Marc -
Especially as the owner of an MSC, your comments are off-base.

* Very few (if any?) of us have anything to do with Glass Door or any other such website. Most of us couldn’t really care less what is said there as we know that such sites are often bunk. Yes, somebody cited comments there. So what? You are a company. You will have detractors - whether warranted or not.

* Insults and linking clients with MSC's... You clearly have done little more than take a perfunctory look at how things run here. Insults are and such ICA violations are constantly reported to the moderators here. Messages are deleted. Accounts are suspended. Users are occasionally removed. Many of these violations - especially the ICA violations - are committed by folks new to shopping and/or the site and simply do not realize the transgression. They are told the rule here and usually edit their own posts. Nobody is screened before they are allowed membership - which has good and ill consequences. Regulars here work to keep this controlled. However, only the moderators (who do not post here) have the ability to take direct action.

* Alexis might be the only person who put her first name on her post. However, some of us have better identification than that readily available. My moniker is my first and middle initials with my last name. Any MSC could easily identify me if they wanted to do so. I (and others) do not consider myself anonymous here.

* Are you really sensitive to the number of "likes" your post got? If you are upset by the number of folks you don't know who did or did not "like" something you wrote on on open forum...

* Statistics on this forum.... Yes, folks come here to vent their frustrations. However, if you would bother to read the responses to many of these posts, you would find a tremendous amount of guidance being given to those folks. Yes, we do, as a community, disagree sometimes. I can't speak for everybody, but I learn a lot from this forum when we do have difficult disagreements about mystery shopping. Your citing of number is nothing more than a very poor attempt at a mathematical analysis. (I am a mathematician...) 1) You have not counted every thread to find out if most are negative or not. 2) Just because a thread was started with a complaint, does not mean that the thread itself is negative. 3) You forget that folks usually don't speak up or ask for help about things that are going well. 4) Many very positive and complimentary comments happen in discussions that are not in the "Compliments and Kudos" section.

* If you think that my initial comment to you was negative, you have a severe misunderstanding about the types of folks who mystery shop. Do you not understand that most folks who do this need to make money? We come from all walks of life, but most are here because their salaries, wages, retirements, etc. do not meet their financial needs or they are between jobs. A few do this as their full time employment. Some, though a relatively small number, shop for the experiences. You posted and described yourself as a company that offers shops that will require an outlay of (in some cases) over $200 and require several hours of work (preparation, meal and report time) for a sum of $15. All in all, you are asking folks to "work" for about $5 an hour after putting out well more cash than what many shoppers can afford. Where I live, that $5 is 1/3 the minimum wage. Anybody trying to make ends meet with these jobs will fail. What you offer for work does not help us to make a living. The meal that we "get" will not pay rent, hospital bills, etc.

* That said, there is a place in this mystery shopping world for companies like yours. You will need to understand, however, that just as your requirements for mystery shoppers eliminate most folks, the compensation you offer for your shops will eliminate you from most shoppers' interest. You are simply targeting a very small percentage of the community.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/30/2018 01:47PM by MFJohnston.

There was a question posted on Facebook from a video shopping company's rep. that asked if they added narrative to certain assignments that did not require narrative in the past, would the shopper require a higher shop fee. A few respondents said they would be willing to do more work for the same pay. Of the shoppers who said they would require more pay or a reduction in some other part of the assignment such as no limit on the entree selections, the rep's response was to question the integrity, motivation, past combined posts and even future standing with the group of the "negative" respondents. Lesson learned here and there.

@MFJohnston wrote:

Most of us could really care less what is said there

Couldn't!!!!

Uggghhh

And you're supposed to be a teacher!!!

Math...

@bgriffin wrote:

@MFJohnston wrote:

Most of us could really care less what is said there

Couldn't!!!!

Uggghhh

And you're supposed to be a teacher!!!

Between 2006 and 2007, I completed seven fine dining assignments before pulling the plug; the pay :work ratio was simply unacceptable to me. That being the case, Marc and I will never be crossing paths. I only mention this to eliminate the thought I am "browning up."

