Reasons why qvcuk.com loses custom
- Thread starter AllThatGlitters
- Start date
Help Support ShoppingTelly:
Just Beauty Direct
For all your beauty needs
Katie - read your post with interest. Our web developer works hard to ensure that her websites have high levels of accessibility
Interestingly the UK Disability Discrimination Act sets standards for web accessibility that websites should (I don't think there is a must (yet) - comply too.
YOU should let QVC know if you have problems.
tuxedokitty
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2008
- Messages
- 264
1) I'm not interested in presenters telling me any of personal details about themselves or their family members-it's a product I'm interested in not the presenter.
2)Postage charges - as a large company they should have better discount rates for delivery than smaller companies would be able to offer.
3)Talking up the 30 day MBG, then contacting people complaining they have returned items.
4) Missing pics and descriptions on line & lack of actual size measurements.
5) Too expensive - apart from the occasional item think most items or alternatives can be bought cheaper elsewhere.
6) Fed up of same faces, selling the same items, saying the same worn out phrases
7) I could hardly believe one presenter saying yeah, yeah, yeah. repeatedly to a guest (giving the mesage I can't be bothered listening to you, the height of rudeness-I turned off).
I spend more time on the computer now.
Very rarely watch or purchase now due to all of the above.
2)Postage charges - as a large company they should have better discount rates for delivery than smaller companies would be able to offer.
3)Talking up the 30 day MBG, then contacting people complaining they have returned items.
4) Missing pics and descriptions on line & lack of actual size measurements.
5) Too expensive - apart from the occasional item think most items or alternatives can be bought cheaper elsewhere.
6) Fed up of same faces, selling the same items, saying the same worn out phrases
7) I could hardly believe one presenter saying yeah, yeah, yeah. repeatedly to a guest (giving the mesage I can't be bothered listening to you, the height of rudeness-I turned off).
I spend more time on the computer now.
Very rarely watch or purchase now due to all of the above.
Brissles
Registered Shopper
This is all adding more evidence to my Post of a week or so ago asking "Is QVC on the skids ?" More and more of their own brands are being pushed, with Northern Nights and Richard Jackson Gardening having more than 1 tsv a month; there are also more outlet shows than ever there used to be too.
Whats happened to Anne Dawson ? was Daniel brought in to replace her ????
Whats happened to Anne Dawson ? was Daniel brought in to replace her ????
sheepdog
VIP Herder
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2008
- Messages
- 350
You mean content management? You can design and put process in place but if nobody is tasked with providing the content, the website just doesn't go anywhere - which is your point. I used to do website management for a company and my biggest gripe was that nobody ever provided me with information to update pages. Then got all the complaints of how the website wasn't doing much! Thankfully I'm out of that side of IT.
I'm guessing QVC's web development team probably consists of a couple of people who do the techie stuff with the "content" being provided by a back end content management system to a few users. With little budget and training
It would be great if QVC read this thread and did something about all the excellent points raised but they rarely do.
Brissles
Registered Shopper
Somebody could print it all off and send it to the CEO at Marco Polo House. NOW THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING.
AllThatGlitters
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 739
Sheepdog, you're right - the content has to be provided, and someone has to check that is HAS been provided. There's both a content management issue and a business process one.
A good content management system (an expensive software facility) will publish content according to instructions...IF the content is there. For example, every time an item is published to the live 'in stock' site, the programmed rule should demand a photograph of the item before publishing, and refuse to do so if the photograph is missing (publishing means uploading the content to a server so that punters like you and me can see it). Where an item's photograph cannot be obtained (eg, Ralph has not yet brought the Honora items across the Atlantic), the item should be flagged as Pending, not made available, and should trigger a review at regular intervals. At the very least, it should be possible for The Management to obtain a report about all items that are missing important details. Clearly, this is not possible, or is not bothered about. They either have poor software, or poor business processes.
I get the strong impression, as you suggest, that much of the content management is outsourced to an unskilled team, and that pretty much NO quality control is present. Errors on the site are rarely (I'd say never, but perhaps I've just not seen the exceptions) picked up and corrected, which suggests that no-one is tasked with QC, and that there's little budget expended on doing so.
Amazon, who offer thousands of times the number of items that QVC do, with a lot more complexity in terms of vendor type, manage a much higher level of consistency. Loads of other online vendors offer a more satisfying and reliable user experience. QVC no longer has many unique offerings (eBay has ended much of QVC's exclusivity). They are really going to have to think hard about how they present themselves and retain market share in a cold economy.
The pensioners buying Nina Leonard over the phone and calling in for a chat with Julia seem to me to represent a static/dwindling market...unless of course, QVC have spent some cash on analysis of the market and can prove me wrong.
A good content management system (an expensive software facility) will publish content according to instructions...IF the content is there. For example, every time an item is published to the live 'in stock' site, the programmed rule should demand a photograph of the item before publishing, and refuse to do so if the photograph is missing (publishing means uploading the content to a server so that punters like you and me can see it). Where an item's photograph cannot be obtained (eg, Ralph has not yet brought the Honora items across the Atlantic), the item should be flagged as Pending, not made available, and should trigger a review at regular intervals. At the very least, it should be possible for The Management to obtain a report about all items that are missing important details. Clearly, this is not possible, or is not bothered about. They either have poor software, or poor business processes.
I get the strong impression, as you suggest, that much of the content management is outsourced to an unskilled team, and that pretty much NO quality control is present. Errors on the site are rarely (I'd say never, but perhaps I've just not seen the exceptions) picked up and corrected, which suggests that no-one is tasked with QC, and that there's little budget expended on doing so.
Amazon, who offer thousands of times the number of items that QVC do, with a lot more complexity in terms of vendor type, manage a much higher level of consistency. Loads of other online vendors offer a more satisfying and reliable user experience. QVC no longer has many unique offerings (eBay has ended much of QVC's exclusivity). They are really going to have to think hard about how they present themselves and retain market share in a cold economy.
The pensioners buying Nina Leonard over the phone and calling in for a chat with Julia seem to me to represent a static/dwindling market...unless of course, QVC have spent some cash on analysis of the market and can prove me wrong.
Catkins
Registered Shopper
I have just been looking at QVC USA and am staggered by the difference in websites! The U.S. website is SO much better with more information on products and their ingredients. Why can't they do the same over here? How difficult can it be? Its like we don't matter as much as the good old U.S of A!
