There's so much discussion on here about horribly low fees and companies not paying on time. Almost every thread citing one of these issues suggests that we should stop accepting the bad fees, boycott the late and non-payers, and maybe it will change.

While I believe this holds truth, we know there will always be new, innocent shoppers to do the dirty work. We like to believe that MSCs don't want to lose good shoppers, but is that really enough to make them change their behavior? Can't crafty editors make a report that's just "done" a "well done" report? (It seems to me that proof of visit and bare facts would be enough to create a client-acceptable report for most MSCs.)

Perhaps it's coincidence, but I've seen more bonuses offered this month than ever before. And yesterday, I got an email about a shop that was not only bonused, it came with an offer to pay within three weeks! (This company usually takes over two months to pay.) To me, that email bore testimony to the fact that if push comes to shove, they CAN change their behavior.

Two questions:

1. Do you really believe that it's within our power to change the way these companies conduct business?

2. As shoppers, what is OUR responsibility? What do WE do to enable this bad behavior?

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2010 04:38PM by nicelytwicely.

nicelytwicely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps it's coincidence, but I've seen more
> bonuses offered this month than ever before.

Must be NYC, as that was NOT the case here. Less than usual on the end of month front...WAY less.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1. Do you really believe that it's within our
> power to change the way these companies conduct
> business?

NO.
>
> 2. As shoppers, what is OUR responsibility? What
> do WE do to enable this bad behavior?

As long as there are shoppers who are willing to take low-paying shops and do a good job on them, the MSC's (collectively) will continue to push shopper fees lower and lower and lower.

This will never go away. As long as there is some bored housewife or retiree
who does this for "a way to add form and structure to their day", get them out of the house, eat at bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE $*, it will continue and worsen.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2010 07:10PM by dee shops.

nicelytwicely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Perhaps it's coincidence, but I've seen more
> bonuses offered this month than ever before.

Must be NYC, as that was NOT the case here. Less than usual on the end of month front...WAY less.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1. Do you really believe that it's within our
> power to change the way these companies conduct
> business?

NO.
>
> 2. As shoppers, what is OUR responsibility? What
> do WE do to enable this bad behavior?

As long as their are shoppers who are willing to take low-paying shops and do a good job on them, the MSC's (collectively) will continue to push shopper fees lower and lower and lower.

This will never go away. As long as there is some bored housewife or retiree
who does this for "a way to add form and structure to their day", get them out of the house, etc, eat at bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE $*, it will continue and worsen.

I feel like I see more behavior headed in a negative direction these days.

I have a rant I'm working up on this very topic, though. Stay tuned....

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nicelytwicely Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Perhaps it's coincidence, but I've seen more
> > bonuses offered this month than ever before.
>
> Must be NYC, as that was NOT the case here. Less
> than usual on the end of month front...WAY less.

Actually, no. Courtesy of lazy schedulers and/or bad filtering systems, I'm seeing them in quite a few states (not HI). My favorite one this month was "Let's Make a Deal!" I'm newly registered with that company, so perhaps this is typical for them, but it's another instance of "Okay, we couldn't get you with that low fee, so what will it take" I was interested to see that in one of Flash's posts, she referenced negotiating a better fee for a shop from the gitgo. Perhaps this is not uncommon for more experienced shoppers.



SteveSoCal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I feel like I see more behavior headed in a
> negative direction these days.
>
> I have a rant I'm working up on this very topic,
> though. Stay tuned....

I look forward to seeing your rant!

Another question -- if this industry is so huge, and so many rely on it for supplemental income, is it inconceivable for independent contractors in this area to unionize?

I doubt you will ever see a union. We are independant contractors. We do NOT work for these companies, directly. There is no basis for a union.

nicelytwicely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dee shops Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > nicelytwicely Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > Perhaps it's coincidence, but I've seen more
> > > bonuses offered this month than ever before.
> >
> > Must be NYC, as that was NOT the case here.
> Less
> > than usual on the end of month front...WAY
> less.
>
> Actually, no. Courtesy of lazy schedulers and/or
> bad filtering systems, I'm seeing them in quite a
> few states (not HI). My favorite one this month
> was "Let's Make a Deal!" I'm newly registered with
> that company, so perhaps this is typical for them,
> but it's another instance of "Okay, we couldn't
> get you with that low fee, so what will it take" I
> was interested to see that in one of Flash's
> posts, she referenced negotiating a better fee for
> a shop from the gitgo. Perhaps this is not
> uncommon for more experienced shoppers.

