This is so funny....Just for another email from the MSC requesting us not to talk to the drug stores about us not servicing them anymore in the next month......This is just so funny....Sounds like The client really want to send out a big Christmas gift to the corporate

the drug store i service i could see us keeping tbh, but again the ones i have they had entirely too many displays.

the big chain of gas stations i think will be up to the manager, i had 5 who have no stock and pulled their displays entirely. Another location i know will be getting torn down and rebuilt come jan/feb so i made sure to get the photos i needed then stock out all i could knowing that. get rid of it before it gets sent to another nearby store.

but the loss is a 1/3 of my income. but i am already trying to find another job until job market reopens in spring. ive cut down mystery shopping and am doing more public merch work,

Yes I thought that was a funny communication too. I often wondered why they didn't want to identify who's the third party entity was stating that we work for product company and providing a virtual business card???. I still maintain they lost the contract. And don't want to prompt another company to take over the account. I feel they have not done me no favors with such short notice losing substantial income. This communication shows me they put a tattoo on their forehead real quick. Nobody should be afforded surprise notices. We the merchandisers are the ones that make sure the product is placed in the store and looking professional. I guess we're just the bottom feeders to the company.. with a communication with one of my contact persons on the account I made a comment well that's a substantial loss in your end of the deal too isn't it. The comment was don't worry we have other business coming in for our merchandisers.... right they lost the account.. like many of you I'm gun shy for taking any more work from the company... I too am looking for work elsewhere after this stunt

CI Has been around for awhile. Projects come and projects go. They made us aware this was the last month. What more can they do. Wait til the end of the month when people start asking about the JAN pre staff?

I am sure they tried to save it or maybe they were just too far away on the numbers.

I don't fault CI here and I have yet to see any jobs that I was not offered for Dec listed for less.

MSCs lose contracts all the time. I think TY itself was poorly managed to begin with. Poor communication to the stores about changes, that wasn't on CI, that was on TY. Regardless, I am also losing a lot of money with that project going away but something else will come along.

True, at least they kind of let us know that it is ending, I've experience quite a few projects that have ended and MSC never let anyone knows unless we emailed and asked about it.

I am sure something else will come along.

Out of curiosity, I looked online yesterday to see whether TY had job openings posted for in-house merchandisers. They have no open jobs.

On Indeed, they have a lot of very bad reviews from past and present employees. It seems as if they treated the merch company (and us) in the same poor manner they treat their employees.

I am doing about 95 stores this month, some that I have not been in before. For the ones I have never been to, most were in very poor shape with low displays and product sitting in the back.

I will make a point of checking the TY displays in the future when I am doing other work in these stores.

I have already been to stores, I have been doing, where the display has been removed.

I would love to have 100 stores in my area where I was paid on the amount of product the stores sell. I wish the jobs paid well enough to act like a company rep instead of the just straightening up displays and putting in notes regarding product that get ignored.

I will be doing a 7/11 next week that has not had a display in months. They keep sending me back. I have other stuff around there so I keep going.

Many of us had figured the end was near and the email from Daniel was not surprising in the least to me.

I will miss the money but not working as much for the cold months is not really hurting my feelings.

This comment should be pinned!!!!

I sometimes check the ty.com store and it has totally changed format to just talk about bouncy balls. Comments in the chat on that website is constantly where are the regular beanies. the replies are always check our retailers that sell them and we dont sell regular beanies online.

I wonder if there is a total rebrand in 2026 or not. Because that is strange to see online.

Either way, I will always enjoy this opportunity despite the challenges it had as well.

Just saw a TY location listed for January.... very odd

I did too, but only for two grocery stores in the area.

Only Kroger here. I work in Kroger, but not doing stuff where I have to deal with Kroger employees.

I am surprised to see some TY on the job board for January. I was under the impression that the whole project was cancelled.

I didn't receive the normal email offering me the one visit I have been making regularly. Although given the $65 drop in fee, I wouldn't have taken it anyway.

I am amazed (although not surprised) that a location that takes 2 hours per visit on average is listed at $10 now.

Apparently TY changed their minds for locations that have round displays and/or multiple displays.

In my area they kept one chain of grocery stores, and some CVS locations but not all.

@87Supra wrote:

CI Has been around for awhile. Projects come and projects go. They made us aware this was the last month. What more can they do. Wait til the end of the month when people start asking about the JAN pre staff?

I am sure they tried to save it or maybe they were just too far away on the numbers.

I don't fault CI here and I have yet to see any jobs that I was not offered for Dec listed for less.

After reading this again, maybe some of this is the fault of CI by trying to staff these at $10 and having shoppers refuse them at that rate. You don't get consistency and quality by dropping rates every month. And as stores were getting additional displays, and pay not going up for additional work, was another swing and a miss by CI and Ty.

@joanna81 wrote:

After reading this again, maybe some of this is the fault of CI by trying to staff these at $10 and having shoppers refuse them at that rate. You don't get consistency and quality by dropping rates every month. And as stores were getting additional displays, and pay not going up for additional work, was another swing and a miss by CI and Ty.

Are they? Cos they just put a bunch of Ty shops out (I assume due to ppl not wanting them anymore) and they are still $10

There's actually extra pay for putting up new display(except temporary cardboard ones), It was also weird that during Dec they have specifically sent out an email telling people not to talk to the CVS staffs about the end of the program as they were still in discussion of TY regarding things. I actually thinks that it maybe it has to do with people talking to CVS rep about the ending of the program and the cvs staffs/managers reflecting that they need the ppl, and the coop put pressure onto TY resulting in the limited return of the program.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/07/2026 04:45PM by kisekinecro.

