I think this is astonishing ... what do you think?
I am respecting the anonymity of the other half of the following correspondence since he has no control over my publication of it. However, I am making him aware of this post so that he retains his full right of reply. Otherwise I would be guilty of all sorts of ethical crimes: he must have any right of reply he wants.
I went to a seminar in Oxford in May of this year and the following correspondence tells us clearly what happened; and the follow up correspondence that eventually ensued.
--oo0oo--
In best dispute resolution, Jonathan called me later on the day that I posted this blog. We learned that from his persepctive I was expecting an alternative CD when none was available. We also learned that from his perspective I wanted the CD that I originally signed up for as I felt a little cheated.
We also learned something about expectations: mine as a customer and his as a provider. Mine are high, his are high. I wanted the NLP CD and he doesn't want anyone to think a) that he has problems and b) if he does that they are resolved amicably adn swiftly.
My summary was that everything would have been fine even with the "wrong" CD except that there was the excess postage issue and then that I had to remind Jonathan to send my me CD. From my perspective that was poor service. Putting those two together, I saw red and started stamping my feet.
Clearly I took Jonathan by surprise but in the end we parted amicably I think and in the end I said I really didn't want a reimbursement and I could live without the new CD ... Jonathan made a pomise and you will read here shortly how he has kept that promise.
In all of my work and all other areas of my life I do encourage people to talk to each other especially when things aren't going smoothly. So well done Jonathan for making that call!!
Now read on if you wish!
Duncan Williamson
29th July 2006
Hello again,
I attended a seminar of yours in Oxford here in the UK on 17th May this year and have yet to receive the CD-ROM that I paid for.
You might remember that you didn't have any with you and you promised to send them on return to your home office. You did write and tell me that you had got home but no CD has come.
Best wishes
Duncan
No reply even though I had received at least two emails from them by the time I sent this message.5th August 2006
Thanks Jonathan,
The CD has now arrived but it cost me £1.05 in excess charges to take delivery of it.
Whoever posted the package for you here in the UK put a first class stamp on it when it needed a first class stamp plus a further 5 pence. The Royal Mail then added a surcharge of a further £1.
I had to take a detour to go and get it too.
How will you reimburse me for this additional expense?
Duncan
No reply6th August 2006
Sorry Jonathan but there is still a problem.
When I signed up to your seminar it advertised a CD-ROM on NLP. You have sent me a CD entitled building response potential.
Please let me know when you will be reimbursing my £1.05 and sending me a new CD-ROM.
Duncan
No replyFollowing an email advertising a further event by this organisation I took the opportunity to try again:24th October 2006
Hi Jonathan,
You didn't reply to my previous email in which I advised you that when you sent me my CD-ROM that you had forgotten to send me, it cost me excess postage to collect it. You also didn't explain why you didn't provide the CD-ROM on NLP that I was expecting from the seminar in Oxford that I attended when that was, really, my main reason for attending.
Best wishes
Duncan
This time I did get a reply and very quickly, too:I don't recall receiving this email; it is possible it was caught in my spamtrap. If I had received such an email, I would certainly have apologized to you for your having had to do that.
Regarding the CDs that were sent out, a couple were sent directly from me, whereas most were sent by me to your colleague in the UK, and then on from your colleague directly. Certainly my aim in all cases was to deliver on all promises made. It is unfortunate news to me at this point to hear that I had in some way disappointed you -- regardless of the cause -- and even if the resultant experience was due to mailing issues out of my hands.
As for the excess postage, I'm a bit surprised since I would have thought sufficient postage was included from the sending side. Was it actually excess postage (which mystifies me, truly)? Or was this some kind of import tariff? I know when I send items overseas, I put "0" in the customs form to prevent import tariffs. So I assure you that in general, I regularly take efforts to reduce these sorts of situations.
What can I do at this stage to regain your trust?
I thought I had explained this during the evening event itself from the front of the room. If I did not do so fully, or if I did so before you arrived (not sure if you were early or not, but several people did come late), again I apologize.
