£25 hobbs gift card with Red magazine

tara747

donna-j wrote: »

Dunno, I am a bit on the fence here. Yes, it is crud that they changed the t&cs but 10 or 11 magazines? Seriously? No wonder Hobbs are hacked off

But a finite number of mags (and therefore cards) have been issued, doesn't matter if each customer buys 1 or 10 each.

And the SAs were encouraging peeps to buy more mags...

donna-j_2

In my opinion, it is still a bit greedy. I doubt the SAs were meaning go out and buy 11.

planetjanet

I was so excited when it was said
I should buy a copy of Red
Inside was a wonderful prize
That would really open my eyes

A voucher all for me just to spend
£25 – so I told all my friends
So to Hobbs we went and flocked
To spend our vouchers on nice new posh tops

But our smiles have now turned to tears
Cos now everything now is too dear
T&C changes now means that we must
Write to Hobbs to register disgust

We now urge Hobbs to go think
How all this will make sales shrink
We want to spend in your shops
But on tops and not dear frocks!

So please don’t change T&C’s
So we can all buy go and buy what we please
We will all feel so much better
When we pay little for a lovely posh sweater!

What do you all think? Will it work?

MsCrow

donna-j wrote: »

In my opinion, it is still a bit greedy. I doubt the SAs were meaning go out and buy 11.

I tend to agree with you. I had one card which I had great pleasure spending on a £29 top. I considered getting another but I don't want a pleasurable experience to turn sour because I'm wielding loads of cards and stating T&C's at sales assistants. I don't think Hobbs should have changed the T&C's; it's naughty and ill thought out but it's hardly like 99% of people haven't already had the benefit.

annie-c

MsCrow wrote: »

I tend to agree with you. I had one card which I had great pleasure spending on a £29 top. I considered getting another but I don't want a pleasurable experience to turn sour because I'm wielding loads of cards and stating T&C's at sales assistants. I don't think Hobbs should have changed the T&C's; it's naughty and ill thought out but it's hardly like 99% of people haven't already had the benefit.

If 99% had already had the benefit then Hobbs wouldn't likely be changing the T's and C's as their losses would be almost covered by now. They obviously know how many cards have been issued and how many are left to be spent and to me, it IS unfair to renege on the T's anc C's whether a customer has one card left, or 10.

scottishminnie

ceebeeby wrote: »

Hi Scottishminnie,

I'm in for the battle too however, I think we need to be fair and consistent. No-one forced us to purchase the Red magazine - we did that through our own choice. We knew that it probably wasn't a publication best suited to our preferred reading, however, weighed it up and decided on this occasion it WAS value for money (due to the promotion) - again, that was our decision. That the magazine featured young trendy models (as I assume it normally does) and didn't change its style for the one month that MSE girls bought it, isn't overwhelmingly surprising. On that grounds, probably best not to go down the route of it's a pants magazine and we've been cheated by them.
I would be very surprised if RED isn't equally hopping mad this morning with the whole scenario, but I don't think it's fair to slate them quite so much unless they're in cahoots with HOBBS about this (which has yet to be proven).

IQUOTE]



To be quite clear - I'm not suggesting we complain to RED slating their magazine. Whilst it is my personal opinion that the magazine is not good value it has nothing to do with the real issue here which is that they participated in a sales campaign which has now gone sour. Stating anything other than facts in a complaint letter/email serves no purpose whatsoever.

They will have profitted generously from the increase in sales of the magazine so I do not think it is acceptable for RED to simply claim non involvement.

My point was that there are 2 parties to this campaign and whilst Hobbs must shoulder the majority of the blame the magazine should not be allowed to think that they are blameless. It is also worth considering that if the magazine are unhappy with the situation several hundred emails may help them to pressure Hobbs to honour the original T&C's.

My complaint to Red was polite and factual so I can't see a problem with it.

twig1_2

I can't believe they have done this with any great thought. The profit margins they have on the cheaper items are huge. The £4 you have to spend on the longsleeve tops covers the cost of the item to them so they have not lost out on anything.
I have a card to spend having no Hobbs nearby, I too was making a outing later on with one of the purposes to spend the reward.
I luckily did get to use one earlier on in the campaign and the staff at Hobbs were lovely and did encourage me to buy more magazines as I liked the top in the other colours . Pity I didn't do that now.
I think most of us who managed to get something earlier on had a great customer experience so it's more the pity that the poor staff have to refuse what they were so genuinely pleased to be part of.
Lets hope we all get a positive reply from our emails I think they will have wasted all the advertising and good publicity they have had to date otherwise.

happygolucky64

Not everyone has made multiple purchases of magazines. I purchased one magazine, I buy Red anyway, and only wanted to use one gift card, and I had to argue with the sa to use it on a top. I would actually preferred to have used it on a pair of jeans but they didn't fit. I think it's very unfair that Hobbs have changed their t & cs because they didn't have the foresight to see how this would or could pan out. They should either have made it a percentage discount card, made it a minimum spend of say fifty pounds or at the very least made it only one per household. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable making multiple purchases with multiple cards but if sales assistants have encouraged this then Hobbs only have themselves to blame, heads need to roll! (management not shop floor!)

kathleenryd

I wonder if Red have printed far more mags than their usual print run - there are still lots of mags on the shelves. This might be the cause of all this - greedy mag. Maybe if they had stuck to their usual print run this situation might not have occurred. Hobbs might have been able to cope.

annie-c

kathleenryd wrote: »

I wonder if Red have printed far more mags than their usual print run - there are still lots of mags on the shelves. This might be the cause of all this - greedy mag. Maybe if they had stuck to their usual print run this situation might not have occurred. Hobbs might have been able to cope.

I think that matters of circulation are usually discussed during negotiations like these. If not then Hobbs's issue would be with Red and not their customers?