If GRM Margie wasn't so nice about half of us would have long ago been banned for life and told to never come back.
If GRM Margie wasn't so nice about half of us would have long ago been banned for life and told to never come back.
Swank Force One wrote: Terry Fair sent you a Star Trek meme? You should be honored, not upset.
I'm more puzzled than upset.
Just hit up James Clay's people next time.
I think this is the 4th thread I remember about customer service things with V. Maybe its a planned thing, like the way Mr. Trump uses the media. 
At least I don't own a BMW. 
Who cares if you cost them money? If they are worried about it, they can charge a restocking fee or a processing fee. That's pretty standard. Vorschlag rhymes with douche-bag, and that's what they are.
Spoolpigeon wrote:Lof8 wrote:If I recall, there was a thread a while back about someone who had an issue with them and made a thread about it. Then an employee (owner possibly?) chimed in on the thread and seemed to clear things up. Maybe you'll get the same thing here. Either way, sending you a meme in an email is not how you run a business. I don't care how good/cheap their parts are.wbjones wrote: wish you would let us know who they are ... and I'm pretty sure GRM would like to know alsoVorshlag
yes they did ... though it doesn't seem unusual with regards to them .... here or on other forums ... maybe it's just their way of doing business ... makes me glad I don't have a pony car ... keeps me from being tempted with all the goodness they have on their web site
There is usually no significant fees to cancel and refund a credit card transaction. If they do have one it's because they're either bad at negotiating / choosing a provider or have a bad history and can't get a good servicer.
I have worked for some pretty terrible companies.. but never once did we do something like that. Yes, we kept a list of customers we did not want to do business with again.. but we kept it pretty professional..
makes me want to order something from them and then cancel it just to annoy them
wbjones wrote: it doesn't seem unusual with regards to them .... here or on other forums
This is where I'm at. I wouldn't mention it outside of a thread like this because I have no direct experience with them, but I have seen enough "wtf is up with vorshlag" threads around the internet that it surprises me to see they are well regarded among some other groups.
RedGT wrote:wbjones wrote: it doesn't seem unusual with regards to them .... here or on other forumsThis is where I'm at. I wouldn't mention it outside of a thread like this because I have no direct experience with them, but I have seen enough "wtf is up with vorshlag" threads around the internet that it surprises me to see they are well regarded among some other groups.
Makes sense to me. Some people do business with them exactly they way they like, and they have a good experience. Others don't and are told they can get berkeleyed. So even though they're doing things right with some customers they're still doing things very wrong overall. The guy who rebuilt my 4AGE has a similar problem...
Instead of alienating customers, what they need to do is put a little thought into making a clear and reasonable "Returns/Cancellation" policy and see that customers have the opportunity to read it before clicking the "order" button.
Maybe they're still mad their old challenge car burned down in a truck fire.
If the guy likes memes, somebody ought to edit this one, changing "soup" to "parts" or whatever is appropriate, then send it to him.
^Bwahaha winnar! 
Lof8 wrote:Swank Force One wrote: Terry Fair sent you a Star Trek meme? You should be honored, not upset.I'm more puzzled than upset.
If you get a chance to meet him it will make sense. This sounds like Fair. A lot of people really like him, a lot of people don't. It's an interesting customer service model.
Well, not to say you are wrong, but to look at it from their perspective - how many people do you think click 'buy' on their site and then back out? If each one only takes 5 minutes like you say, but they get 50 every night, that's more than half an FTE of cost on their end for nothing. And I bet it significantly cuts down on the number of false orders they receive if they just ban every false order-er from ordering in the future.
If I had to spend significant time in my day working for essentially free to cancel orders from who I perceive to be flakes I can see how it would make me mad and I would choose not to work with them in the future. I would do exactly the same thing selling personally - if someone agreed to buy from me and then flaked I would be much less inclined to ever even answer an email from them in the future.
1988RedT2 wrote: Instead of alienating customers, what they need to do is put a little thought into making a clear and reasonable "Returns/Cancellation" policy and see that customers have the opportunity to read it before clicking the "order" button.
But then you would be tempted to return something. They don't want no stinking returns.
Robbie wrote: Well, not to say you are wrong, but to look at it from their perspective - how many people do you think click 'buy' on their site and then back out? If each one only takes 5 minutes like you say, but they get 50 every night, that's more than half an FTE of cost on their end for nothing. And I bet it significantly cuts down on the number of false orders they receive if they just ban every false order-er from ordering in the future. If I had to spend significant time in my day working for essentially free to cancel orders from who I perceive to be flakes I can see how it would make me mad and I would choose not to work with them in the future. I would do exactly the same thing selling personally - if someone agreed to buy from me and then flaked I would be much less inclined to ever even answer an email from them in the future.