Right before leaving the States, I looked over the roster for the evening event, and realized that I knew many of the people who would be coming to the evening event. I also knew that many of them had at some stage or other, by attending other events, or by buying certain products, received one or the other of my typical bonus CD materials (at present, I have 4 such titles). And I knew that I did not know which person had already received which bonus CD. When I left, there was the potential of over 30 people who were either confirmed or considering coming that night (the weather prevented a wide range of people from coming). Which meant I would have been bringing ~140 CDs in jewel cases, knowing I'd be bringing at least 105 of those specific CDs back with me.
Baggage space and weight is always at a premium when I take my overseas trips. In other words, I'm already paying to bring excess baggage, every time I go overseas. This by contrast to before 9/11 when the baggage limits were much higher.
So to bring ~35 of each of those 4 possible titles, knowing that I was going to have to bring at least 105 of them back with me, seemed a less efficient way of handling the matter, than by sending specific chosen titles to the people who'd requested them, afterwards. The money I spend on postage was saved on less of a baggage fee, so for me, again, it seemed a better way, when I saw the roster.
Now, I recognize I did promise that these CDs would be provided at the event. So I also recognize there was the potential for the "bait and switch" experience -- which I did not want anyone to have had. I hoped that by offering a lot of information and material and promising to ship the bonus (and of course then delivering on that promise), it would be a non-issue.
If you personally would have made a different choice in my shoes given the same scenario, then I can appreciate that. I might very well make a different choice again in the future, if such a situation recurs, for such reasons as people incurring postage or import fees, etc.
Does that sufficiently answer your question?
Regards,
I replied:
Thanks for the quick reply Jonathan.Spam trap I doubt since you had already received two messages from me and had replied successfully.
Definitely too little postage paid on the package which was posted from Southampton or Portsmouth in the UK if memory serves me correctly.
As far as the CD is concerned, no you haven't answered my question.
You advertised NLP and that really was the only reason I went along: I know of it, I discuss it from time to time, many people find it fascinating and useful so I wanted to know more. I thought your CD together with a seminar would be ideal.
Put yourself in my place Jonathan and I am not trying to be offensive in any way
Did I care that other people already have your NPL CD?
Does it matter to me that you might have excess baggage problems?
Did I ever at any stage prior to your email just received appreciate that your potential excess baggage was going to cause me a problem?
No!
No!
No!
Do I care that I am disappointed even though I was present at your meeting when you announced that you weren't going to provide that CD? (I said in my email just now that you didn't explain ... That's not true, you did: was I satisfied by your explanation? No I wasn't.) Do I feel aggrieved that you changed the CD that was being given away without notice?
Am I startled at having to pay excess postage on my parcel?
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
You gave some good solid information and tips in your seminar too and I did appreciate them: I didn't waste an evening by any means!
Best wishes
Duncan
Again very swiftly, this arrived:Hi Duncan,
My spamtrap settings are primarily controlled by Earthlink/Mindspring and I have zero control over what keywords they include or exclude. I have only 3 basic settings, and all of them have downsides of different amounts of email filtered out. This year has seen dramatically shifting settings controlled by that ISP's spam department.
Receiving some but not all emails from a given person is a regular, daily occurrence for me (just as not getting some through to other people, and then getting other emails through to those same people later in the same day, is also a daily occurrence).
Internet email on a grand scale is already going the way of the "whitelist" (approved/accepted authors only).
If you have not experienced this yourself yet, I'm glad for you. But for you to say "I doubt" what I'm experiencing would not be a knowledgeable or accurate perception about the variant performance of spamtraps in place on the internet today. It may be fully accurate for you, but it doesn't apply to my perspective.
The pros and cons of spamtraps are dramatically affecting businesses today in negative ways. And there is no solution in place. Letting ALL the emails through is not an option; I'd spend so much time deleting email, I'd never get to important customer business. Filtering a minimal amount of it is the only smart choice, even with the downsides of that. Sometimes that leaves choices up to a spam administrator that I wouldn't personally make. These unfortunate events can and do leave people feeling ignored or dissatisfied. Not something I'd ever wish on any customer.