I see these from one of the E's at KSS who is either not yet trained or too lazy or ignorant to use Sassie correctly.

In my opinion, the majority of these are either fee based issues or areas where companies have a tough time finding shoppers. If you have a good reputation with a company, and know the latter is true based on seeing history in the making, of course you can negotiate earlier in the month, depending on the MSC. I don't think it works for all of them, but many will do that.
>
>
>
> SteveSoCal Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I feel like I see more behavior headed in a
> > negative direction these days.
> >
> > I have a rant I'm working up on this very
> topic,
> > though. Stay tuned....
>
> I look forward to seeing your rant!
>
> Another question -- if this industry is so huge,
> and so many rely on it for supplemental income, is
> it inconceivable for independent contractors in
> this area to unionize?

There are plenty of other fields for independent contractors that are unionized. However, I don't know the basis for qualification, either in terms of starting one, or on what basis individuals qualify.

Dee, I have issue with your statement of "bored housewifes and retirees" taking low paying jobs, please don't lump us all with a few. I do not take the lowest paying jobs, so I speak for myself...we owned a business, I do take this personally. This happens to be a great field for retirees, remember we had careers, were business owners and still want to be productive. This is not our fault that fees are low, this is not a controlled business, no one sticks up for us and believe me, the bored housewifes, and retiress would love to make more money....do I see that happening, not really, I have banned low paying jobs such as Bestmark and many others, and have spoken about it many times.

The answer to the question will things get better, not as long as there are new comers that get excited about having a free FF, not taking it seriously and just leaving when tired. The serious shoppers as are on this forum, can not take jobs or take them, they will not change or raise fees. I do hear of great bonus at the end of the month from folks, however, if those bonus are not availabe, we're out of luck. Shoppers do the best they can, the clients and MSC's are in control, not shoppers! I see the industry getting worse, asking for more, squeezing every penney out of us, and for myself, I try and rise above it, change it, someone lead the way.

mrcomputer101 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I doubt you will ever see a union. We are
> independant contractors. We do NOT work for these
> companies, directly. There is no basis for a
> union.


I would not join as an independent contractor. If the industry became more like the grocery store that hires its own on its own PR and treats them fairly, we might not even need one. But they way it is, there will always be a shopper willing to do it for the fun not the money, and that means those in the union would lose.

Irene_L.A. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dee, I have issue with your statement of "bored
> housewifes and retirees" taking low paying jobs,
> please don't lump us all with a few. I do not take
> the lowest paying jobs, so I speak for myself...we
> owned a business, I do take this personally. This
> happens to be a great field for retirees, remember
> we had careers, were business owners and still
> want to be productive. This is not our fault that
> fees are low, this is not a controlled business,
> no one sticks up for us and believe me, the bored
> housewifes, and retiress would love to make more
> money....do I see that happening, not really, I
> have banned low paying jobs such as Bestmark and
> many others, and have spoken about it many times.
>
> The answer to the question will things get better,
> not as long as there are new comers that get
> excited about having a free FF, not taking it
> seriously and just leaving when tired. The
> serious shoppers as are on this forum, can not
> take jobs or take them, they will not change or
> raise fees. I do hear of great bonus at the end
> of the month from folks, however, if those bonus
> are not availabe, we're out of luck. Shoppers do
> the best they can, the clients and MSC's are in
> control, not shoppers! I see the industry getting
> worse, asking for more, squeezing every penney out
> of us, and for myself, I try and rise above it,
> change it, someone lead the way.


Did I say ALL retirees? Nope.

But we read enough of those statements on forums from both groups that it is true.

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> nicelytwicely Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

> > 1. Do you really believe that it's within our
> > power to change the way these companies conduct
> > business?
>
> NO.

Yet, in the Goodwin thread, you wrote, "If enough people will not shop for them for the reason that they do not pay us according to contract, they will either lose their clients on their own, or fix their issues in order to not lose them."

