Subject:
|
Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 27 Mar 2000 22:34:37 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
4097 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.dear-lego, Craig Livingston writes:
> While I expect that in a discussion of this length no one will read this
I will...
> I see two sides to this argument. One, Larry and whoever else wants to keep
> there arrangement intact, ensuring the greatest satisfaction. The other side,
> including myself (even though this time I would not have bought anything),
> wants access to this elusive market.
>
> Larry and Mike (among others) propose that the "have-nots" should have
> purchased more last time the Outlet had prices so they would have been called.
> False thinking since this system always reward the more spend happy customers -
> a very elite few.
But why should the "system" *not* reward the "more spend happy customers"?
Larry spends a whole lot of money at the Outlet. The manager of the
outlet has a job: sell LEGO. He is able to do this job *and* do a favor
for a good customer. So from his standpoint, he's a double winner. From
Larry's standpoint, he's a double winner.
Now along comes you or me. Personally, I've given the Outlet store about
$30 worth of business. Why should the manager even remember me compared
to a big-ticket customer like Larry?
Now, if I got *crappy* service while Larry got the red carpet, I'd be
peeved. But I think that I got good service when I bought from them, and
I don't expect service above and beyond the call of duty - which is what
Larry got because of his spending habits.
Some people on this thread seem to think that it's "bad service" if the
manager doesn't go through his files and personally call everyone who has
ever bought LEGO from him, as well as taking out full-page ads in
worldwide newspapers and trumpeting the presence of these sets across the
internet. Personally, I think that kind of expectation is ridiculous.
> Every retail outlet I have worked at has always stresed good customer service
> and along with that customer satisfaction. I would argue that the way things
> worked this time served neither purpose.
It satisfied a big-spending customer. If Larry hadn't mentioned his good
fortune, you never would have known about it, so it wouldn't have mattered
to you.
> Also, Larry proposes that someone can get to the top of this list by buying
> his way in. Not possible, unless someone was in on the ground floor, since
> every subsequent purchase has been of the "insider" type source.
I bet if you called and regularly made large purchases from the Outlet,
the manager would remember your name and call you. Maybe if you chatted
with him a bit at the same time and mentioned that you wouldn't mind
buying discontinued sets in bulk, he'd be even more likely to call you up
when he got some in. Even if you called up and said, "Hey, I'm looking
for set X, I'm interested in buying 30-60 depending on your price, could
you call me if you get any in" he might do it.
But I'll bet that most of the people complaining about this wouldn't be
buying in bulk. They'd buy one or two copies of a set. That's not even
worth the time the manager would spend looking up your number to call you
and tell you about the deal.
> However, elite insider trading constitutes in no way
> fair and equal access to goods and services.
Capitalism is in no way fair and equal access to goods and services.
TRU gets LEGO sets cheaper from TLC than I could. It's not fair! It's
not fair! I should be allowed to buy at wholesale prices!
J
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
| A couple of thoughts here: 1. I have no side in this argument. I understand the business practices of the manager. I disagree with them. As I said, I wouldn't be able to convince you if I was God, anyway. Therefore I will let you have the false (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego Direct (was Re: Georgia LEGO Outlet is Cool!)
|
| While I expect that in a discussion of this length no one will read this, here goes: I see two sides to this argument. One, Larry and whoever else wants to keep there arrangement intact, ensuring the greatest satisfaction. The other side, including (...) (25 years ago, 27-Mar-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
146 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
