4 ms·
My most recent instance of this is online ordering with Dunkin’ Donuts. The app has no feedback to indicate what items are in stock, so it’s possible to order t
by teeray 2y ago
My most recent instance of this is online ordering with Dunkin’ Donuts. The app has no feedback to indicate what items are in stock, so it’s possible to order things that can’t be fulfilled. If you don’t want their substitute, the store cannot cancel the order. You have to call an 800 number and plead your case. Sure, it’s not a huge hardship, but it’s another instance of making the cancellation path more difficult to frustrate people into writing off the order.
- alephnerd 2y agoDunkin's are franchises. What you're describing is an inventory cataloging issue caused by limited quality and inventory control from corporate over franchisees.
- GiorgioG 2y agoDunkin's are a franchise, but they're using Dunkin's hardware, software, etc. It's absolutely within their ability to track (and force franchisees to track) inventory. It's also within Dunkin Corp's ability to give stores the capability to provide refunds from the retail locations.
- alephnerd 2y ago> It's absolutely within their ability to track (and force franchisees to track) inventory Depends on whether or not the franchisee has implemented inventory tracking correctly. > It's also within Dunkin Corp's ability to give stores the capability to provide refunds from the retail locations That's the franchisee's decision at that point. Dunkin's corporate was out of the loop in that transaction and as such is reticent. Dunkin's tends to hold its franchisees to a lower quality bar imo.
- teeray 2y agoThe comment was about stores not being empowered to cancel orders to the detriment of the customers, not about the reasons why that order was cancelled. The point stands if, say, the store was suddenly closed due to a burst pipe. Corporate is counting on there being enough friction in calling them on the phone to prevent people from doing it altogether.
- zo1 2y agoScrew franchises and franchising. That's the kind of business model we need to get rid of, because it's basically a "subsidiary" model that shields the parent company from liability. At the very least it complicates the dynamic. "Am I really hurting Dunkins or am I just ruining a small business owner that pays a crap ton of money to the franchise owner and mortgaged his house to open this little franchise of Dunkins".
- GiorgioG 2y agoDispute the charge with your bank - you did not get what you paid for, and it's not on you to chase them down and waste your time. If/when enough people do this, they'll get their shit together.
- citizenpaul 2y agoThis is basically a variation on tragedy of the commons. The solution is right there in front of everyone and "simply" requires everyone to do it coordinately. I've told this solution to numerous people, just log onto your bank website and click "dispute" and thats it you are done. Nope, they either don't believe me or are afraid of doing it because "banks". They continue to just allow crappy businesses to effectively steal their money or they waste time with a 45min customer service call. Its the same with many other things like simply boycotting an abusive business. People say starbucks is bad. All that is required to "destroy" starbucks is simply go to any of the dozens of local coffee shops that exist everywhere for a month instead. That would make the heads spin/roll at the C-level at starbucks but still no one does it.
- gruez 2y ago>I've told this solution to numerous people, just log onto your bank website and click "dispute" and thats it you are done This depends heavily on your bank. I can see this working if you're using a neobank, but there's plenty of legacy banks that require you to call in, wait on hold, etc.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- lupire 2y agoWhy do you believe that people who think Starbucks is bad are the people who love Starbucks? The vast majority of people aren't coffee snobs.
- citizenpaul 2y ago