This is the sort of thing I meant by the question relating to our behavior having the potential to impact companies. I understand it's not enough to change a whole industry! However, to a certain extent, I do think there's a co-dependent relationship here, and shoppers are not above and beyond being enablers!

nicelytwicely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are plenty of other fields for independent
> contractors that are unionized.


Such as?

What time has shown is that no matter how many step up to the plate and demand fair pay, there is a new crop of shoppers that will show up to enable the MSCs.

The answer is bigger than shopper unity, unfortunately

nicelytwicely Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dee shops Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > nicelytwicely Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>
> > > 1. Do you really believe that it's within our
> > > power to change the way these companies
> conduct
> > > business?
> >
> > NO.
>
> Yet, in the Goodwin thread, you wrote, "If enough
> people will not shop for them for the reason that
> they do not pay us according to contract, they
> will either lose their clients on their own, or
> fix their issues in order to not lose them."
>
> This is the sort of thing I meant by the question
> relating to our behavior having the potential to
> impact companies. I understand it's not enough to
> change a whole industry! However, to a certain
> extent, I do think there's a co-dependent
> relationship here, and shoppers are not above and
> beyond being enablers!


Okay, yes, but this takes a long long long time. Look at Freeman, still preying on the clueless or newbs at least 2.5 years after their financial issues started to show on the outside.

I do not think that eradicating the abhorrent behaviors of this industry is possible in anything like a few years. Like streetcars, a newb or someone who has nothing better to do will always show up and be abused by MSC's.

That said, I will not enable these practices. I won't do a $1 phone shop that takes 5 minutes, I won't do a $3 gas shop because I ride by it, I won't do a shop for Goodwin or Freeman. But the newb around the corner will.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2010 06:40PM by dee shops.

I need to add that yesterday I had a great MSing day....came home with $102.00 + free buffet $21.00 and fun at Casino.....free food won money, yes this was a rare day, but thanks to MSing I had it. We do get to choose when we work, our own scheduling and what we want to do, that's the tradeoff.

Unfortunately, I see it as the whole system is set for failure. In the 5+ years I have been doing this, I have seen the number of MSC greatly increase. I have seen many of the shops I depended on monthly cut drastically or cut completely. All the while the number of shoppers grow and grow. Aside from selling Avon (not to cause an uprising from Avon consultants) this is one of the few industries that takes NO money investment to get started, minimal application and acceptance procedures, and basically NO supervision. So as sad it is, I see it getting harder and harder to make a decent income from this business.

OK, and now for the rant….

“What the market will bear”

This is a term I hear regularly when people ask about the ridiculously low fees offered with MS assignments. To me, it sounds like, “Don’t blame us for paying low wages if people are willing to work for them.”

MSCs are in business to make money and the #1 rule of business is to make sure your product costs you less than you charge for it. It stands to reason that if one is selling mystery shops, they would do whatever possible to minimize the cost of the product. The IC status is a major tool that most MSCs utilize in accomplishing this goal. Since there is no regulation of what an IC gets paid, MSCs are free to offer ‘what the market will bear’. This is why we see insultingly low fees for shops and crazy attempts to get those shops filled at the end of the month. The end result is to get shops completed for the least amount of money possible.

Why shoppers take these shops is something that’s been talked about ad infinitum on these message boards. I personally think there’s also an addictive component to MSing that gets exploited. Many see MSing as a game and take pleasure in lining up a group of shops, even when there is no profit involved. There are also those shoppers that for one reason or another cannot fit the conventional employment model and find MSing as away to generate income, so they take what’s available.

The stereotypical model of a MSer is the housewife that wants to contribute to the household, so she takes grocery or retail shops. That’s why we see high-end shops that pay $10 for someone to dress up nicely and price expensive merchandise. The government-assisted shoppers are typically those who are disabled, retired or unemployed. The ‘employed elsewhere’ group represents the remainder of the shoppers out there. All of these three groups above have one thing in common; They derive additional income from an outside source, enabling them to work for reduced wages. No offence meant to any of the above parties. That’s just the facts!

When I began shopping, corporate jobs were readily available and salaries were higher. I saw many more lifestyle shoppers, who like myself made a decent living and upgraded their lifestyle with mystery shopping. In many cases, these shoppers utilized the facilities and time at their workplace for completing shops. However, with fewer jobs and tighter restrictions on employees in our current economy, this is becoming a less popular option and is why we see recent changes in our industry.

