Do you think they`re struggling ?

yorkrose26 said:

One final thing and then I promise I will shut up (well at least for today), how can Q justify charging £10.95 for delivery of a computer, when you can get the exact same one from the manufacturer free of charge

Click to expand...

I want to know how QVC get away with charging P&P on Direct Dispatch items when the product supplier doesn't charge P&P when you order direct. I bought some Peony flaaars last year for a relative and was charged £4.95 for the privilege, and the order was direct dispatch. I would have bought direct but Peony didn't have the exact item I wanted in their stock ( I presume they keep separate stuff for QVC? ) and they would have sent them P&P free. So are QVC basically charging a fiver for simply taking the order?

QVC need to realise that they are losing out on orders because of their P&P. Last night, I was interested in a few different products, but because they were going to charge upwards of £12 in total for postage, I didn't bother ordering as much. Had that P&P been free or much cheaper, I would have likely gone ahead and ordered all of the items I looked at. I would have bought a Lip Lift, how can they justify £3.95 for that? Some A'kin oil and something else. Given they were all small items, I wasn't prepared to spend the equivalent of another product on their charges. So I didn't.

And with regard to craft coming back, this is only going to work if they sell a decent range of project material, not just card making. I used to do crafting at home, even went to evening school to learn techniques and made some lovely stuff. I got so incensed with their card making shows, under the guise of craft, as I have done this year regarding the gardening. Saturation of boring products. I barely watch now, just look in on certain items. Half the time even the beauty TSVs aren't worth buying, so I don't. The same old stuff turns up every time.

I'd imagine they catch a lot of people out this way. After all, when you've got some eejit shrieking "it can be yours for only £xxx" at the top of their lungs (yes, Pete, I do mean you), then inevitably some people will not check the details shown on screen before ordering. Still, I don't suppose that would bother any of the usual suspects for one minute.

loveallthingsitalian said:

I know it should be obvious that it is only an Easypay instalment but Q's prices are so off the wall I'm surprised more people aren't caught out by this - I know my late mother would have been as she would never ever imagined that people would actually charge 4 times that amount for a big of tat.

Click to expand...

I know I could be tempted by a few clearance items if they had free p and p

stratobuddy said:

In the "olden days" of analogue TV, the only way to watch Q on TV was to invest in a freeview box, which were originally quite expensive.

As they came down in price, more and more people bought one (including me) so Q had an ever-increasing customer base as they discovered selly telly. That's when I got hooked.

Nowadays, EVERYONE with a TV can watch Q, ever since analogue TV was switched off a few years ago.

So their viewers will no longer be increasing week by week as in the past, but almost certainly decreasing as the novelty of smelly telly wears off.

This, combined with the decline of the products and presentations, probably means they are struggling. I can't see they will ever get new customers any more.

Personally, I've gone from watching loads of Q to never watching it at all live.

I check their (DREADFUL) website for new gadgets, then buy them elsewhere if at all possible.

PS spell check kept changing my word to SMELLY which seems appropriate

Click to expand...

Well if you believe the hype Q has had the most customers ever this year! Hmm cynical moi!

shopperholic said:

I'd be more inclined to take notice if they say "look, we've got Johnny Depp!" or "look, we've got Angelina Jolie!" to me Ruth Langsford is a non entity who I've never watched on Tv. QVC may get new customers every day, but if they don't repeat purchase then eventually, once the people who started out when the Internet was not the global phenomenon it is now stop shopping, then all they'll be left with are the customers that know nothing else other than internet shopping, were these new breed of savvy shoppers Google first and will judge a company on price and returns policy, and the one with best of both gets the order, but like I say, it doesn't bother me either way, it's just how I see it, I don't do Facebook either.

Click to expand...

it's clearly a dying medium of selling products, as you rightly say... their target audience are simply going to die (as morbid as it is to say. Forgive me) But we both know they are going to wring out every drop from the selly telly cloth.

though for every savvy shopper as you described them (rightly again), there will be three people who will prefer to spend £24 on an £18 item as they simply cannot be bothered to look for it. In my opinion that is who q brings in ruth langsford for, etc. It's not right but is how they are still going in 2017.

mr tom said:

it's clearly a dying medium of selling products, as you rightly say... their target audience are simply going to die (as morbid as it is to say. Forgive me) But we both know they are going to wring out every drop from the selly telly cloth.

though for every savvy shopper as you described them (rightly again), there will be three people who will prefer to spend £24 on an £18 item as they simply cannot be bothered to look for it. In my opinion that is who q brings in ruth langsford for, etc. It's not right but is how they are still going in 2017.

Click to expand...