I completely agree as to Marc's comment concerning anonymity. When I originally signed up with Volition, without any thought, I used my name. Three years later, when I came aboard with this forum, as Bob Engleman was already used by me, I chose Shopperbob. That is me, but I also respect there are others who, for their reasons, may wish to post behind a shroud of secrecy.

I will end with this comment: Marc is certainly concise and candid. Two characteristics I quite admire both personally and in a business setting. Predicated upon his post, were I a fine dining shopper I would not hesitate to explore a relationship.

Bottom line for me not enough pay for the work you require. Success to you and your company.

I suggest you refer back to one of your own expectations in your post: 7. Constructive Feedback (does not take it personally). If you do, this will not work out, and please do not apply.

You posted here seeking feedback and that's exactly what you have been given: constructive feedback. On the other hand, there's a 2015 post on this forum from a shopper who posted a screenshot of a reply they received from you that is anything but constructive. There's no mistaking which i-SPY or which Marc Karvitz the response is from. Your full name and picture are in the the response that you sent to the shopper telling them that their work is "crap." What the shopper wrote about your professionalism, demeanor, and expectations matches the tenor of the response in the screenshot as well as what others have said in the past on this forum and elsewhere on the web. I think you should take an honest look at yourself in order to find the answers you seek.

@ispyhospitality wrote:

Otherwise, the replies to my post match the statistics for this website, which is an incredible amount of negativity, written by anonymous people (one person even wrote, “I need to work right now and this is easy work. I'm not going to screw that up).

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2018 04:17AM by MSF.

I'll be the first to admit that I take the easy work. I can do a ton of easy work and in 8 hours end up with $560. That's the very tops though, eom and eoq. $735 eom and eoq and eoy.

@MSF wrote:

I suggest you refer back to one of your own expectations in your post: 7. Constructive Feedback (does not take it personally). If you do, this will not work out, and please do not apply.

You posted here seeking feedback and that's exactly what you have been given: constructive feedback. On the other hand, there's a 2015 post on this forum from a shopper who posted a screenshot of a reply they received from you that is anything but constructive. There's no mistaking which i-SPY or which Marc Karvitz the response is from. Your full name and picture are in the the response that you sent to the shopper telling them that their work is "crap." What the shopper wrote about your professionalism, demeanor, and expectations matches the tenor of the response in the screenshot as well as what others have said in the past on this forum and elsewhere on the web. I think you should take an honest look at yourself in order to find the answers you seek.

OMG that's classy.

It seems that the biggest problem with i-spy is the owner. Just wow.

We're all stupid and crap. He knows everything, clearly.

I have no words...that just takes the cake in showing a total lack of professionalism. Telling someone that their work is crap? How is that constructive criticism? WOW.

Edited to add that I apparently did have words, LOL.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2018 09:06PM by JASFLALMT.

The arrogance...
Anonymity fosters honesty, Marc. That is what you're getting here.

It looks like you have achieved quite the opposite.

@ispyhospitality wrote:

Recruitment is not my goal for starting this conversation.

@ispyhospitality wrote:

Let's try something: include your name and where you live with your posts, and remove the anonymity.

Are you related to Dave from Sentry? LOL

OP,
Unfortunately your suggestion reveals only that you are not aware of the practices of some of your MSC owner colleagues with regards to seeking shopper poster's names and then retaliating against them. Perhaps if you knew this history, you would have avoided raising so many hackles here.

Some forum members have been subjected to quite hair-raising occasions of retaliation and harassment. Unfortunately, this has not been limited to only one MSC owner or scheduler or editor. It has even extended beyond the forum to include trolling shopper conferences to try to identify any shopper perceived as critical of certain MSC's practices.

@SoCalMama wrote:

@MSF wrote:

I suggest you refer back to one of your own expectations in your post: 7. Constructive Feedback (does not take it personally). If you do, this will not work out, and please do not apply.