OK, now I know where your package originated from -- as I didn't have that information prior to this email. This is a surprise to me, as I didn't expect Royal Mail would even accept a package without sufficient postage paid in advance by my UK colleague. I would be annoyed by this had I been on the receiving end. And I would not have wanted customers to experience that. Again I ask, what can I do to resolve the situation?
Well, yet again, I have, but clearly not to your satisfaction. You asked me why "I" did something. To answer that, I speak from my
position. (And I apologized, as well.) You are clearly uninterested in my position, which is your prerogative.
And no offense was taken -- I have put myself in your position and I can appreciate your position -- both in terms of what doesn't matter to you, and in terms of what does. And all either of us can do is change the future.
So since at this point, you've been to the evening, you got valuable information/tips there, and you've received your CD as promised, though not in the way/method it was originally promised. And now there is the outstanding issue of unexpected postage paid upon receipt. Are there other outstanding issues on your side of which I'm unaware? On my side, there is an outstanding issue of my question in the prior email --
#1 -- Would you like me to refund the excess postage you paid for receipt? I would be happy to do so. I can refund by paypal, or in cash by mail when I'm in the UK next week.
#2 -- Do you have any other such suggestions?
My position is that I have a dissatisfied customer whose dissatisfaction was not known to me. I made a choice that was not appreciated by you, and apparently you emailed me about that -- however I did not receive that email as far as I can tell (I've been searching). Had I known, I would have taken immediate steps to extend to you in some way, just as I'm providing rapid responses today.
Now to your perspective:
>Did I care that other people already have your NPL CD? No!
>Does it matter to me that you might have excess baggage problems? No!
Agreed, these are not your concerns, nor should they be.
>Did I ever at any stage prior to your email just received appreciate that your potential excess baggage was going to cause me a problem? No!
Well, that was part of my explanation in person.
>Do I care that I am disappointed even though I was present at your
>meeting when you announced that you weren't going to provide that CD?
>Yes!
As do I -- I do care that you were and still are disappointed. Which is why I've now asked several times what you would propose I could do to resolve that.
>Do I feel aggrieved that you changed the CD that was being given away without notice? Yes!
I think there is a perception issue here -- I did not "change the CD being given away" -- I chose not to take 35 of only one title, when many of the people there might already have it. I then made that same title, and several others as well, available by choice afterwards by mail. At no time did I remove a specific title choice from participants.
However, it is obvious my choice about delivery method was not appreciated by you.
I've answered this point because it looked as though you thought I was removing a specific bonus from availability, and that wasn't the case.
>Am I startled at having to pay excess postage on my parcel? Yes!
I would be too. And I am glad to be notified of it now, so as to be able to do something about it. I would not have wanted that to occur.
>You gave some good solid information and tips in your seminar too and I
>did appreciate them: I didn't waste an evening by any means!
Of that, I am immensely glad. That is my prime outcome in doing what I do.
So what next steps do you propose?
Regards,
I replied further and I have to say that these long essays that I have received didn’t really seek to solve my problems and they came as a shock to me so I tried to resolve the matter.Well, I think we all suffer from spam, even the great Bill Gates III. I normally wake up to 150 messages in my in boxes the majority of which are spam. I said I doubt because my controls (at ISP and computer level) filter on words and email addresses and ing eneral once I have approved you then you stay approved. There are blips but they are few and far between.
As for the rest, you are being exceptionally defensive and in the end you ask me what you should do. I am not uninstersted in anything you are telling me otherwise I wouldn't be communicating with you. By being so defensive I am receiving it as dismissive and that is unfortunate for me.
Anyone can post a letter or parcel here with the Royal mail by posting it in a post box with no stamps on it, the rightn value of stamps or far too many stmaps. They will deliver it. It was laziness or a mistake that made your colleaguesned me a packet that was insufficiently stamped.
I don't want to drag this out any more Jonathan as I have made my point and really got no where.
Thanks for your time. I will put down to experience the loss of the CD that I wanted and the money I had to pay to receive the CD that I didn't.
I have been in your position and made my client happy by taking a surprising decision. If I were in your place I would now do something surprising.