That's true, it's certainly not for their "buying power" I think QVC rely heavily on the addictees and devotees, the addictees think they're not actually spending because they're not handing over money as you would down the Highstreet and the devotees who QVC have suckered in to thinking they're part of the QVC "family" the type of family member who'd disown you if you return 51% or miss an easy pay. :mysmilie_17:

lola rose stretch ring £3.95 post. qvc need to get a grip

boffy said:

lola rose stretch ring £3.95 post. qvc need to get a grip

Click to expand...

I agree. I don't get Lola Rose because I seen on the The Jewellery Channel a couple of days ago, they had a big chunky disc of either Rose Quartz or Blue Sandstone sitting in a half silver coloured moon for £7.99 so their semi-precious stones are a lot cheaper for a lot more because it hasn't got "Lola Rose" (who I'd be surprised if none QVC viewers have ever heard of) written on it.

One thing I have noticed in my own behaviour now is that I don't even look at threads on here for TSVs I know I won't buy. The elemis thread sits mysterious but unclicked.

For me the symptom that signals trouble is the increasing retreat into what they know sells. Lack of risk taking indicates they either don't have the confidence or don't have the resources to accommodate the odd flop in the search for new hits. They cling to a handful of "bankers" to the detriment of the selly telly concept. They've stopped casting their nets wide and instead sink their nets narrow and deep. The thing is, they then have all their eggs in a limited number of baskets, with most in the beauty basket. They are also way too reliantvon imported brands. How do they think they can survive if there is a backlash - say on ethical, or low carbon, or low air miles policies? Or with spiraling prices as the pound's value fluctuates?

Apologies for the mixed metaphors, but I hope they make sense.

boffy said:

lola rose stretch ring £3.95 post. qvc need to get a grip

Click to expand...

This is one of my real bug bears when the item is obviously being sold as a stacking item, which they say at every other sentence, yet they still charge full whack postage for each item.

I quite like Nicki but she was getting on my wick saying that we should buy as many of the TSV options as we could so we could mix them up. Yeah, the postage alone on that lot would be a fortune.

Mr LATI tells me to shut up and just add the P&P to the item cost and of course I'm not stupid but there is something about that £5.95 for a light, tiny item which just sticks in my gut.

i remember buying a links bracelet as a tsv. it was £4.95 post and took so long to come in the regular post the easy pay was due. it was so tiny a hair weighed more than the bracelet. i returned it at my expense the same day and qvc refused to refund both my postage costs as they said i had kept it longer than the 14 days. i won't repeat what i said to the customer service rep. but i did get my postage money back.its service like this that irritates me the most

boffy said:

lola rose stretch ring £3.95 post. qvc need to get a grip

Click to expand...

That's disgraceful ! I'd think it would fit in an envelope with 'large letter' stamp even if protected by bubble wrap. Cost - less than £1.

maymorganlondon said:

One thing I have noticed in my own behaviour now is that I don't even look at threads on here for TSVs I know I won't buy. The elemis thread sits mysterious but unclicked.

For me the symptom that signals trouble is the increasing retreat into what they know sells. Lack of risk taking indicates they either don't have the confidence or don't have the resources to accommodate the odd flop in the search for new hits. They cling to a handful of "bankers" to the detriment of the selly telly concept. They've stopped casting their nets wide and instead sink their nets narrow and deep. The thing is, they then have all their eggs in a limited number of baskets, with most in the beauty basket. They are also way too reliantvon imported brands. How do they think they can survive if there is a backlash - say on ethical, or low carbon, or low air miles policies? Or with spiraling prices as the pound's value fluctuates?

Apologies for the mixed metaphors, but I hope they make sense.

Click to expand...

They/selly telly are very similar to wrestling and other ''carnie'' types of things, in that they try desperately to make themselves mainstream but will always be seen as lame. No matter how many brand names they sell... they will always be seen as a place that sells toy racing cars, karaoke machines and ladders.

mr tom said:

They/selly telly are very similar to wrestling and other ''carnie'' types of things, in that they try desperately to make themselves mainstream but will always be seen as lame. No matter how many brand names they sell... they will always be seen as a place that sells toy racing cars, karaoke machines and ladders.

Click to expand...

not according to the "so you think you know qvc think again" statement lol:mysmilie_48:

boffy said:

not according to the "so you think you know qvc think again" statement lol:mysmilie_48:

Click to expand...

I think we all know QVC too well, for too long!!! That's the problem...:mysmilie_11:

I think they're trying to justify their P&P by spending it all on packaging! This morning the postman dropped off a HUUUUGE blue QVC bag. Inside that was a box that was about the size of couple of house bricks stood next to each other. This box contained scrunched up paper that must have been almost a metre squared. All this to protect the product inside.... a mascara!!

I couldn't believe it. If not for the cost, won't QVC consider the environment?

I was even more annoyed that it's an advanced order that has arrived early, yet again, with no notice!