can come to rely on is the cost of belonging to either WS is going to continue to increase almost every month with some dues or fees being increased or some new charges that wil be created. As RC says. "florists continue to cry about not getting enough money, but continue to belong." NOW that is the fault of the florists and not the WS!

Thanks RC for being the one to step up to the plate. Didn't look like anyone else wanted to touch this subject.

I'm not putting blame on florists. It's a trap they fall into.

Instead of placing blame, we need individually to take responsibility for our own situation. So, instead of pleading for the wire services to change, we need to take responsibility and change our own situation.

You are completely right the wire services don't care whether a florist survives or not. That's not really their responsibility. FTD needs to report to it's shareholders, and Teleflora is an investment. The responsibility whether a florist survives or not is on its owner.

If I would give one advice to the florists, it would be to stop depending on others for your success, whether it's the wire services, Rio or anyone else making big promises to you, and start relying more on yourself. You will become much stronger and more independent.

RC

 

[bloomz]

. However, I have very little tolerance for florists that openly turn down full value orders <undiscounted, for you Bloomzie> in favor of WS discounted orders and try to convince the industry that they are doing this for the good of the system.

You are referring to those 83% orders you direct senders send, right? :icon15

 

[CHR]

I honestly don't know if florists think of WS as a religion or not. I am of the opinion it is becoming more like a disease, not a drug. A disease is defined as "an alteration of a living body that impairs it's function." In some cases the WS disease is impairing business owners' thinking where in they are actually thinking how they can sustain or even tolerate the disease rather than how it is restricting their business.

Excellent point, Griff. These restrictions include lack of choice with each product purchased. From POS, to network communications, to website hosting, to credit card clearing, florists' purchasing proprietary products have seen choices limited to the point where the WS's have a rather large say in the way member shops can conduct everyday business. Work-arounds, while possible, become more costly and decrease efficiencies (while those same WS products were supposed to increase them.)

Instead of placing blame, we need individually to take responsibility for our own situation. So, instead of pleading for the wire services to change, we need to take responsibility and change our own situation.

RC, I couldn't agree more. Florists first need to recognize their positions in the system and then assess the costs and benefits of participating in it. Some have stepped away completely, others have used a cafeteria approach (picking and choosing what works to their benefit) and still others have bought into it completely by primarily focussing on being filling stations.

You are completely right the wire services don't care whether a florist survives or not. That's not really their responsibility.

A rude awakening, but one of the most important and liberating concepts for any florist to grasp.