Best wishes
Duncan
Again very quickly, a response: you can see the deteriorating nature of the communication now.Hi Duncan,
Your points are well taken. And I still have an open question before I choose any further action which you might interpret as generous.
As for "defensive" I am sensing the same thing in how you have still not explained the source of your perception of the "bait & switch" on CD titles you experienced.
In NLP we seek to resolve misunderstandings and move on. So far in your emails, I'm perceiving you would rather remain unhappy with the status quo. You have your perception of my emails, I have mine about yours. That is unfortunate, at least, for me.
Grievances don't come up very often for me. When they do, they're typically one of two kinds. And almost nothing in between. About half of them are truly legitimate, where I will go quite far to resolve that customer's problem, and seek to make them happier and hopefully retain them as customers. The other half are just trying to get things for free, and end up playing email games to be manipulative. They get nothing.
"Doing something surprising" is an act I value immensely, and save for situations when I'm communicating with a customer who had a legitimate problem, who is reasonable and clear in all of their communication, and has been helpful enough to explain their grievance clearly and fully.
Behavior such as describing my emails as defensive and ignoring my intent to start by resolving what went wrong doesn't help your case.
So far: you've clearly explained the excess postage issue and that was one of the things I've already offered to resolve, but you rejected that offer (perhaps as a way of motivating me to "do something surprising.")
However, I'm still not getting any clear information on the CD title issue.
Yet there has obviously been a misunderstanding over what CD title was going to be on offer that night. In my email ad for the evening, I didn't even specify a title for the bonus. I said, a "free NLP CD."
Did you somehow conclude I would be giving away some of my paid-for products? Nowhere did I promise or even imply such, if that's what happened with you.
So I ask the following question:
Which specific CD did you want, that you didn't get? I made on offer at the evening a choice amongst _every_ bonus CD I've ever given away. But you still seem to think I "changed the CD being given away." How could that be possible, when I didn't give you a title in advance?
What opinion did you form in advance about which CD that you wanted, that was not available as a free bonus CD?
If you can answer the above clearly and calmly, without embellishing your email response with emotional baggage or accusations, you will likely find me very generous in response.
Regards,
You can see that the debate has now partly become one of a matter of facts: I know I only signed up for a CD on NLP. I really wouldn’t have gone otherwise and the offer to get one of every CD ever produced doesn’t ring true either as the NLP CD wasn’t on the list that I ticked!!!
Here’s my reply anyway:Jonathan,
I first read this message a few hours ago and decided to ponder my reply.
I sell a small number of things online from my web site and once when one sale went really wrong, I apologised, gave a bonus product and then refunded all of their money. I didn't argue, I didn't search for a psychological angle and I didn't drag it out.
Initially I refused to provide you the answer to the problems I felt you had caused me. Then at the end of my last message I gave you one possible solution; leaving the substance of it to you.
Now you have classified your problems as either worth solving or not worth solving. The inference is clear: so don't solve this one. You are only at the end of the email so you can simply walk away.
Final point, though, I remember seeing an advert from you that clearly said that there would be a CD-ROM on NLP included in the evening's seminar. Don't try to make me feel as if you are doing for me anything other than something that was promised. In an earlier email you seemed to agree with my stance now you have changed your mind.
Let me turn the psychological analysis on you now: you have written a lot of words and said that you want me to be a satisfied customer. Yet you are completely afraid of taking the decision of how to do that.
I gave you a get out yet you have poured boiling oil on it.
Duncan
More bile poured forth:I'm done with this email exchange, Duncan. I am willing to talk this through with you over the telephone, but no further by email. You have misinterpreted me and distorted my comments so thoroughly in your replies to me that your interpretations do not remotely resemble what I wrote or intended.
I don't mind calling you on my dime if you're willing to discuss the matter by phone. Or we could chat by Skype.
Regards,
I caved in, beaten and bloodied:Why didn't you just say at the very beginning that you had no intention of sorting out these problems? That would have been much more honest of you.
This is one for the blog.
Duncan
And finally since there is clearly no point in persisting with this:Now that's a flat out lie. I both had, and still have, every intention of sorting out these problems, but clearly -- you have a specific expectation of exactly what you expect me to do, and my questions and behavior didn't match your expectations. So you're playing cat & mouse games. You're being dishonest.
