We know that sequels are not so good as the first movie, however I believe that in this case we have a Terminator 2 or Aliens. The visual effects might not be so extravagant; however the result is satisfying, at least.

In the previous post, we saw how a major digital marketplace messed up our order and the buying experience in any possible way. The last straw was that the product (a bottom freezer) externally damaged. We immediately informed them about the damaged appliance, sent pictures and waited for their reply. They asked if the product was still in packaging (which was obviously not, as we had unpacked to use it and then we saw the damage) in order to send another appliance as a replacement.

Not trusting that they could send a replacement intact, we suggested we could keep the old one with a serious reduction in price (perhaps with cash return or with a discount coupon). We believed that this would be the most realistic option, as we did not expect them to be capable of managing delivering a replacement intact. Additionally, we wouldn’t have to go through packaging, waiting for pickup and delivery. The reduction we asked was 50%, hoping that through negotiations we would arrive to something between 40-30%.

They replied that their compensation policy was such that did not allow them to give something more than 20% on the value of the product. Or they could send a replacement.

And this is when I took over. My wife was exhausted with all this back and forth, so I promised to put an end to this. I prepared an answer for her to send. I put to use some things I learned on negotiations through my studies, as well as the experience of similar situations I got from clients’ claim in my job. To avoid missing on the passion of the reply, I will post below the original (translated).

“Hi

In the case of replacing the appliance with a new one, we agree initially on that, provided that the pick up of the damaged appliance will be done only after a new one is delivered, in perfect condition and at a specific time (which means that you will tell when you will do it, and you will do it). And obviously this will be done by a professional transporter, who will be properly trained and equipped to deliver it, in the proper packaging, without any damages.

The above, if done, does not prevent us from publishing a review on your site about this experience, with all the details.

In the case of compensation instead of replacement:

1. The policy of your company is a manmade guideline, product of your company for internal guidance, for general purpose cases. First, it does not mean the percentage is an unaltered natural constant, but it is defined by one of your superiors, which means that they can be changed according to the case. Second, it is a guide for general cases, created to make daily business easier. However here we do not have a general case, as whatever could go wrong, did. We have here a business school case.

2. The compensation should not be a result only of the bad situation of the product (while we do not know if the product was damaged also internally during transportation-handling-storage).

It should be also about the delayed delivery (we spent weeks without a freezer);

It should be about the fuzzy communication; 

The time we allocated to be at home to receive the delivery while we should have been at work; 

The mockery regarding the personal assistance on the market research, the never-to-happen appointment, and the wasted 1 week to wait for conclusion on that;

The loss of trust against your platform (as we experienced your company as we have never done before); 

As well as the fatigue caused by the NEGOTIATION PROCEDURE you put us through, while we expected your service to be care-free. It seems that this is not the case any more.

Consequently, the suggested compensation percentage is way beyond the one suitable for this case. I ask you to reconsider your proposal and to finally satisfy the service standards that we are accustomed to through the years from your service all these years. 

I am expecting your immediate actions.”

Guess what.

We got a discount coupon, with 50% of the value of the appliance, no questions asked. Simple as that. I believe that they realized how bad they had messed up, and perhaps they are afraid also the backlash from a potential public review. In the end, we should be paid as testers / guinea pigs, as it seems that the procedure was not properly designed.

Conclusions:

In this extra step of the buying process, I believe the most important is to try to patch things up, do some damage control. The word of mouth, the backlash of a review, the loss of trust from a client can be invaluable. A discount coupon, even 100% could be nothing to life time value of this client and many that are connected to him.

The fact that they thought that a negotiation could take place from point 0 was utterly false. My position was already predefined as a result of the previous stages of the purchasing process. And to be honest, I think that somebody from above stepped in when they realized what was at stake here.

In such cases companies try to exhaust you, to accept something less, in order to close the case ASAP. We have to keep in mind as consumers, that we should not let our emotions to take over. Regardless if the opponent is ruthless, or plain stupid, we have to follow some basic rules and apply a strategy, to get what we deserve and not what is given to us.

PS.

Sorry to say that, but I believe that there will be a short 3^rd sequel to that. My wife found out that they never gave us the extended warranty we paid for. In the end she told them jokingly that they should pay us a tester fee, as we have found so many holes in their system. Let’s see.