2021 - Retailer woe & retail sector chat
Discussion
devnull said:
Vasco said:
devnull said:
anonymoususer said:
Private Equity, leveraged buyout. Job losses. Can't see anything going well for ASDA to be honest. Hardly the strongest of the pack in the first place, but I can't see quality and service improving any time soon. Who is thought to be the best of the bunch?
Harrison Bergeron said:
skwdenyer said:
Re your (1), the Issa brothers didn't put much money into the Asda deal. They're buying the forecourts with their forecourts business. Yes, as far as I can tell the debt is going to Asda.
Re (2), well, yes... W&D is a growth area in commercial property right now.
The latest rumour is that the Issas will sell off George because "they don't understand it" and replace it with paid concessions.... https://dailybusinessgroup.co.uk/2021/02/asdas-new...
For us finance luddites how do you buy a company with its’ own money?Re (2), well, yes... W&D is a growth area in commercial property right now.
The latest rumour is that the Issas will sell off George because "they don't understand it" and replace it with paid concessions.... https://dailybusinessgroup.co.uk/2021/02/asdas-new...
Edited by skwdenyer on Thursday 25th February 23:54
Like how do I get in on this seeming legal scam.
number2 said:
JL is done for. We all knew that though, right?
Order delivered damaged.
First contact good: "no problem sir we'll send you out a new item and collect the damaged item at the same time, a colleague will call you tomorrow to arrange it"
Second contact: "would you send photos please? Sorry sir what you'll need to do is pay for the item again before we can send out a replacement (to be refunded when they receive the damaged item). We won't do it at the same time, the collection will be by DPD and the the delivery by someone else. A colleague will contact you to make payment."
She was very apologetic about the new system - not her fault obviously.
I'm now waiting for someone to call at some point to take a payment.
It was an £89 element of my order fortunately rather than the £1k + part, but I will not be using JL again. The £1k part of the order is due to be delivered Monday, that better not be smashed in transit. I'm taking the chance with it as it's in the delivery ecosystem which is finely balanced and I don't want to add to life's woes by disturbing it.
My annoyance is that the order needs to be paid for again. And the six contact points: three phone calls, one email, additional delivery and a collection. This could have been three or fewer.
Others may not have an issue with that but I do.
Whilst that is annoying, you can't make assumptions about the underlying financials of a business and its future viability based on an anecdote like that, even if there are a few. I'm also not saying they are in good shape, they're not, you just can't draw that conclusion rationally from a few examples of poor customer service.Order delivered damaged.
First contact good: "no problem sir we'll send you out a new item and collect the damaged item at the same time, a colleague will call you tomorrow to arrange it"
Second contact: "would you send photos please? Sorry sir what you'll need to do is pay for the item again before we can send out a replacement (to be refunded when they receive the damaged item). We won't do it at the same time, the collection will be by DPD and the the delivery by someone else. A colleague will contact you to make payment."
She was very apologetic about the new system - not her fault obviously.
I'm now waiting for someone to call at some point to take a payment.
It was an £89 element of my order fortunately rather than the £1k + part, but I will not be using JL again. The £1k part of the order is due to be delivered Monday, that better not be smashed in transit. I'm taking the chance with it as it's in the delivery ecosystem which is finely balanced and I don't want to add to life's woes by disturbing it.
My annoyance is that the order needs to be paid for again. And the six contact points: three phone calls, one email, additional delivery and a collection. This could have been three or fewer.
Others may not have an issue with that but I do.
number2 said:
Financials?
It's my financials and time I care about. Paying twice for an item delivered damaged and having to wait/hope for a refund, having to speak with multiple people and have separate additional delivery and collections. This is JL policy now - not anecdotal evidence.
Customer experience is dreadful. The advisers I spoke with agreed. I imagine they get it in the neck (unfairly) from customers on the basis of this change.
I'm dreading TV delivery on Monday.
Edit to add: when I said done for, I meant in terms of turning customers away. Long term damage due to this, yes.
You’re probably right, if you extrapolate that experience to every single customer interaction that takes place, they’ll be closed in no time It's my financials and time I care about. Paying twice for an item delivered damaged and having to wait/hope for a refund, having to speak with multiple people and have separate additional delivery and collections. This is JL policy now - not anecdotal evidence.
Customer experience is dreadful. The advisers I spoke with agreed. I imagine they get it in the neck (unfairly) from customers on the basis of this change.
I'm dreading TV delivery on Monday.
