IPSOS' New Gas Station Math Doesn't Add Up

What am I missing here?

The newest IPSOS gas station description is as follows: Job Fee: $8.00 Expenses: $10.00

Self-assign at this time! Shop pay = $8

Product purchases: A minimum of $3, with a max of $7 in fuel + in-store item of up to $2 in reimbursements.

So, the minimum of $3, with a max of $7 in fuel + in-store item of up to $2 in reimbursements = $9.00 maximum.
Where does the extra $1.00 come in to add up to $10.00 expenses.

Create an Account or Log In

Membership is free. Simply choose your username, type in your email address, and choose a password. You immediately get full access to the forum.

Already a member? Log In.

I ran across this too when I did a test drive on one. There are typos between the guidelines, email notifications and the actual shop report. I addressed this in the comments section because I spent $2 (as one or more of the docs read), but like you, my math added to $9 vs $10 for reimbursement). I asked how we get reimbursed for the additional $1 if we can only spend $2. The editor replied the Program Manager is updating the documents/forms of communication, but that the actual amount for store reimbursement is $3 not $2.
????!

@salisburync wrote:

They are from Ohio, land of bewildered sub-humans.....what did you expect?
The initial rollout of the guidelines is certainly not a ringing endorsement of people from ohio. That said, I'm sure not everyone in Ohio is that incompetent.

It amazes me that a company that can figure out how to have a cartoon nerdy guy and a cartoon raccoon cannot figure out how to properly proofread guidelines before rolling them out. It's like nobody proofread it.
Cease - Yes, I know. I spent a couple of winters there...and the only thing colder and wetter than an Ohio winter is my heart.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2022 01:55PM by salisburync.
A scheduler for convenience stores that require a specific purchase each month, which changes, continues to send e-mails with "the purchase for March is a Redbull".

I have seen where they take the guidelines from a similar type shop and reuse them without changing anything. This makes the guidelines somewhat correct for the new shop, but not totally correct.
Did you actually do the shop? The original $8 that was listed as the shop fee was ridiculous, and $10 does not seem to be much better; I feel that they are valuing the shopper's time as nearly nothing with that amount. Now if the shop can be completed in 30 minutes or less, including drive time, shopping and report, then perhaps it is worthwhile?
I did these shops for the pervious MSC. I was reimbursed for the full $10 and rarely did one under $20 fee. Will be interesting if IPSOS gets them done for less.

Do not read so much, look about you and think of what you see there.
Richard Feynman-- letter to Ashok Arora, 4 January 1967, published in Perfectly Reasonable Deviations from the Beaten Track (2005) p. 230
I just found out from a scheduler that this is just a pilot program. They only need half the locations done to meet their quota. So, they are likely trying to get the contract but don't have it yet. I hope they get it, since it is so much easier to schedule routes when you can easily work with a scheduler and the emails show all locations, rather than having to search by multiple zip codes.
@mjt9598 wrote:

I just found out from a scheduler that this is just a pilot program. They only need half the locations done to meet their quota. So, they are likely trying to get the contract but don't have it yet. I hope they get it, since it is so much easier to schedule routes when you can easily work with a scheduler and the emails show all locations, rather than having to search by multiple zip codes.

After downloading the LOA, here is what I've learned: It is termed "New Vendor for Excellence in Action program". The shopper is referred to as an "Assessor" and that the evaluation is "for mystery shop training and calibration of scores".
Notably, it further states that this is a "Pilot Shop" and that the testing is for quality control.
Underlined is "You will not receive a reported score for this shop". - "You will not be charged for this shop and importantly, "This is not a replacement for the normal mystery shop - expect the normal shop during the quarter in addition to this Pilot Shop.
Interesting. Because the old MSC still has locations available. Bonused up to $35 and can Make Offer.

Do not read so much, look about you and think of what you see there.
Richard Feynman-- letter to Ashok Arora, 4 January 1967, published in Perfectly Reasonable Deviations from the Beaten Track (2005) p. 230
Im doing a gas station for one MSC and the same gas station is posted for the new MSC. Not only that but the pay is 3x as much.
@French Farmer wrote:

@mjt9598 wrote:

I just found out from a scheduler that this is just a pilot program. They only need half the locations done to meet their quota. So, they are likely trying to get the contract but don't have it yet. I hope they get it, since it is so much easier to schedule routes when you can easily work with a scheduler and the emails show all locations, rather than having to search by multiple zip codes.

After downloading the LOA, here is what I've learned: It is termed "New Vendor for Excellence in Action program". The shopper is referred to as an "Assessor" and that the evaluation is "for mystery shop training and calibration of scores".
Notably, it further states that this is a "Pilot Shop" and that the testing is for quality control.
Underlined is "You will not receive a reported score for this shop". - "You will not be charged for this shop and importantly, "This is not a replacement for the normal mystery shop - expect the normal shop during the quarter in addition to this Pilot Shop.

It further states, "This evaluation is for mystery shop training and calibration of scores as the new vendor."
With the former MSC, full reimbursement was $10. Minimum of $3 gas, $1 in store purchase. The increase follows how it was done. $8-$10-$15-$18-$20-$25-Make Offer..

Generally, they wanted to complete them by the end of the 1st month of a quarter.

Do not read so much, look about you and think of what you see there.
Richard Feynman-- letter to Ashok Arora, 4 January 1967, published in Perfectly Reasonable Deviations from the Beaten Track (2005) p. 230
Do you really have to wear a saftey vest? I have been hesitant because of that. I know it sounds silly but I do not want to wear one.
For any of the gas stations shops for IPSOS, it is required in my area. These shops did not require it with the former MSC. So not sure if its a client or IPSOS requirement. I have two types: the vest over the shirt and for cooler weather, a long sleeved safety shirt.

Do not read so much, look about you and think of what you see there.
Richard Feynman-- letter to Ashok Arora, 4 January 1967, published in Perfectly Reasonable Deviations from the Beaten Track (2005) p. 230
@Francie82 wrote:

Do you really have to wear a saftey vest? I have been hesitant because of that. I know it sounds silly but I do not want to wear one.

You don't have to take and upload a pic of yourself with the vest on ...... just sayin ......
As a person who has completed more than 1,000 gas station audits and has almost been hit by cars on multiple occasions, I highly recommend the vest.
Vest equals authority watch people move out your way. Weird but a bonus.

Shopping Western NY, Northeast and Central PA, and parts of Ohio and West Virginia. Have car will travel anywhere if the monies right.
Just as stated above, I like the vest because people just assume I'm there doing something important. When I'm taking pictures undercover, I get lots of weird looks and questions. I've almost never had anyone question what I'm doing when I'm wearing a vest.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login