No I don't think it even comes close to making sense. You're banning a customer who very nearly bought stuff from you, it's the business equivalent of telling a woman that you don't ever want to see her again because she didn't want to go past heavy petting one time. And that's not even getting into the PR fallout.
spitfirebill wrote:1988RedT2 wrote: Instead of alienating customers, what they need to do is put a little thought into making a clear and reasonable "Returns/Cancellation" policy and see that customers have the opportunity to read it before clicking the "order" button.But then you would be tempted to return something. They don't want no stinking returns.
And that can be their stated policy.
GameboyRMH wrote:Robbie wrote: Well, not to say you are wrong, but to look at it from their perspective - how many people do you think click 'buy' on their site and then back out? If each one only takes 5 minutes like you say, but they get 50 every night, that's more than half an FTE of cost on their end for nothing. And I bet it significantly cuts down on the number of false orders they receive if they just ban every false order-er from ordering in the future. If I had to spend significant time in my day working for essentially free to cancel orders from who I perceive to be flakes I can see how it would make me mad and I would choose not to work with them in the future. I would do exactly the same thing selling personally - if someone agreed to buy from me and then flaked I would be much less inclined to ever even answer an email from them in the future.No I don't think it even comes close to making sense. You're banning a customer who very nearly bought stuff from you, it's the business equivalent of telling a woman that you don't ever want to see her again because she didn't want to go past heavy petting one time. And that's not even getting into the PR fallout.
Well here is a little known secret about business: every transaction should be beneficial to the buyer AND the seller. Just because a buyer has the means and the want doesn't mean that completing the transaction is good business practice for the seller. In fact, I would argue that sellers need to put more scrutiny on who they sell to than buyers need to put on who they buy from.
By the way, I am in no way angling my points as a judgement statement toward the OP, I'm just trying to voice an additional viewpoint.
Its funny because the business in question made a (probably unfair) snap judgement about the OP, and the forum mostly responds by making a (probably equally unfair) snap judgement about the business. Yet somehow we are right and the business is wrong...
Robbie wrote: Well, not to say you are wrong, but to look at it from their perspective - how many people do you think click 'buy' on their site and then back out? If each one only takes 5 minutes like you say, but they get 50 every night, that's more than half an FTE of cost on their end for nothing. And I bet it significantly cuts down on the number of false orders they receive if they just ban every false order-er from ordering in the future. If I had to spend significant time in my day working for essentially free to cancel orders from who I perceive to be flakes I can see how it would make me mad and I would choose not to work with them in the future. I would do exactly the same thing selling personally - if someone agreed to buy from me and then flaked I would be much less inclined to ever even answer an email from them in the future.
If their perspective is to look at customers as "snowflakes" and ban those who have a change of heart, they deserve every bit of derision thrown their way. It's just as easy (and more profitable) to prominently note that cancelled orders are charged a penalty fee.
On a personal level, your view has some value. On a professional level, suicide by leeching doesn't seem like such great idea.
Robbie wrote: Well, not to say you are wrong, but to look at it from their perspective - how many people do you think click 'buy' on their site and then back out? If each one only takes 5 minutes like you say, but they get 50 every night, that's more than half an FTE of cost on their end for nothing. And I bet it significantly cuts down on the number of false orders they receive if they just ban every false order-er from ordering in the future.
Possibly. But a one-strike policy still makes them not terribly bright. They are well within their rights to be not terribly bright if they choose. But even given that, the response was utterly unprofessional either way.
You can argue both sides are wrong, but there is no way you can argue the company wasn't wrong.
For those who might think running a business this way might make any kind of sense,
Seller: "hey, what's up? Why'd you cancel your order?"
Buyer: "ahh man, it was an impulse thing, but my financial situation just isn't right, you know. Kids to feed."
Seller: "okay, no problem dude. Let us know if we can do anything else for you."
Later that summer...
Buyer: "hoo boy, money money money. Bills are all out of the way. I'm so flush I'm feeling legit gangsta. Where am I going to spend all this money?"
Seller: "you rang?"
...is precisely what didn't happen here. Don't burn bridges.
Robbie wrote: Its funny because the business in question made a (probably unfair) snap judgement about the OP, and the forum mostly responds by making a (probably equally unfair) snap judgement about the business. Yet somehow we are right and the business is wrong...
Reducing all the actions involved to "snap judgements" is a word game, the difference is in the actions that triggered those "snap judgements" and their consequences. Canceling an order is generally regarded to be a reasonable action, while banning a customer who canceled an order is generally regarded to be an unreasonable one (based on the replies so far, and the return policies of most businesses). The business' actions directly blocked the OP from buying the parts while our angry posts have hardly inconvenienced anyone.
You'll need to log in to post.