I don't think that CI is blameless here. Any time an MSC agrees to a contract where they cannot pay us enough to make it worth doing a job, they are part of the problem, IMO. They become part of the race to the bottom.

I think this whole project from TY - CI was/is a huge dumpster fire....

I had locations for MONTHS that didn't carry the product, yet every month they sent me back to tell them the same dang thing. Both CI & TY should have removed these locations.

I had locations that begged for product and couldn't get them (even after phone calls) to send much if any.

I had locations that I put in the notes had so much backstock the manager was about to remove the display and tell TY where to go shove it, yet they sent ANOTHER display and products...

Both companies failed miserably with this project.

I’ve worked other projects like this and saw rotations so locations came back in cycles as long as the contract was in effect.

It made it hard to maintain a baseline route/income and plan for work during the lapses.

Many contracts ended with the New Year or may not remain valid during buyouts, so I’m wondering what’s next.

Not having any stability is difficult for those in the field, and the client always wants to pay less for more when the sales numbers come in, as the MSC’s in the middle need to do the same.

There are many discussions on this platform about the increasing pattern of decreasing fees.

Did you know many schedulers are also 1099’s with set budgets for a project they are also paid from, intensifying the…penny-saving approach leaving those of us in the field with options that don’t make sense for our bottom line, and, as so many are being laid off, increasing our ranks.

Routes make lower fees workable up to a point, and I’ve mentioned “route” to several schedulers who have no idea what I’m talking about because they’ve never done our work and carried all of the overhead.

The client wants regular service and good working relationships between the locations and service personnel to support increased sales…and to pay as little as possible to make it happen to boost profits.

Feedback I’ve received from most location management is frustration and overwhelm. There’s gratitude for the (regular) work we do, and on the flip side, stress concerning the lack of consistency and regular service from multiple contractors who have to be oriented each time, wasting time for contractor and management with no compensation for additional time and effort it takes to complete what’s expected.

The gig model may cost less on paper, but be more costly in these other ways.

One manager shared that corporate had cut staff hours in half and decreased new hire wages before Thanksgiving (not at all attractive to newbies who need to pay rising rents). I was the 5th contractor in 2 months for irregular unannounced visits, and it was distracting from the paper-thin priority overload they already faced…especially during The Holidays, so I was on my own. Can’t say I blamed them under those conditions.

Another perspective: If I were a “corporate bottom liner” getting that feedback from my management, I might choose not to renew the gig-style contract and (re) assign it to the location staff (with no additional pay) …and doubly increase my profits.

Business isn’t just about numbers. It’s also about relationships.

In the end, it’s a business for all of us, and we have to take care of ourselves.

I’m seeing the need to remain flexible and open to more possibilities to care for our bottom line.

Wishing everyone a fresh start and perspective in 2026.

They are very much not blameless here, and know they were charging over $200/location to Ty. So they had plenty of money to pay appropriately here. They had inexperienced people at CI working on this, and paid as low as possible to the ICs, so they got a smattering of participants and a smattering of results. To try and replace company employees who handled all of this (and certainly not for $10-12 a location once or twice a month) with an ever-rotating group of people doing it differently every time, and a bunch of wonky "wink wink" don't tell anyone who you really work for, and lets add a bunch of ridiculous steps to the process...thats what got us here.

@TeriW wrote:

I don't think that CI is blameless here. Any time an MSC agrees to a contract where they cannot pay us enough to make it worth doing a job, they are part of the problem, IMO. They become part of the race to the bottom.

@Cassiespark wrote:

They are very much not blameless here, and know they were charging over $200/location to Ty. So they had plenty of money to pay appropriately here. They had inexperienced people at CI working on this, and paid as low as possible to the ICs, so they got a smattering of participants and a smattering of results. To try and replace company employees who handled all of this (and certainly not for $10-12 a location once or twice a month) with an ever-rotating group of people doing it differently every time, and a bunch of wonky "wink wink" don't tell anyone who you really work for, and lets add a bunch of ridiculous steps to the process...thats what got us here.

I am very curious how do you come up wit the $200/location number?

I know Ty from my "real" job.

@kisekinecro wrote:

@Cassiespark wrote:

They are very much not blameless here, and know they were charging over $200/location to Ty. So they had plenty of money to pay appropriately here. They had inexperienced people at CI working on this, and paid as low as possible to the ICs, so they got a smattering of participants and a smattering of results. To try and replace company employees who handled all of this (and certainly not for $10-12 a location once or twice a month) with an ever-rotating group of people doing it differently every time, and a bunch of wonky "wink wink" don't tell anyone who you really work for, and lets add a bunch of ridiculous steps to the process...thats what got us here.

I am very curious how do you come up wit the $200/location number?

I do not understand why these TY products would need merchandisers or route sales reps. Order, stock and sell. Displays are easy to set up. The hardest part is organizing the stuffies on the display. That can be easily taught.

@whosear wrote:

I do not understand why these TY products would need merchandisers or route sales reps. Order, stock and sell. Displays are easy to set up. The hardest part is organizing the stuffies on the display. That can be easily taught.

Most of the stores do not have enough people on staff to stock items like this. They can barely handle their own stuff.
FYI you can ask for more pay...