Q Talk

[gardensla]

I wanted these boots but the thought of paying TEN bucks if they don't fit sent me to my best friend, Google. Found the exact boot for the exact same retail price at three other sites, all of which offered FREE s/h in both directions. I spent the 80.00 at Nordstrom. Will the Q miss my money? Probably not yet...maybe one day, soon?

[febe1]

I love shoes and boots. I've had to return many shoes for bad fit. I still watch shoe shows,, but I'm not going into hock exchanging shoes. After watching, I'll go out buying. The Q will eventually miss the monies.

[handygal2]

The Q used to appeal to a demographic who didn't use the Internet for shopping. That group of shoppers has shrunk considerably over the years. If it's so easy to comparison-shop on the Web, why would anyone pay more to buy something from the Q if can be purchased-- and returned-- for less $ elsewhere? The Q needs to change their business model to reflect this. By making their return policy MORE expensive, they did just the opposite of what they should have done. Going forward, they will alienate more customers, and their bottom-line will reflect their mistake.

[stevieb]

One of my weaknesses is handbags. To this point, I'd occasionally 'try a bag on for size'. I did this primarily when the bag or color I wanted wasn't available elsewhere for less (most of them are) or when Easy Pay was a factor. I'll no longer be doing so. I might still buy a bag here every once in a while, again, only when it isn't available elsewhere, because QVC doesn't offer the same deals on bags that most other retailers do, but will no longer be taking chances on bags I'm not sure I'll like. Handbags are one area where the Q's shipping remains too high and are certainly an area where they could implement a shipping reduction when customers are spending beyond a certain price point. They haven't opted to do that and instead are now charging non-refundable top dollar to send the bag and then another significant amount to return it. What this means is customers who order and return pay what approaches twenty bucks just for the privilege of seeing the item. This will definitely mean far fewer episodes of risk taking and I'd guess that will be true for many of us. And yes, this could well translate into lost revenue. When they see a dip in the bottom line, perhaps they'll come to their senses. Of course, there are never any guarantees where this bunch of decision makers is concerned.

[handygal2]

On 3/2/2015 stevieb said:

One of my weaknesses is handbags. To this point, I'd occasionally 'try a bag on for size'. I did this primarily when the bag or color I wanted wasn't available elsewhere for less (most of them are) or when Easy Pay was a factor. I'll no longer be doing so. I might still buy a bag here every once in a while, again, only when it isn't available elsewhere, because QVC doesn't offer the same deals on bags that most other retailers do, but will no longer be taking chances on bags I'm not sure I'll like. Handbags are one area where the Q's shipping remains too high and are certainly an area where they could implement a shipping reduction when customers are spending beyond a certain price point. They haven't opted to do that and instead are now charging non-refundable top dollar to send the bag and then another significant amount to return it. What this means is customers who order and return pay what approaches twenty bucks just for the privilege of seeing the item. This will definitely mean far fewer episodes of risk taking and I'd guess that will be true for many of us. And yes, this could well translate into lost revenue. When they see a dip in the bottom line, perhaps they'll come to their senses. Of course, there are never any guarantees where this bunch of decision makers is concerned.

Exactly! I used to be a Q "bag lady", but with the possibility of a return now costing me a $22 penalty, l've sworn of my bag habit cold-turkey.

[Catch71]

I am done ordering shoes with the new s/h policy. I often ordered Clarks in the past but now it will cost me close to $20 to return if they don't fit - doesn't make sense. There are other online shoe retailers (including Clarks directly) that offer free shipping and free returns. They may cost a few more dollars up front, but if they don't fit correctly they will not cost me. In the end I would prefer it this way. I watch shoe shows on the Q then search the web to find them elsewhere with free shipping/free returns.

I also feel this way with clothing - too much money wasted on returns. Even with the $3.00 reduced shipping; add this to the cost of the return label and you are out $10 and you have nothing. I enjoyed shopping with the Q but have told myself now to shop locally or online with free shipping.

[GinaV24]

On 3/2/2015 gardensla said:

I wanted these boots but the thought of paying TEN bucks if they don't fit sent me to my best friend, Google. Found the exact boot for the exact same retail price at three other sites, all of which offered FREE s/h in both directions. I spent the 80.00 at Nordstrom. Will the Q miss my money? Probably not yet...maybe one day, soon?