Edit to add: when I said done for, I meant in terms of turning customers away. Long term damage due to this, yes.
number2 said:
jakesmith said:
You’re probably right, if you extrapolate that experience to every single customer interaction that takes place, they’ll be closed in no time
Easily done. JL policy applies to all customers. JL policy is not customer friendly. Customers do not like JL policy and shop elsewhere. number2 said:
jakesmith said:
Of course, you are right - and it is irrefutable that you can surmise this from 1 experience and that of 3-4 other people out of tens of thousands that use this forum vs millions of transactions a year. It is a well known logical step that everything can be scaled up from a single data point. I'm just surprised that we have any non-Tory MPs given that I voted Conservative in 2019, probably nothing in it, more a glitch - the exception that proves the rule. I'm also surprised that X-Factor is still going as I don't like it. How can it have an audience?
It's JL policy and affects every customer. There's no extrapolation required. JL have changed their returns policy. It's not my feelings that have been hurt, or poor interpersonal service, it's policy which affects all equally.
Why do you struggle with understanding that.
Anyway, whole order cancelled now, refund due in 3-5 days, collection of damaged goods on Monday and 30 pounds good will. Not even requested which goes to show that the staff understand how poor the shop's policies are.
number2 said:
This is fun 
.
It's policy - customer must now pay for a new item to be sent out while a refund is processed on collection of the damaged item.
I'm not moaning at the goodwill, I didn't ask for it or expect it. I suggested to the forum that it demonstrated that the staff were fully aware the level of service that JL now offers is not up to past or expected standards.
The staff I dealt with were lovely, as was the way I dealt with them.
JL's rules, their policies, apply to all, not just me.
There was no mistake, just the lovely staff implementing JL's new rules which they were openly embarrassed about even before I expressed my surprise at the new rules.
Every customer that returns something damaged will have to pay for another item to be sent out to them. They are JL's rules and apply to every customer. Still confused?
Sorry my posts are full of facts.
The only thing I am confused about is why unlike any other retailer on the planet you think you are in some way entitled to be sent a replacement item out, on trust, without returning the one which you claim is faulty. Oh I can't see any scope for that being abused. The is absolute bog standard practice across retail. I'm sorry you're so upset that it appears this was initially explained to you wrong. Maybe the person didn't understand the process, was confused, or made a mistake, it happens, grow up and get over it..It's policy - customer must now pay for a new item to be sent out while a refund is processed on collection of the damaged item.
I'm not moaning at the goodwill, I didn't ask for it or expect it. I suggested to the forum that it demonstrated that the staff were fully aware the level of service that JL now offers is not up to past or expected standards.
The staff I dealt with were lovely, as was the way I dealt with them.
JL's rules, their policies, apply to all, not just me.
There was no mistake, just the lovely staff implementing JL's new rules which they were openly embarrassed about even before I expressed my surprise at the new rules.
Every customer that returns something damaged will have to pay for another item to be sent out to them. They are JL's rules and apply to every customer. Still confused?
Sorry my posts are full of facts.
One thing I don't understand is that you are furious at having to deal with this over two phone calls as your time is so incredibly valuable to you, yet you are perfectly willing to spend most of your Saturday hammering out lengthy and dull explanations to me as to why you are right, and how this mistake is one of the 4 horsemen of the forthcoming apocalyptic ending of a large business.
smashing said:
Oakey said:
Sorry, what, it's bog standard to have to pay for a replacement if your item arrives damaged prior to them sending a new one? Since when?
If you buy a £1500 TV and it turns up broken it's completely unreasonable to expect someone to have another £1500 to pay for a replacement, even if it's temporary.
Yeah that's not normal or reasonableIf you buy a £1500 TV and it turns up broken it's completely unreasonable to expect someone to have another £1500 to pay for a replacement, even if it's temporary.
Oakey said:
Sorry, what, it's bog standard to have to pay for a replacement if your item arrives damaged prior to them sending a new one? Since when?
If you buy a £1500 TV and it turns up broken it's completely unreasonable to expect someone to have another £1500 to pay for a replacement, even if it's temporary.
OK please tell me a retailer that will send you out a second £1500 TV on trust as you say the old one is broken, as I am not aware of one. I don't think this is a widely applied policy & am happy to be wrong. Even Amazon you have to at least use the postage label they send you to return the item, and then you get a refund & have to rebuy & they have the best online returns system I can think of. If you buy a £1500 TV and it turns up broken it's completely unreasonable to expect someone to have another £1500 to pay for a replacement, even if it's temporary.
