Did a high end hotel shop the other day, something I specialize in. I've done a bunch of them before, I can get everything done no problem, though this is a new MSC and I'm not entirely familiar with their requirements.

One thing they ask for, which others don't, is that I take pictures of public areas in the hotel (the lobby, hallways, etc). It wasn't a very big hotel, and the fitness center and pool had a surcharge that the MSC wasn't willing to pay me for, so I really only had a handful of places to visit. Still, went around with a fine toothed comb and took my pictures. Got a lot- more than I could fit into the report.

Now, the report itself says that if you don't find any issues in public areas, take an overall picture and state there were no issues. I thought that was clear as day. I found issues everywhere- some big, some small, but they were issues. So I figure I didn't need to take those pictures, and because I'm always worried about looking like a mystery shopper taking pictures out in the open, I don't. I go home, fill out my report, think everything's fine.

I got a bit of a rude email back from the account manager saying I didn't finish the report, because I didn't include any overall pictures of the area. I explain to them that the rules said I only need overall pictures if there were no issues... and there were issues. They tell me that other mystery shoppers "easily" take those pictures... which I don't care about. These other mystery shoppers either went to better maintained hotels or didn't look as thoroughly as I am. They then copy the instructions... which say the exact same thing; only take pictures if you didn't find issues. I did.

I don't get what the problem here is. I followed the rules to the letter. If you have a problem, if you want me to take overall pictures regardless: say so! It also kind of bugged me that between the instructions I was given, my email and the conversation I had with the account manager I had three conflicting set of instructions. It seems like this MSC doesn't know its own obligations, but even if they do, there's no reason for them to be rude to me!

Can you let us know the MSC and somebody here can let you know if that is how they always are or if this is a fluke?

I agree that you didn't need the overall photos. Too bad you didn't take them anyway.

Although you didn't need overall pictures because there were issues I would assume that you should have taken pictures of the issues. I know its a little extra work but with the upfront cost I would have taken pictures just in case.

I think I know which company you mean, and I had a similar experience. Among the 40+ pictures I was to submit, I was supposed to submit a picture of X. I submitted a picture of X. Then, I was chastised for not having more than one picture of X. I feel your pain.

I'm pretty sure I've done jobs for this MSC. I found a total of one issue. The place was spectacularly maintained. So I filled the report with overall pics. I was told, very nicely, that I probably could have found more issues but don't worry about it this time.

Since you didn't disclose the name of the MSC's client it's ok to name the MSC. Give it up !!!!

Sounds like 5D

I would have taken pictures of the good and the bad..... (that's just me--I love taking pictures) I stayed at a hotel and took pictures of the burn hole in the comforter, the hole in the bathroom door, and every other issue that I could see.... that did not look presentable to the guest and they never wanted any of my pictures!

I did a Mall Shop and they wanted pictures of issues. I could not find any. So I took pictures of the good things. They liked that

In this digital age & w/camera phones, everyone is taking pics of everything these days so it is not weird at all. I always take overall pics & then go smaller for issues. If there are not places for the extra pics in report i let my scheduler know i have them just in case. taking pics is the fun part.

@BuffaloNY101 wrote:

Although you didn't need overall pictures because there were issues I would assume that you should have taken pictures of the issues. I know its a little extra work but with the upfront cost I would have taken pictures just in case.

I did take pictures of the issues. That was the whole thing!

@Roxie wrote:

I think I know which company you mean, and I had a similar experience. Among the 40+ pictures I was to submit, I was supposed to submit a picture of X. I submitted a picture of X. Then, I was chastised for not having more than one picture of X. I feel your pain.

Yeah they were also getting on me for not having more than one picture of X which wasn't covered in the instructions, but they were a bit nicer about that and I can at least understand their logic with wanting more pictures. They just don't seem to understand that I can't magically make pictures appear when I don't have them. It's odd but I think this MSC has some kind of aversion to editing their own instructions to apply to a shop.

@parkcitybrian wrote:

Since you didn't disclose the name of the MSC's client it's ok to name the MSC. Give it up !!!!

I'm still getting a feel for the MSC so I don't want to burn bridges with them just yet. I've found this forum isn't all that anonymous and schedulers and editors have emailed me about things I've posted here before... but I will say it's a company known for high-end hotel shops, and it's not Coyle (Coyle's editors will admit when they've got their own instructions wrong, at least)

@Misanthrope wrote:

@BuffaloNY101 wrote:

Although you didn't need overall pictures because there were issues I would assume that you should have taken pictures of the issues. I know its a little extra work but with the upfront cost I would have taken pictures just in case.

I did take pictures of the issues. That was the whole thing!

@Roxie wrote:

I think I know which company you mean, and I had a similar experience. Among the 40+ pictures I was to submit, I was supposed to submit a picture of X. I submitted a picture of X. Then, I was chastised for not having more than one picture of X. I feel your pain.