Nice shoes! and I'm doing the same. I can shop elsewhere, it was just convenient before to shop with QVC before, but it simply isn't at this point.

[stevieb]

On 3/2/2015 GinaV24 said:

On 3/2/2015 gardensla said:

I wanted these boots but the thought of paying TEN bucks if they don't fit sent me to my best friend, Google. Found the exact boot for the exact same retail price at three other sites, all of which offered FREE s/h in both directions. I spent the 80.00 at Nordstrom. Will the Q miss my money? Probably not yet...maybe one day, soon?

Nice shoes! and I'm doing the same. I can shop elsewhere, it was just convenient before to shop with QVC before, but it simply isn't at this point.

Agree... So the "value" is now questionable... and the "convenience" has become too pricey (there's that pesky "value" thing again) and the "quality", well, let's just say it's hit or miss... So Q, is it time to follow in the steps of SHQ and consider a name change...?

[stevieb]

On 3/2/2015 handygal said:

On 3/2/2015 stevieb said:

One of my weaknesses is handbags. To this point, I'd occasionally 'try a bag on for size'. I did this primarily when the bag or color I wanted wasn't available elsewhere for less (most of them are) or when Easy Pay was a factor. I'll no longer be doing so. I might still buy a bag here every once in a while, again, only when it isn't available elsewhere, because QVC doesn't offer the same deals on bags that most other retailers do, but will no longer be taking chances on bags I'm not sure I'll like. Handbags are one area where the Q's shipping remains too high and are certainly an area where they could implement a shipping reduction when customers are spending beyond a certain price point. They haven't opted to do that and instead are now charging non-refundable top dollar to send the bag and then another significant amount to return it. What this means is customers who order and return pay what approaches twenty bucks just for the privilege of seeing the item. This will definitely mean far fewer episodes of risk taking and I'd guess that will be true for many of us. And yes, this could well translate into lost revenue. When they see a dip in the bottom line, perhaps they'll come to their senses. Of course, there are never any guarantees where this bunch of decision makers is concerned.

Exactly! I used to be a Q "bag lady", but with the possibility of a return now costing me a $22 penalty, l've sworn of my bag habit cold-turkey.

I've sworn it off here... Wish I could do the cold turkey thing but thankfully... there are other places where shopping for QUALITY bags is still a VALUE and is still CONVENIENT... just not here... Maybe it really is time to consider that name change!

[GinaV24]

On 3/2/2015 stevieb said:

On 3/2/2015 handygal said:

On 3/2/2015 stevieb said:

One of my weaknesses is handbags. To this point, I'd occasionally 'try a bag on for size'. I did this primarily when the bag or color I wanted wasn't available elsewhere for less (most of them are) or when Easy Pay was a factor. I'll no longer be doing so. I might still buy a bag here every once in a while, again, only when it isn't available elsewhere, because QVC doesn't offer the same deals on bags that most other retailers do, but will no longer be taking chances on bags I'm not sure I'll like. Handbags are one area where the Q's shipping remains too high and are certainly an area where they could implement a shipping reduction when customers are spending beyond a certain price point. They haven't opted to do that and instead are now charging non-refundable top dollar to send the bag and then another significant amount to return it. What this means is customers who order and return pay what approaches twenty bucks just for the privilege of seeing the item. This will definitely mean far fewer episodes of risk taking and I'd guess that will be true for many of us. And yes, this could well translate into lost revenue. When they see a dip in the bottom line, perhaps they'll come to their senses. Of course, there are never any guarantees where this bunch of decision makers is concerned.

Exactly! I used to be a Q "bag lady", but with the possibility of a return now costing me a $22 penalty, l've sworn of my bag habit cold-turkey.

I've sworn it off here... Wish I could do the cold turkey thing but thankfully... there are other places where shopping for QUALITY bags is still a VALUE and is still CONVENIENT... just not here... Maybe it really is time to consider that name change!

Ha, Stevie. I have sworn off QVC shoes & bags, too. of course I got a catalog the other day and they had some really cute spring things. I looked thru it and put it down. I may go back to it, but I'm going to try and be good and at least wait for a sale!

I don't think a name change will do it, Q needs a complete overhaul top to bottom IMO. As you pointed out in your previous post, quality is down, value is down. Convenience, well, sort of, since I can still pickup the phone and order BUT slower shipping plus cost outweighs the convenience.