If you actually, I mean ACTUALLY want to allow me to resolve the specific problems you expressed, in a way that will work for BOTH of us and not just you, then we should talk. But it sounds exactly like you've baited me into not wanting to play a game that was rigged from the beginning.
I also agree this is one for the web, unless you actually want to get it mutually resolved.
But you don't want it mutually resolved. You want some fantasy fulfilled, that you're not even clarifying. More games.
--oo0oo—
See the defensiveness in the final message? Just like the first message from him. Then there is the defend by attacking aspect to it all.
My summary isI was offered the reimbursement of my excess postage very quickly. I appreciated that of course. However, the rest of the attempted resolutions were just disingenuous. Then I believe my correspondent got himself in such a knot that he probably said things he didn’t mean and read things from me that I didn't write. It is a matter of provable fact that his advert in the Oxford Times or wherever it was that I saw it announced an NLP CD for all delegates.
All I really want in that CD: I didn’t need to know about his excess baggage problems. I don’t want to plunder his magnum opus and I didn’t even want to hear that he’d made an assessment that he thought that his other delegates would have received the NLP CD already so I shouldn’t have it either.
I would have seen immediately in this exchange that all I wanted was the NLP CD: he thrust NLP methodology in my face during one of his messages thus proving that I really need to know and learn about NLP!!!
Duncan Williamson
Petrol Prices II
As I was driving past a petrol station yesterday I made a mental note that they were advertising unleaded petrol at 90.9 pence per litre. A lot more than the 84.9 pence per litre I found on Saturday night. So I did a bit of digging.
I found
www.whatprice.co.uk/car/petrol-prices.html and they said that BP unleaded petrol is 95 pence per litre at their Milton Heights petrol station. Then it said it was 95 pence per litre at BP stations at Frilford, Hartwell Abingdon ... and Shell unleaded is 95 pence ... So, I discounted that as being unreliable.
A bit more research revealed a very useful article from The Scotsman newspaper:
Petrol prices fall to lowest level in over a year. This article explains the relationship between the price of crude oil and the price of petrol at the pump: leads and lags, for economists.
From
www.petrolprices.com, we see that on Sunday unleaded petrol in the UK cost:
Unleaded average of 87.4p, a minimum of 83.9p and a maximum of 100.0p
In my own post code area, according to petrolprices.com, the equivalent figures are:
Unleaded average of 87.9p, a minimum of 84.9p and a maximum of 92.9p
I then enetered a post code for a place where I used to live (the North East of England), just to see whether petrolprices.com is showing different prices elswhere, unlike www.whatprice.co.uk:
Unleaded average of 86.9p, a minimum of 84.9p and a maximum of 89.9p
The petrolprices.com web site claims:
* The only site to cover all UK petrol stations
* Over 8,000 daily updates
What are you opinions and conclusions so far?
Do you know how the price of a litre of petrol is set? According to
petrolprices.com, it is as follows:
"Fuel is taxed twice: firstly by fuel duty and then by VAT. Fuel duty is a fixed amount (47.1p per litre for unleaded and diesel) and VAT is a percentage (17.5%)."
Is that a good thing? Well, what do you make of this, also from
petrolprices.com? Data applies only to the UK, please note.
"In the 2004–05 fiscal year, fuel duty alone generated approximately £23.5 billion and this does not include the VAT raised on the fuel sold. In the 2005-06 fiscal year only £21 billion will be spent by government on transport as a whole. So, fuel taxation not only pays for the upkeep of our roads but it also helps to pay for the other things that government spends our money on."
There is another easy to read article in The Scotsman,
Slowing demand pushes oil below $60 that discusses the recent falls in the price of crude oil. Did you know that it has fallen to around $60 per barrel now? A $19 per barrel fall since mid July.
Assuming that this link will stay valid, why not go to this Advanced Financial Network
web page to see how the crude oil price is now back to the level it held in January of this year?
An excellent topic in supply and demand, markets, commodities, commodity v retail prices, cartels, leads and lags and a whole lot more.
Duncan Williamson