You posted here seeking feedback and that's exactly what you have been given: constructive feedback. On the other hand, there's a 2015 post on this forum from a shopper who posted a screenshot of a reply they received from you that is anything but constructive. There's no mistaking which i-SPY or which Marc Karvitz the response is from. Your full name and picture are in the the response that you sent to the shopper telling them that their work is "crap." What the shopper wrote about your professionalism, demeanor, and expectations matches the tenor of the response in the screenshot as well as what others have said in the past on this forum and elsewhere on the web. I think you should take an honest look at yourself in order to find the answers you seek.

OMG that's classy.

It seems that the biggest problem with i-spy is the owner. Just wow.

We're all stupid and crap. He knows everything, clearly.

I can think of another MSC owner who frequently shows up here and comments and who is - how do I see this civilly? A bit difficult? This owner doesn't seem as far removed from shopper reality as this other owner I refer to. I say this only because I wish to be fair and reasonable here.

@Hoju wrote:

The arrogance...
Anonymity fosters honesty, Marc. That is what you're getting here.

I know I've had an issue with being a little bit sensitive on this board so I just want to say that I am grateful that I am not alone here in seeing the arrogance.

@BlueMoose wrote:

@ispyhospitality wrote:

Let's try something: include your name and where you live with your posts, and remove the anonymity.

Are you related to Dave from Sentry? LOL

TOO FUNNY!!! I just referred to Sentry and it's owner in a reply to another poster here before I saw this post by you mentioning Sentry's owner by name! Glad it seems that I'm not the only one out there who has made this connection.......

@walesmaven wrote:

OP,
Unfortunately your suggestion reveals only that you are not aware of the practices of some of your MSC owner colleagues with regards to seeking shopper poster's names and then retaliating against them. Perhaps if you knew this history, you would have avoided raising so many hackles here.

Some forum members have been subjected to quite hair-raising occasions of retaliation and harassment. Unfortunately, this has not been limited to only one MSC owner or scheduler or editor. It has even extended beyond the forum to include trolling shopper conferences to try to identify any shopper perceived as critical of certain MSC's practices.

Has this really happened? Shoppers attending one of the industry's conferences being trolled for having issues with an MSC? I find this very scary if it's true that it's happened. Scary and more than a bit Big-Brotherish.

Sqire,
I do not know what MSPA does at their conferences but, as I recall, the first IMSC conference was the very LAST at which attendees name tags carried their last names.

"6. Commit to at least ONE meal per month." Are you hiring independent contractors or employees? ICs do not have to commit to taking a low paying shop at least once a month.

There is no need for me to comment on the "free meal" crapola. It has been commented on by others and shows you do not value shoppers. It is just ironic you are expecting such high standards when you don't have them yourself.

"We have personal relationships with our clients that they value." Professional shoppers also value their relationships with their clients, the MSCs. The caveat is the relationship must go both ways.

"We have ex-shoppers that post fabricated stories about us, anonymously, without worry of repercussion by the website. And then these websites contact us to advertise, or want me to pay a fee for them to delete negative postings." Apparently most, if not all, these comments apply to other websites. Is it professional to bring your negativity to our sandbox?

"The combined total of Mystery Shopping + Mystery Shopping Company discussions (most of which are negative/complaints) on this website is over 464,000." This is a blatant lie. Perhaps it is because you don't want to take the time to read, but a lie nonetheless. Many threads are shoppers helping other shoppers to improve their skills and make their businesses more profitable. The Kudos thread was started at the behest of members here to highlight MSCs and schedulers who deserve praise, not to limit praise to one section of the forum.

"I posted: 1) because some of the negative postings listed under my company were not even about my company, but another company with a similar name that has since changed their name; 2) to introduce my company as I was unfamiliar with this website; 3) to learn if this was a website I would want my company to utilize as this is not our typical source for recruiting." 1. Apparently some of those negative postings sure were about you and your company. You certainly would not be the first to make a slight change to the company before trying to present yourself in a new light. 2. Great job on the introduction. We all want to work for an arrogant MSC owner who thinks our time is worthless. 3. If you had wanted a good place to find professional shopper, you actually found it. Too bad you shot yourself in the foot.

