Cheapskates

[threemonkeys]

I seem even easier to rile than usual at the moment. The latest irritation comes from my friends at Dymocks. I really like the local franchise store and its staff but I guess the chain management is just like big business anywhere.

I received a new Dymocks card in the mail last night. The envelope had a bunch of enclosed material trumpeting how amazing their new loyalty scheme is to be. But if you look at the fine print, what you see is that the effective loyalty earning rate has dropped from $7 benefit per $100 spend down to $5 benefit per $100 spend. It isn't as if it is replacing a clunky old card stamp system either - the existing scheme is a rather smart one in terms of its flexibility and customer information.

Harrumph.

Comments

[beagl.livejournal.com]

[points] Grumpy old man, grumpy old man! [/points]

I hate it when companies do the "In order to serve you better we are [somehow cutting services/benefits]" thing. I understand that things can't always stay as they were, but they could at least skip the lies.

[threemonkeys.livejournal.com]

Exactly right, its the lies that generate the grump.

[lobelet.livejournal.com]

Hmmm. I threw the letter away unopened, assuming it was the usual advertising rubbish. Perhaps I should have opened it after all...

I am sorely tempted, when receiving disimprovements to service like this, to write a rude letter to head office and then start boycotting the shop. I've done it before to other places, and I have no problem with doing it again to Dymocks. After all, Dymocks isn't the only bookshop in the city and it isn't the only bookshop in the world either. I have many other ways of buying books. I don't need Dymocks, but they do need me, just as they need all their customers. It is in their own interests to keep me sweet. If they won't, then I'll simply walk away.

[threemonkeys.livejournal.com]

I nearly threw it away too under the same assumption.

The biggest problem I have boycotting in this specific instance is that the local Dymocks shop had nothing to do with the decision - in fact I know from Mark that they are trying to push back on some things. They are an independently owned franchise, so this is imposed as part of their franchise conditions. This means that I would be doing most harm to Bruce and the local staff - who I like dealing with and who at least provide me with some inside information that I find difficult to obtain elsewhere even if the books are not unique.

But in general I agree, if a company does this kind of thing to me, they do tend to drive my business away.