Normally you would return the old one and then they would send you a new one, or refund you and you buy a new one. That is generally how buying things online works in my experience. If you have a credit card you can buy a new one before the old one is refunded otherwise I guess most people would just have to go without TV for a few days. You're asking a corporation to send you a £1500 TV on trust so you can't be without TV for a couple of days... doesn't sound realistic to me.
To stop using a retailer because you have unrealistic expectations of how they should treat you, or because 2 people told you different things resulting in an extra phone call having to be made, is entirely up to you but hardly a sign of their imminent demise. I'd say the more obvious signs are their unpaid bonus, closed stores, lack of stock, incompetent leadership, declining quality amongst some lines, declining shop floor staff numbers and quality, lack of decent staff training programs, and the general trend for retail especially retail of that type. They're f
ked alright but not because they don't give out free TVs to entitled customers.Suggest we leave it here as it's Saturday night now & I genuinely want the bloke to go and have a nice alcoholic drink & maybe calm down a little over this laughably minor incident
survivalist said:
It is indeed a new policy. In the last 6 years we’ve had a few issues with items ordered from JL.
One was a sofa we waited several weeks for. Arrived with some less than brilliant stitching, especially given the price. Second one was a child’s car seat where they delivered the wrong colour (ordered boring grey and got something in a horrific bright green pattern that looked like it was capable of triggering an epileptic fit)
In both cases new items were sent out to us, with the courier taking the defective or incorrect item away with them. At no point did we have to pay for the second item.
More impressively, we were encouraged to use both items until their replacements arrived (weeks later in both cases).
That’s the kind of service that means customers don’t shop around for the cheapest price.
The service that you have received is a more polite version of what most online retailers offer.
Being as good as anyone else isn’t a viable model for JL IMHO.
Well good sounds great, what's the problem thenOne was a sofa we waited several weeks for. Arrived with some less than brilliant stitching, especially given the price. Second one was a child’s car seat where they delivered the wrong colour (ordered boring grey and got something in a horrific bright green pattern that looked like it was capable of triggering an epileptic fit)
In both cases new items were sent out to us, with the courier taking the defective or incorrect item away with them. At no point did we have to pay for the second item.
More impressively, we were encouraged to use both items until their replacements arrived (weeks later in both cases).
That’s the kind of service that means customers don’t shop around for the cheapest price.
The service that you have received is a more polite version of what most online retailers offer.
Being as good as anyone else isn’t a viable model for JL IMHO.
Saweep said:
Sounds as bonkers as them turning dept stores into windowless apartments.
They're just flailing about.
They'll be gone soon, even if it breaks Jake's heart
I will be sad if they go for sure. A nice shopping environment and an aspiration to do things better even if they didn’t manage it every time as a few angry ravers on here will testifyThey're just flailing about.
They'll be gone soon, even if it breaks Jake's heart
Would you be confident on how long it will take? They aren’t loaded with debt and don’t have the shareholder issue to contend with. They’ve probably got longer than you think even though, like you say, their days are numbered.
snuffy said:
I can still remember, as a child, going to Nottingham with my Grandma and she'd always take me to Thorntons and treat me to a bag of coffee creams. That was over 40 years ago and I can recall it even now. They were special, not like a Milky Way or a Mars Bar.
They failed to spot the premiumisation that has ripped through the confectionary category - so many brands spotted the potential & swooped into that market. Hotel Choc, Montezuma, Green & Black, LIndt, Maison de Chocolate etc
pablo said:
Chrishum said:
jakesmith said:
Surely if people don’t feel safe being outside after a year it’s going to take more than a tweet from a retailer to fix their shattered nerves? https://www.met.police.uk/AskforAngela
anonymoususer said:
To be fair Jakey when I read it I immediately thought of that
I think its their version of was it Boots ? who came up with something start of year
Forgive me as I havent checked it but from memory Boots chemist were starting a scheme. A woman suffering abuse could go to a Boots chemist counter say a word and they would then be seen by someone who would help them to escape their abuser
Ask for Angela I think its their version of was it Boots ? who came up with something start of year
Forgive me as I havent checked it but from memory Boots chemist were starting a scheme. A woman suffering abuse could go to a Boots chemist counter say a word and they would then be seen by someone who would help them to escape their abuser
Thanks for posting and this very much is the place. We’ll now see the impact of a move that many have been calling for as essential to save urban centres. Sadly any policy change affects different groups positively and negatively. Whilst the impact on this revenue loss on councils may sting, it may still be better to take the medicine now and see if it can resuscitate urban centres and have them produce at least some revenue for councils, than have them die off completely over the next year or so. We’ll see council tax rise quite a bit I’d imagine to fund the shortfall
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff