Complaint to QVC..Don't you watch the Q at home?

HAPPY LADY · ‎07-16-2012

Watching FEW on Monday, 9/8 and thinking what a disaster! The more I think about this the more annoyed I become. I can appreciate updating the sets but the most important thing for purchasers is to be able to see the product and for the product to be demonstrated. Please don't try to reinvent the wheel. There is a reason why "THE RUNWAY" is the only way to show clothing. We want the models to walk out to the camera so we can see how the clothing moves. We want to see the entire look; front, sides and back. We want up close camera details of the fabrics, lining or no lining, buttons, tailoring details. We want the designers to speak 95% of the time explaining the fabric, fabric content, fabric care, weight, why it was selected and point out the tailoring details.

Would like suggestions on how to wear and how to style. Suggestions from the designer for styling new item with previous items offered in the collection. Tell us what is coming up that will go with item being shown. Show what the designer is discussing instead of going to something else. The designer is demonstrating a detail or a color and the camera goes to something else and does not go back to the demonstration. That is so frustrating and annoying. And yes, it is possible to stay with the designer; never see that happen on HSN. Actually show sneak peaks and items bought on line only.

What we want is very basic. We want to buy; you want to sell. We want your main focus to be on the product so we know what we are buying. There would be a lot less returns. At QVC there seems to be a shift in the wrong direction. You are not merchandising, you are doing visual marketing, but not of the products you are selling. If this continues I will be categorizing you as a digital Sears and Roebuck Catalog. We used to buy from pictures only. I was not planning on buying furniture or looking for visual ideas for my furniture placement as was the case this morning in FEW.

How about getting back to the reason we shoppers tune in, to actually see and hear about products we want to buy. ${#emotions_dlg.mad}$

JustJazzmom · ‎03-09-2010

I agree with all you have written, Happy Lady. Those camera shots were for the most part distant-- even on my HD TV it was difficult to discern the fabrics and the various jewelry items when the camera is doing long distance shots!!

I am beginning to think that they WANT us to return the clothing so that they can make money on the S&H fees they outrageously charge us!!

I have suspected for a long time that the S&H fees are the Q's bread & butter, not the clothing or jewelry itself!!

☼The best place to seek God is in a garden. You can dig for him there. GBShaw☼

kittymomNC · ‎08-09-2012

On 9/8/2014 JustJazzmom said:
I agree with all you have written, Happy Lady. Those camera shots were for the most part distant-- even on my HD TV it was difficult to discern the fabrics and the various jewelry items when the camera is doing long distance shots!!

I am beginning to think that they WANT us to return the clothing so that they can make money on the S&H fees they outrageously charge us!!

I have suspected for a long time that the S&H fees are the Q's bread & butter, not the clothing or jewelry itself!!

I agree with a lot of what you and the OP are saying about camera work, showing the items and explaining better, etc., but there is no way that QVC makes money on shipping when we return things. If WE pay for return shipping, QVC is REFUNDING our original shipping, therefore, they are losing money, not making it. They're giving our money back that we paid for shipping, so how can they make money on it? Plus, if we return because an item is defective, QVC not only refunds our original shipping, but pays to ship the item back. I just don't understand how anyone thinks they're making money from that.

Also, I have a family member who sells on eBay, and contrary to what seems to be popular opinion, shipping is not cheap. QVC is charging for both shipping AND handling--after all someone has to pull an item from inventory, put it in a box, and print and put a label on the box. They have to PAY someone to do that - unless they have robots that do it all.

JustJazzmom · ‎03-09-2010

I think returning the clothing keeps the warehouse people busy-- they prepare stuff for shipping and then they prepare stuff for return to stock.

And when I watched this morning-- they showed Jackie in the black ponte knit skirt and I couldn't even make out the button front on the skirt due to the camera shot!!

☼The best place to seek God is in a garden. You can dig for him there. GBShaw☼

Penellope · ‎09-03-2012

FWIW, I really don't think the shipping really costs QVC what they are charging us. Of course they have special deals with USPS and UPS, and it probably costs them next to nothing per package. I'm sure they make a mint on their high shipping and handling.

kaydee50 · ‎02-07-2011

I agree with JustJazz about the s&H. I would think the "handling" costs are priced into the article. IMO an SG top is not worth $50, a portion of that goes to QVC's overhead. I sent back an article of clothing for less than $2 when I would have been charged $5.95. I see that difference as pure profit for QVC.

SoX · ‎03-15-2010

When watching the video for the ponte knit skirt, I laughed so hard at the way the models were positioned ... there's Jac way, way in the back of the set, trying hard not to appear bored. (It reminded me of the scene from A League of Their Own, where Marla Hooch was photographed from afar so as not to show to her face.)

Then there's Pat and Jane up close trying to hold onto the skirts ... while Louis just looked confused at the whole scenario.

What a faux pas (pardon my French) ... hilarious!

${#emotions_dlg.laugh}$

jackthebear · ‎03-11-2010

I don't want to get into B/M shopping pricing vs. shopping here and s/h pricing (long sentence) but the Seth Aaron shirt with the fake leather trim and zippers looks like something we could buy at Kohls on sale for $29.99 so there is a lot of profit when sold for $50

HAPPY LADY · ‎07-16-2012

This thread is not about S&H... It's about presentation. What happened this morning on FEW and attempting to get QVC attention. Please. S&H is a whole other fiasco.

Trix · ‎03-16-2010

The new Fashionably Early With Pat & Jayne (FEW) is a mess. The set completely distracted from the clothing. I was partly snoozing through the first hour then I heard Louis Del Olio so I sat up. What was before my eyes was a mess. The models were positioned in front of furniture like a game show hostess showing off a prizes, and I could not see any detail on the clothing that way.

This set and it's lighting is totally inappropriate for showing clothes. I realize they are going for a warm cozy we're relaxing at home with Pay and Jayne vibe, but it didn't make me feel like shopping -- and QVC's first priority should always be to showcase the merchandise to get the viewer motivated to shop.