@LisaS TL, great post! Maybe he will take the time to read what you said and do a little self-reflection. Bravo!

@SassyShoppin wrote:

@LisaS TL, great post! Maybe he will take the time to read what you said and do a little self-reflection. Bravo!

Until such a time, this MSC and it's shops are relegated to ten foot pole status as far as I am concerned..........Certainly there is room for improvement in my performance and there are things left for me to learn regarding this business......that said, however - I am good at what I do and deserve to work for better. I'm worth it. Period. End of story.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/02/2018 08:30PM by squireparty.

I wanted to add one other little factoid regarding the Kudos section versus the combination of two others. The Kudos thread has existed for a mere three years. It is apples to oranges when the other two began 11 years ago.

Did he really call a shopper's efforts "crap?" That's horrible.

I'm so tired of companies paying poorly for 'fine dining.' Appealing to hobby-shoppers never works out.

Indeed, it is detailed in the comment prior to last in this thread: [www.mysteryshopforum.com]

@RobinMarie wrote:

Did he really call a shopper's efforts "crap?" That's horrible.

I'm so tired of companies paying poorly for 'fine dining.' Appealing to hobby-shoppers never works out.

Thanks for the link. Marc, that was pretty unprofessional.

@RobinMarie wrote:

Thanks for the link. Marc, that was pretty unprofessional.

For those of you who believe in astrology (which has nothing to do with my real point) I'm about to be a textbook Scorpio and raise the ante.......that was EXTREMELY unprofessional and I'm very glad this board exists so that forum members can evaluate if this MSC owner is worth our time and efforts. A side tip to the MSC owner - seriously, and I mean this in a kind and civil way - you are not helping your case one iota here with the experienced and professional shoppers of this board. Your behavior is such that I'd personally steer clear of you......I'd put you on a perma ban as far as my ever picking up a shop for you. I can understand that being a business owner can be relentlessly stressful and I can understand some of that seeping into your communications with shoppers.....a little. Not to the level you have displayed that you are willing to take it, though. I'd recommend keeping the high standards (which in and of themselves are not a bad thing, please understand this) and raising shopper pay to justify adhering to your high standards, and here's the big one - show a little bit of basic respect to your shoppers. As you can see here your reputation and that of your business are not quite up to the standards you espouse, shall we say? Entirely your doing, sir, and I say this not to be a jerk on an anonymous forum but to offer some constructive feedback to that which you have presented to this board.

I've actually done some "crap" work myself. Poor time management, too much narrative at 11pm, boiler pot of a tummy because of the crappy meal. Ah, you know, we all do "crap" py work sometimes.

Here is a little feedback from a pretty new shopper... which is likely who shops for you. Take it for what it is worth.

Someone said earlier, which I agree 1000%, that your shoppers are likely those who are new and/or couldn't afford a nice dining experience otherwise.

When I first started, I got pretty excited about the big reimbursement shops... but then I came to see that you can easily lose the shop and be stuck with the bill when you mess something up. The "mess up" could be a very minute issue, but enough to be declined.

Your food isn't worth that risk and I don't care if it's caviar and escargot. Seriously, it is food. I am not destitute. I can buy whatever food I want. I can eat wherever I want. I am a professional and I make plenty of money. I secret shop for extra money and keeping my brain active. Don't act like you're doing everyone a big favor by providing a meal. Your meal is no big deal.

Your angry comments about a person's report being "crap" ???

The generous $15 you offer is a joke. Hence, this is your problem! You are not willing to pay professionals to do the job you want done. You're sucking in the newbies and you're getting newbie reports, which you then turn around and dress them down for what is lacking.

You need to rethink your whole approach. It sounds as though you do not treat your shoppers with respect.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2018 03:46AM by mselle.

Amen. [www.youtube.com]

@mselle wrote:

You need to rethink your whole approach. It sounds as though you do not treat your shoppers with respect.