Recommendations for personal shoppers

[Brendan]

Is there no end to the neoliberal onslaught? First the economy now forum moderation.

[Huguenot]

We'll all be living in teepees, wracked with indecision because we can't get a unanimous agreement.

...and then Quids will swipe the float...

[red devil]

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't think a rule is needed, maybe moderators

> need to be a bit more alert to stuff like that

> naively or mistakenly starting in the lounge.

>

> Generally people would do so because they enjoy

> the banter and I see no reason to stop that and

> impose a more stringent stickly-rule culture on

> the forum.

>

> Maybe posters like giggirl could have reported

> their concerns to the team earlier and saved MsB

> her flounce?

I've seen threads in the Lounge where the OP has been advised to post in another section, but quite often a thread can quickly go off-tangent before anyone gets a chance to advise.

I think it also depends a lot on the subject matter of the thread.

If you take the 'hypnosis' thread as an example, there's a certain 'comic potential' associated with it, and sure enough someone had already posted a photo of the Matt Lucas character. So far no one has answered the OP's request for a hypnotist recommendation. I'm sure they'd get a better banter-free response posting in the Wanted section...

[Brendan]

Stripped of autocratic regulation it will only be a matter of time before the forum becomes a plaything to small group of unaccountable elites. They will no doubt argue that that laisezz-fare approach provides freedom. The fact that it is a freedom reserved for their closed circle will not be mentioned.

[El Pibe]

*eek, brendan's getting too close to the truth, next he'll work out Jo's English was a patsy account designed to bring in mock elections to give an impression of accountability and democracy*

Quick lizards, slough skins, to the mothership!!!

[Aladam888]

I had heard of paid guides that took you to popular resturants, but "unpaid" personal "shoppers" is a rather new term for me. Even if there were such people around, surely they would demand some compensation for the time they spend on you, and that way this activity would be commercialized. The personal shoppers wouldnt have any interest in what you want, and just stick arund for money. You would much rather take your family or friends for shopping . It would be free and give you a more honey advice:)

[RosieH]

Aladam888 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I had heard of paid guides that took you to

> popular resturants, but "unpaid" personal

> "shoppers" is a rather new term for me. Even if

> there were such people around, surely they would

> demand some compensation for the time they spend

> on you, and that way this activity would be

> commercialized.

dear god, personal shoppers have been around for years - I can't understand the incredulity on this thread.

Clearly the point is that in a department store, it's easy to be overfaced by the 3+ floors of choice and give up before you've found what you're looking for.

Or not shop the concessions you don't think are your bag, only to find you're missing out on some good stuff.

Or, if you're looking for a nice black pant suit, trust someone who actually works there to know where all the nice black pant suits are.

Or be tired after a long week at work and want someone else to do the schlepping for you, while you have a nice cup of tea / glass of wine and a read a magazine.

It's pretty straightforward why shops offer this service. If they can find something that suits your requirements and style you're more likely to buy there than somewhere else, and buy more. And they can upsell with accessories, and send you info when your favourite designers come in encouraging repeat purchase. Makes perfect sense. And you have to make an appointment so there's no danger of being overrun.

As for taking friends / family - Christ, I wouldn't trust them to choose outfits for me. Tell me whether I look fat, sure, but I didn't spend this long honing my impeccable fashion skills only to be dragged to Karen Millen or Boden. YOIKS!

[Alan Medic]

It must be hard being a woman with all that goes in to shopping. I'd love to know though is there also a section for the not so nice black pant suits?

[RosieH]

Yep, it's called Debenhams.

No one's saying it's hard - but that is not to say it's not tiring or boring, or that you wouldn't like someone to show you some fancy new slacks.

But the sarcastic comments from yourself and Huguenot would carry a little more weight if I thought either of you had the remotest clue about fashion.

[Jeremy]

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But the sarcastic comments from yourself and

> Huguenot would carry a little more weight if I

> thought either of you had the remotest clue about

> fashion.

undisputedrosie

[Huguenot]

I didn't make any sarcastic comments until the woman had hissed off in a tizz.

I'm interested in why this service exists from the shop's perspective, not from your perspective.

It is completely fucking obvious that anyone would want to sit on their arse drinking coffee whilst someone else does the shopping. I get that. All of your reasons I get. I'm not thick.

However, for some reason people think that shops provide this service because you really really want it. This is completely illogical.

The question I ask is that since the shop can't do it for everyone, why would they do it for you?

There's 5,000 people going through these stores every day. What makes the store decide which particular group of 10 people, who are looking for cheap clothes and offer no guarantee of purchase, are going to get this service?

It's commercially insane.

All this bollocks about coming back over the long term and customer for life stuff is valid, but nonsensical. They need to get the other 5,000 people coming back for more, not just 10.

If you are a special customer, then fine - but nobody here has claimed to be a 'premier' customer of these stores at all - quite the opposite.

Giving these 10 a special, but underserved, benefit is actually more likely to piss of the other 4,990. Not only that, but because this benefit is underserved, it actually seems to have created a rather snotty self righteous sense of entitlement amongst the recipients. That can ONLY go wrong.

So there must be something else, something that nobody has mentioned, that would explain this apparently stupid activity.

[Otta]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> RosieH Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But the sarcastic comments from yourself and

> > Huguenot would carry a little more weight if I

> > thought either of you had the remotest clue

> about

> > fashion.

>

> undisputedrosie

Haha I was going to say the same.

[Huguenot]

I should clarify that I don't give a flying fuck about fashion.

I'm not asking about fashion, I'm asking about commercial rationale.

You can be buying teapots for all I care.

[Jeremy]

H, I thought it was obvious. If you use one of these personal shoppers, the store assumes that you're going to buy a lot of stuff (several complete outfits) and spend a lot of cash. So it's worth their while paying someone ?15 p/h to spend a bit of time with you and get you to buy as much stuff as possible.

[*Bob*]

Come on, Huggie. "Not giving a flying @#$%& about fashion".. that's a pretty bold statement. I mean, what do you do.. simply select clothes on the basis of (1) applicable gender and (2) approximate sizing - and the rest can go blow?

Unless you're over-egging the argumental pudding 6000% is the reverse direction, as per.

[El Pibe]

I imagine in somewhere like HoF they have other stuff to do if they're not doing that.

I imagine in somewhere like Burberry they're not only dedicated shoppers, they're dedicated to specific foreign demographics.

We can probably assume the cost/benefit stuff has been ironed out some time ago and that you probably are missing something Hugues ;-)

[RosieH]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Jeremy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > RosieH Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > But the sarcastic comments from yourself and

> > > Huguenot would carry a little more weight if

> I

> > > thought either of you had the remotest clue

> > about

> > > fashion.

> >

> > undisputedrosie

>

>

> Haha I was going to say the same.

I forgot to add "unlike me", but that WAS implied, right?

Huguenot, you're not thick, but you're being wilfully obtuse and it's frankly bordering on the preposterous.

Many shops provide many services free of charge (gift wrap for instance, or a free makeover, or free delivery). These things all clearly cost money, but also clearly provide a return on investment or they wouldn't do it. I would suggest at the very least: customer loyalty, increased spend and great PR.

Refuting that purely on the basis of your own tea-spluttering incredulilty is a little arrogant, no?

And why would it piss anyone off that someone else booked an appointment with a personal shopper? Anyone can book an appointment with a personal shopper. Are you mental?

Undisputedrosie x

[red devil]

The fact that some people on here have expressed surprise and incredulity that a store like HoF provides this type of personal customer service, is probably the answer why they are doing it. They're just trying to improve how the public perceives them, to get away from the 'threpenny bit bazaar' image, to a more upmarket/exclusive shopping experience, along the lines of the Burberrys of this world.

It's a simple loss leader for stores like HoF, a form of stealth advertising.

Paying someone cira ?125/day is a drop in the ocean compared to their overall advertising budget, and there's a good chance they will recoup some, if mot more, of it back. If it bothers you that much Hugo, write to them...

[*Bob*]

"Ooh, look, they do personal personal shopping." (walk on)

That's what it's for, 99.9% of the time. It's only a vacant counter with 'personal shopping' written above it. With a buzzer just in case someone actually wants to call their bluff.

[RosieH]

When I buy a bra, I can get a free fitting if I like. It can take ages (not to wrestle my breasts into said brasierre, you understand, but trying on the many different shapes and styles to see which is best).

Some of the shops I frequent have shopper evenings. Here you can get a discount, and a glass of bubbly, and with some, even a canape, or (heaven forfend) a cupcake, maybe even a goody bag.

A couple of shops I go to send me presents for my birthday.

WHY, GOD, WHY???

[Huguenot]

"also clearly provide a return on investment or they wouldn't do it. I would suggest at the very least: customer loyalty, increased spend and great PR."

For 10 people - not the other 5,000.

Clothes is a low margin business. If you only buy a pair of trousers and shirt, that's the 15 quid margin gone that you paid to the assistant.

Regarding loyalty, the OP made it clear that she would go to whatever store was providng the service - even (shock) Debenhams. That's not loyalty, that's promiscuity,

Also the OP made it clear that she did not intend to spend large sums of money, and would not shop at a store that required her to spend more money. You said you wanted a pair of black trousers or a trouser suit. That's not increased spend, it's what everybody else is buying.

Finally great PR? Whoosh - did I miss it? What PR?

So bloody great PR that nobody knows who provides the service. You think I'm being preposterous?

What on earth is arrogant about saying I can't see the commercial sense in this?

You've called me sarcastic when I wasn't, you've said I'm making fashion judgements when I didn't, now you've called me arrogant because I can't see the sense in this.

I think you've got a bee in your bonnet about something else - I'm not attacking women you know, just I can't see the benfit if personal shoppers to a high street store and average punters. I don't begrudge them to you. Go for your life, enjoy.

[*Bob*]

It costs hardly anything (one formica counter, one enthusiastic wannabe Gok shop assistant) and it gives your shop an air of ooh-la-la. As The Devil says, it's simply another means of PR.

Selfridges gets one. JL wants to be more like Selfridges, so they get one. HOF wants to be more like JL so they get one. Debenhams wants to be more like HOF, so they get one. (I don't know who comes after Debenhams.. I just know I don't want to go there.)

How hard can this possibly be to understand?

[Huguenot]

Dear *Bob*.

It would depend on your definiton of fashion, I was interpreting it to mean the changing styles of personal apparel.

I buy my wardrobe from Muji because it's cheap, and all my t-shirts cost 5 quid.

On the basis that I have one of every colour they sell, and that the design hasn't changed in the 42 years I've been alive, I think most people would observe that I wasn't showing any symptoms of being concerned with the zeitgeist. Including RosieH.

However, you may nitpick - to do so you'll probably need to use an alternative definition of what I mean by 'fashion', but I hope you'll accept that this was the meaning I intended.

[*Bob*]

"Muji is distinguished by its design minimalism, emphasis on recycling, avoidance of waste in production and packaging, and no-logo or "no-brand" policy."

Oh my God.. look out.. you're fashionable!

[RosieH]

Come now Huguenot - you can't have it both ways. You can't say you don't give a rat's ptooch about fashion, and then say that because YOU haven't heard of a fashion service, no one has. (For the record, I like fashion, I've heard of personal shopping. As have many, many of my friends, some of whom have availed themselves of it. I have also seen lots of coverage of personal shopping in women's fashion and lifestyle media, so actually yeah, great PR. Does it occur to you maybe you're not target audience?)

Nor can you accuse others of an extraordinary overreaction, when you post this:

"'Deactivating' is such a hissing pissy shitsy foot stamping pathetic wankster that I don't believe even the most vomit poking ingrate would have it done after a little gentle ribbing for asking for shopping slaves to bring clothes to her. "

And arrogant, to suggest that you (not in retail) know more about retail than Selfridges, Harvey Nichols, John Lewis, House of Fraser, Debenhams? Well yes, I'd say so.

No bees in bonnets, nor wandering wombs, just incredulous at your incredulity.