In my opinion, nobody can rely on MSing for full time income without outside support. The business is simply not structured that way. While on the surface, this may seem like an appropriate pairing of needs, what results is a parasitic industry that cannot support itself. Shoppers either work at a loss, or for sub-standard pay.

Why are MSCs appealing to the lowest common denominator, rather than paying a premium for good shoppers? Perhaps they have done the math and prefer to employ editors to fix the problems, keeping their bottom end as low as possible. I doubt this, however, since I regularly see posts and emails from MSC owners who are shocked at fraud that took place on a shop or are upset about shoppers’ inability to follow directions.

How can you pay someone less than minimum wage and expect them to act in a professional manner? The current answer is to have someone else subsidizing your costs. Is there anyone out there who really believes that two hours of an educated and well-spoken person’s time, with access to internet, computers, printers, scanners and digital photography has a value of $10?

Unless MSCs come to the conclusion that having an independent, educated and dependable workforce is a better business model, there are only two other possibilities for putting an end to the current state of the industry; Either shoppers unify or other government steps in. Time has shown us that this first option is not likely to happen, and as much as the MSPA is concerned with the dissolution of the IC status for shoppers, I’ve seen no real indicators that this will happen in the near future, so we find ourselves here….

I’ve had the experience of working as an employee shopper and can tell you that if we become employees, the base rate for a mystery shopper would be around $12/hour. While that may seem a fair rate for many, since travel time and costs would be covered, it’s less than I make on just about every assignment I take.

I am effectively powerless to change the industry and I work within the existing structure. The savvy and informed shopper can be the one who earns the lions share, so I recommend everyone read all they can and make educated decisions about which shops they take if they are in this to make money. If you have other reasons for shopping, then so be it and I hope you have a good time at it. If you are expecting to earn full time wages, please visit monster.com!

I LOVE your rant! So well said. Excellent points. Thank you so much for sharing and putting into words my thoughts as well. Great job!

Steve always rants well! I can't find anything I disagree with!

Yea, agreed. AND Steve doesn't even "rant" when he rants. :-)

I shop for money, and I shop to upgrade my lifestyle. I'm a double dipper. :-)

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This will never go away. As long as there is some
> bored housewife or retiree
> who does this for "a way to add form and structure
> to their day", get them out of the house, etc, eat
> at bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE $*,
> it will continue and worsen.

Wow, such bitterness! Sounding almost like a post from Beisen!

I am not bitter at all.

It just is what it is. Shoppers who find this site are mostly savvy enough not to do shops for peanuts. But there are those for whom MS is just a time-user upper that is "fun."

Unlike Beisen, I don't think they should stop shopping. People shop for many reasons. It still doesn't mean the savvy shoppers on the planet are going to be able to change the reality that MSC's will always find a newb to jerk around...um...I mean not pay fairly, or on time, etc.

Whether newbie, oldie, bored housewife or brain surgeon, there's something for everyone. $1 jobs and up, working for pin money, to feed the family or to stuff under the mattress. We choose what we want and leave what we don't on the job boards.

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This will never go away. As long as there is some
> bored housewife or retiree
> who does this for "a way to add form and structure
> to their day", get them out of the house, etc, eat
> at bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE $*,
> it will continue and worsen.

I disagree. To hold bored housewives or retirees responsible is as silly as it is incorrect. I also disagree that a reimbursement shop is free. A shopper's time is not free.

Mert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whether newbie, oldie, bored housewife or brain
> surgeon, there's something for everyone. $1 jobs
> and up, working for pin money, to feed the family
> or to stuff under the mattress. We choose what we
> want and leave what we don't on the job boards.

No one said that there was not something for everyone, Mert. This is so out of context right now. Flash quoted a single point from my post. It was said in response to the reason why shoppers won't be successful in stopping abhorrent practices by MSC's.
>
> dee shops Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > This will never go away. As long as there is
> some
> > bored housewife or retiree
> > who does this for "a way to add form and
> structure
> > to their day", get them out of the house, etc,
> eat
> > at bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE
> $*,
> > it will continue and worsen.
>
> I disagree. To hold bored housewives or retirees
> responsible is as silly as it is incorrect. I
> also disagree that a reimbursement shop is free. A
> shopper's time is not free.