Yeah they were also getting on me for not having more than one picture of X which wasn't covered in the instructions, but they were a bit nicer about that and I can at least understand their logic with wanting more pictures. They just don't seem to understand that I can't magically make pictures appear when I don't have them. It's odd but I think this MSC has some kind of aversion to editing their own instructions to apply to a shop.

@parkcitybrian wrote:

Since you didn't disclose the name of the MSC's client it's ok to name the MSC. Give it up !!!!

I'm still getting a feel for the MSC so I don't want to burn bridges with them just yet. I've found this forum isn't all that anonymous and schedulers and editors have emailed me about things I've posted here before... but I will say it's a company known for high-end hotel shops, and it's not Coyle (Coyle's editors will admit when they've got their own instructions wrong, at least)

I verrrry strongly disagree...you've started a threat by being very critical of a MSC and allegedly made some disparaging remarks about them without specifics (other than your own account) and doesn't give the MSC the opportunity (if they read this and if they choose) to respond to your allegations. And it calls into question your accountability and credibility. Not only that but you aren't giving the rest of us fair warning about an MSC that we might not want to associate with. Hiding behind the cloak of anonymity (by not naming the MSC) in my opinion is cowardly. Just sayin'

I agree with the OP. It seems to me OP is just venting, note the word "rant" in the title. In my post, I used X instead of the item precisely so I would not be identified. I have been punished by an MSC for posting a legitimate gripe on here in the past. What difference does credibility make if one isn't identifying an MSC? We are purposely not bashing a particular MSC, which is why we are not stating the name.

@parkcitybrian wrote:

I verrrry strongly disagree...you've started a threat by being very critical of a MSC and allegedly made some disparaging remarks about them without specifics (other than your own account) and doesn't give the MSC the opportunity (if they read this and if they choose) to respond to your allegations. And it calls into question your accountability and credibility. Not only that but you aren't giving the rest of us fair warning about an MSC that we might not want to associate with. Hiding behind the cloak of anonymity (by not naming the MSC) in my opinion is cowardly. Just sayin'

He seems to feel his anonymity protects him and allows him to say what he wants without risk that the company will identify him. I actually think he has provided enough information for a scheduler or editor to recognize the issue if they choose to identify him.

As Misanthrope said in a previous discussion of anonymity:

"You've never heard of the Greater Internet F(edited)d Theory, have you? Anonymity emboldens all, and humanity is not at its best when it is at its boldest.

Mod note: edited to remove obscenity "

I copied the post along with the moderator's note when he removed the obscenity.

@Jay C wrote:

@parkcitybrian wrote:

I verrrry strongly disagree...you've started a threat by being very critical of a MSC and allegedly made some disparaging remarks about them without specifics (other than your own account) and doesn't give the MSC the opportunity (if they read this and if they choose) to respond to your allegations. And it calls into question your accountability and credibility. Not only that but you aren't giving the rest of us fair warning about an MSC that we might not want to associate with. Hiding behind the cloak of anonymity (by not naming the MSC) in my opinion is cowardly. Just sayin'

He seems to feel his anonymity protects him and allows him to say what he wants without risk that the company will identify him. I actually think he has provided enough information for a scheduler or editor to recognize the issue if they choose to identify him.

As Misanthrope said in a previous discussion of anonymity:

"You've never heard of the Greater Internet F(edited)d Theory, have you? Anonymity emboldens all, and humanity is not at its best when it is at its boldest.

Mod note: edited to remove obscenity "

I copied the post along with the moderator's note when he removed the obscenity.

Jay C...I think the moderator must reside in Utah because he/she seems to be somewhat reluctant to let a post go by that might, just might offend. That being just one of the many weird peculiarities that is a feature of Utah.

I also see this as Misanthrope just venting to fellow shoppers. If this is a MSC that specialized in upscale hotels, it's from a limited group and doesn't really warrant a fair warning to shoppers IMHO, since they probably have a ton of shoppers knocking on their virtual door. Having an MSC respond to allegations like this in the past has not really worked out well for anyone, either.

This post should be more of an overall note to any MSC staff reading here that their editorial guidelines need to match up with instructions.

@SteveSoCal wrote:

I also see this as Misanthrope just venting to fellow shoppers. If this is a MSC that specialized in upscale hotels, it's from a limited group and doesn't really warrant a fair warning to shoppers IMHO, since they probably have a ton of shoppers knocking on their virtual door. Having an MSC respond to allegations like this in the past has not really worked out well for anyone, either.

This post should be more of an overall note to any MSC staff reading here that their editorial guidelines need to match up with instructions.

exactly and there have been many, many discussions started (myself included) that have called out specific MSCs because of their poor, confusing, wtf "comments" and wtf contradictory "guidelines" and, as a result, a few of those MSCs have actually attempted (some successfully and others not-so) to give some clarity to those issues. Jeez, I guess there are some out there that just tiptoe around things that they find unsettling instead of trying to make a difference.

And on another note...I have never been blacklisted or dropped or discriminated against in any way-shape-or-form by voicing my displeasure at either an MSC and/or scheduler or editor because of my criticisms. They have been constructive ones and MSCs have actually dropped schedulers and editors because of being made aware of their issues with me/us.

to moderator...feel free to delete the "wtfs" as they more-than-likely offend.

edited to add "And on another note..."

