LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksGood pointsOriginally Posted by TheAnimus
Hence the rather ridiculous nature of claiming that most people here couldn't handle the stress of selling TVs
Good points
Meh I'll go and make one of my sweeping yet often all too accurate generalisations.Good points
I could cut doing it at a richer sounds in Knightsbridge, but not Romford.
(even then selling the £75 HDMI cables might make me die inside, I'd sooner sell people coke)
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Ah...but just think of these cables as a little resourcefulness test! A tax on those who don't do a little bit of research
I agree that having to push that kind of thing is a miserable time of things; my experience has been that the main source of stress in that type of job can be rubbish management more than rubbish customers. Makes a big difference.
I think I can still see the OT, if I look hard enough, way over there.....
Why not ask Behemoth how much he enjoys his job then? Things have changed since you were doing those kind of jobs.Good points
And I never said it was just the selling but the customer service side that was the stressful part.
Kata, I somehow doubt you believe what I said about what I did, if you don't believe me fine, your loss.
I don't know very much about the software development world, so it's hard for me to make an opinion on that, to be honest. I did a very little bit of google "research", and software projects of over $1b value seem extremely rare, particularly for something of the nature you mention as opposed to large scale stuff like the NHS computers; but hey, you certainly know more about it than I do, so who am I to decide. It's the internet, I guess I might as well take you at face value.
Us software / system people often quote the money at risk rather than the budget, not just because we almost always end up delivering more than originally asked (sounds better than 'over budget') and also because it makes it look cooler.
Say your trying to pick up someone in a horrible club like Raffles on the Kings Road
"hello treacle, I work for a hedgefund and manage $2bn of money with my software"
sounds better than I have a $76M budget, $65 of which is spent by people outside of my control...
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Hehehe, ok, all is clearI was talking more about CAPEX, or money spent just to get the project ready to start production ; not that it really matters now, I think we're just about done!
I like the software way of saying things, maybe we should adopt it here
What is it with you and every story starting on Kings Road?
Just going on contract $$$:
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/p...eliancePR.mspx That isn't even the main contract and there are IIRC at least 25 other telco contracts on top and one or two very large companies too. (And being MS can swallow up research/dev costs given that ED&D is the main profit maker in MS and ventures like this usually work well)
Other thing with software is that there is longer for the initial development but when released it's easier to keep generating profit while making other products
It is a very useful way of reminding people the scope of the project. IT projects suffer spec creap almost unheard of in the rest of engineering, when compared to something like architecture, no one would dream saying 30% of the way in, "actually we'd like it to be thrice as tall, with smaller footprint, located on a volcano in iceland" but we often get those sort of requirements change. The mark of a good systems architect is been able to design in such flexibility to allow this and hope that the project spec creeps so you can say "well you asked for something that would deliver $100M of value for $10M of capex, but we ended up realising we could deliver $300M for $20M" Works very well despite a 100% budget overspend. This is the bizarre nature of the beast, combined for me at least with investment finance level of monies.... When its good its just awsome, watching your system outperform a $80M system designed by a certain bank, when yours only cost $1M with a small overspend of about £30K.....
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Because all the worst behaviour in humans is brought out by the kings road, alcohol and ahem.What is it with you and every story starting on Kings Road?
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Women who will 'paint your house' in pairs?
Tell us moreWomen who will 'paint your house' in pairs?
It's an in jokeTell us more
No, you wouldn't.
Para 14(7) of the DSR stipulates very explicitly that if goods supplied are substituted by the supplier for the goods the customer ordered, then the paragraph (s14(5) ) that allows the cost of return delivery or collection to be deducted from a refund does not apply.
You would be quite correct if the goods supplied were as ordered, and you just used the DSR to change your mind. But not when what you got is not what you ordered. If a supply chooses to substitute, one of the implications is that they bear the cost if the consumer isn't happy with that.
If you think about it, it pretty much has to be like that. Otherwise, you order something (say, a 24" monitor), and the company send you a two-seat sofa as a substitute. To reject it, you'd have to pay the return cost. Not on.
Besides, if you ordered goods A and they supply goods B, then the goods generally won't match the description, and are therefore a breach of contract, and in that case, you aren't liable for the return postage anyway.
My point was not that I would expect that level of service. Clearly, it's going to be the exception not the rule. My point was that it's exceptional customer service, to a long-standing customer, and one that earned that shop a considerable degree of brownie points with me.
But how could it be taken advantage-of. It wasn't a mail-order job. I bought product A. It failed. I went back, and they took the one I'd bought back, and lent me their own. When the replacement came in, quite some time (several months, in fact) later. I went back again, returned the loan product and got the brand new one.
To be specific, the item in question was a car alarm. When my (nearly new) one failed, the shop had the alternative of leaving me alarm-less until the replacement arrived, or supplying an alternative. Supplying an alternative of the same btrand meant going down-market, as I had a top end unit, or rewiring the car if they changed brands, and opposed to simply plugging the replacement in. So the shop owner took his unit off his brand-new Merc, and I got it. My bet is that he had something else put on his Merc.
But Richer sounds did the same thing with a MiniDisc recorder that packed up. They lent me a (better) unit while mine was being repaired. When mine came back, we swapped over again. It wasn't an owner's personal unit that was loaned, but the point was the same ... good customer service.
In both cases, I've been back many times. The car hifi pace is a fairly high-end outfit, so I'd expect commensurate service, but Richer's aren't renowned for being expensive and I would still say the service I've had from them, more than once, has been outstanding, exemplary. So I go back, loyally.
That was my point. Good, above and beyond legally required, service breeds customer loyalty, especially from regularly customers, whereas being jerked around breeds anger and resentment, and lost customers. Whoever this seller is has pretty much lost gmarno, when a different attitude could have turned a shipping mistake (or a try-on, if it was deliberate) could have turned it into a positive experience. That they didn't, and apparently didn't even want to try, tells me all I need to know about the supplier ... other than who they are, and really, that's not necessary for the purposes of this thread.
My point was to NOT return the goods under the standard use of the DSR as the wrong item was delivered
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
SCAN.care@HEXUS
SCAN.care@HEXUS
SCAN.care@HEXUS
SCAN.care@HEXUS
Posting Permissions