We are going to have to disagree on this. The MSC's set rates. *Shoppers accept them.* Who is taking $1 video shops? It's not the serious or savvy shoppers. It is newbs who do not know any better, and bored housewives and bored retirees who do not do this for money.

I never said that all retirees or all housewives are not serious about shopping. I simply stated a fact of why the situation will not change and will worsen. We can't expect people who shop for fun and don't need nor want the money to "punish" the low-paying MSC's.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/2010 11:26PM by dee shops.

My three comments on this:

1. Steve - as always - very much enjoyed your thoughts. And as always, I find myself agreeing with 99% of what you say.

2. Who the heck is Beisen?

3. While I agree that the situation will not change until either a) we all become employees (and I am not saying that will be a good or bad thing, just that it would be a game changer) or b) people stop accepting shops at sub-minimum wage - I do not agree that the people who accept shops at sub-minimum wage are disproportionately retirees and housewives (bored or otherwise). I am not disagreeing with this either. Honestly, I have no idea. I would tend to agree that those who accept shops at sub-minimum wage are disproportionately new to the game. And I do not see how we will ever stop the flow of new shoppers.

If someone thinks so little of the value of their time that they will take a $1 video shop or is so much in need of the $1, or of the need to feel they are doing SOMETHING productive, who the heck am I to criticize them? Things are tough these days. My significant other got a feeler about a job the other day for an independent contractor, 6AM to 6PM shifts on Saturday and Sunday that he and 22 others applied for within a half hour of it being posted. The pay is almost minimum wage and as a "bonus" they will "throw in" $1.60 per shift "to help with FICA". This job is well below standard rates for a State licensed security guard in this area. Yet he was seriously considering taking it as his other applications for work have brought no results. It is a job with a major manufacturer. Would you criticize him for potentially reducing pay of all security guards in the area by taking the job???? Walk a mile in the other guy's shoes.

Mert Wrote:
I
> also disagree that a reimbursement shop is free. A
> shopper's time is not free.

Who said it was? Not me. I love restaurant shops, fee or no fee. But it doesn't mean I will do one for no pay and a free Happy Meal. But we certainly have read here over the years about people who will.

Flash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If someone thinks so little of the value of their
> time that they will take a $1 video shop or is so
> much in need of the $1, or of the need to feel
> they are doing SOMETHING productive, who the heck
> am I to criticize them? Things are tough these
> days. My significant other got a feeler about a
> job the other day for an independent contractor,
> 6AM to 6PM shifts on Saturday and Sunday that he
> and 22 others applied for within a half hour of it
> being posted. The pay is almost minimum wage and
> as a "bonus" they will "throw in" $1.60 per shift
> "to help with FICA". This job is well below
> standard rates for a State licensed security guard
> in this area. Yet he was seriously considering
> taking it as his other applications for work have
> brought no results. It is a job with a major
> manufacturer. Would you criticize him for
> potentially reducing pay of all security guards in
> the area by taking the job???? Walk a mile in the
> other guy's shoes.

I will say this again for those who missed the point the first few times. This was in reference to shoppers not being able to change the business model. This is NOT value judgements about why people shop or whether they should. YOU can try to turn what I say into something I didn't, but calling a sow's ear a silk purse doesn't make it so.

When you state, in response to the question an answer such as yours quoted in full below to the question, I cannot see how this is NOT a value statement. You do seem to feel that shoppers willing to perform low paid jobs at low prices are the cause of the problem and will only cause it to worsen. The jabs at who you perceive are the culprits only adds icing to it. It was for this reason and only for this reason that I call you to task for your post.

While I would agree that shoppers willing to work for low fees does make things not get better, but I would never be judgmental about it.

dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > 2. As shoppers, what is OUR responsibility?
> What
> > do WE do to enable this bad behavior?
>
> As long as there are shoppers who are willing to
> take low-paying shops and do a good job on them,
> the MSC's (collectively) will continue to push
> shopper fees lower and lower and lower.
>
> This will never go away. As long as there is some
> bored housewife or retiree
> who does this for "a way to add form and structure
> to their day", get them out of the house, eat at
> bad restaurants free, etc, and not *FOR THE $*, it
> will continue and worsen.