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2015 06:49PM by parkcitybrian.

@Jay C wrote:

@parkcitybrian wrote:

I verrrry strongly disagree...you've started a threat by being very critical of a MSC and allegedly made some disparaging remarks about them without specifics (other than your own account) and doesn't give the MSC the opportunity (if they read this and if they choose) to respond to your allegations. And it calls into question your accountability and credibility. Not only that but you aren't giving the rest of us fair warning about an MSC that we might not want to associate with. Hiding behind the cloak of anonymity (by not naming the MSC) in my opinion is cowardly. Just sayin'

He seems to feel his anonymity protects him and allows him to say what he wants without risk that the company will identify him. I actually think he has provided enough information for a scheduler or editor to recognize the issue if they choose to identify him.

As Misanthrope said in a previous discussion of anonymity:

"You've never heard of the Greater Internet F(edited)d Theory, have you? Anonymity emboldens all, and humanity is not at its best when it is at its boldest.

Mod note: edited to remove obscenity "

I copied the post along with the moderator's note when he removed the obscenity.

I'm giving all parties involved the common courtesy of not naming names.

I just want to know which MSC wants the extra photos. Pretty simple. Otherwise, it's kind if a wasted thread.

I think shoppers have the right to not name names if they wish, just as MSC staff have the right to post without specifically adding a signature identifying themselves. Some like to see it but it's not a requirement.

That said, I'm in complete agreements with Brian on his post...

@parkcitybrian wrote:

I have never been blacklisted or dropped or discriminated against in any way-shape-or-form by voicing my displeasure at either an MSC and/or scheduler or editor because of my criticisms. They have been constructive ones and MSCs have actually dropped schedulers and editors because of being made aware of their issues with me/us.

My identity is no secret to any of the MSCs I work for, and have have lodged many complaints and/or criticisms over the years. Sometimes have a received an email, thanking me for the input and balanced opinion. If anything, it has improved my relationship with some MSCs.

@SoCalMama wrote:

I just want to know which MSC wants the extra photos. Pretty simple. Otherwise, it's kind if a wasted thread.

SCM, there's not a MSC listed in this thread who require photos and has not at one point in time asked me for a photo that I did not have and was not required to take. I think it's the nature of the work.....

@SteveSoCal wrote:

I think shoppers have the right to not name names if they wish, just as MSC staff have the right to post without specifically adding a signature identifying themselves. Some like to see it but it's not a requirement.

That said, I'm in complete agreements with Brian on his post...

@parkcitybrian wrote:

I have never been blacklisted or dropped or discriminated against in any way-shape-or-form by voicing my displeasure at either an MSC and/or scheduler or editor because of my criticisms. They have been constructive ones and MSCs have actually dropped schedulers and editors because of being made aware of their issues with me/us.

My identity is no secret to any of the MSCs I work for, and have have lodged many complaints and/or criticisms over the years. Sometimes have a received an email, thanking me for the input and balanced opinion. If anything, it has improved my relationship with some MSCs.

Wish I could say the same. I got threatened with deactivation by ACL because I complained about one of their shops that, frankly, was both unethical and put the shopper in a dangerous position.

But. But. ACL is a fantastic company and they're so nice and friendly!

bgriffin is asskisser,

@MSNinja wrote:

bgriffin is asskisser,

Finkle is Einhorn?

@MSNinja wrote:

bgriffin is asskisser,

"asskisser" = either hyphenated or 2 words. Your score is an "8" because of having to contact you for spelling/grammar issue.

And...watch out cuz the Utah-based moderator will edit out your excessive and continued use of...profanity.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2015 10:03PM by parkcitybrian.

If I hyphenated the system would have changed it. Ass is a donkey. and what is wrong w/Utah? awesome snowboarding.

@MSNinja wrote:

bgriffin is asskisser,

Uggg. I hate when I forget to use the sarcasm font!

Italics is the sarcasm font, bg

Strangely, my ability to see shops with ACL has gone UP since I started complaining publicly about them.

(Edited for apparent Freudian slip that caused the original message to appear slightly profane)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2015 10:48PM by SteveSoCal.

For my two cents, I think it's either Mercantile or 5D. The instructions for their hotels say to take a picture of the overall area if no problems are seen... And, based on how it's written, I totally agree with the OP.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2015 11:06PM by LindaM.

I would resent it if they told me "other shoppers don't have a problem with taking overall photos." Everything from the crowd to the management can affect a person's ability to take photos.

If the shopper performed the shop according to instructions, then everything was done as expected. I would copy the instructions and send it back with a professionally cheerful and polite response, and I would keep in mind that something is "off" with this company, and make my choices responsibly when dealing with them.

Edited to correct typos. My grammar instructor and friends called grammatical errors "toads." Toads, can't stand them.

@SteveSoCal, if italics are for sarcasm, then why is the editing note at the bottom of your post in italics?

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/2015 11:26PM by Robin2.