- This topic has 52 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Re: Badda Bing
Ok, I agree that there are other suppliers, so, to try and put this CDSL debate to bed, I propose:
We put a post in the members forum explaining the proposed discount idea. We then ask them to list their top 5 suppliers in order of priority (ie.. 1st choice, 2nd etc etc). That way, after a week or so, we should be able to collect the most popular 5 suppliers to approach. If we then end up leaving anyone out, whether it be CDSL or anyone else, then at least we can say that it was the members decision who to approach, not the council of the WTA taking it upon themselves to exclude certain Companies.
That to me is fair
Adrian 🙂I wouldn’t as if you post it then nothing happens you place the TA in an embarrassing situation.
You’d be better to ask which is the preferred supplier and mention nothing about discount.
K.
Re: Badda Bing
washdoctor wrote:Ok, I agree that there are other suppliers, so, to try and put this CDSL debate to bed, I propose:
Sorry Ade, you missed the point there on that I think.
They are all not only spares suppliers they also are WPs and all also, like CDSL, force agents to buy spares exclusively from them. This means no freedom of choice or on pricing for the trade and that they can charge what they like free of any competition creating in micro-monopoly situation just as CDSL have done.
They also have exclusive rights to many spares, just as CDSL do.
If you asked me to describe CDSL’s role within the industry now I’d have to say I’d be torn between spares “supplier” (both trade and retail) and work provider but, in so far as the repairers are concerned, mainly a WP these days. Just because they choose to call themselves something different doesn’t mean that they are in respect to the “Repaircare” branding and, that’s all it is, branding.
K.
kwatt wrote:You’d be better to ask which is the preferred supplier and mention nothing about discount.
Yeah, your right, so hows about that then? Lets put a post up in the members area asking what their prefered top 5 suppliers are. Then we can collect that info and move on. As I said, at least then we have something to point at if asked why we’re leaving certain companies out of the scheme.
What does everyone else think?
Re: Badda Bing
It will need to be worded correctly and also made clear that it is purely for research purposes and not for people to have a rant.
Even a simple poll would suffice.Jim.
Re: Badda Bing
iadom wrote:It will need to be worded correctly and also made clear that it is purely for research purposes and not for people to have a rant.
Even a simple poll would suffice. Jim.Agreed Jim ,A poll isn’t threatening and people can vote anonomously
kwatt wrote:Apart from that you can’t have a poll with multiple answers I’m afraid.K.
As above, we cant run a poll, so we would have to out right ask people to post their top suppliers. Agreed with Jim that the poll should read ‘for research purposes’ only, No supplier bashing allowed!!
Adrian 🙂
Re: Badda Bing
Martin’s just posted that it would be a good idea if we negotiated a WTA trade discount with the wholesalers……
http://www.ukwhitegoods.co.uk/modules.p … ic&t=28381
Chris.
Re: Badda Bing
Martin wrote:negotiate a ‘Special Discount’ with certain wholesalers (i.e our friends Masterpart and CDSL?)….exclusive for WTA members?
This is why we cant exclude CDSL, the first person to post about this, and they include CDSL. IMO, they now have to be included in any discount plans.
Adrian
Re: Badda Bing
Penguin45 wrote:However – they are a parts wholesaler, so some sort of approach (no matter now half-hearted 😕 ) would be appropriate if we are going to be even handed.
Thought we’d agreed that, Adrian?
I imagine it will be a waste of breath……….
Chris.
Re: Badda Bing
Sorry Chris, I missed the post where we all agreed to include CDSL 😳
Anyway, it may be a waste of breath……. but at least we would have put the idea on the table for them and have them turn us down as opposed to us excluding them!Adrian
Ade gonna STFU about Connect… please, drop it. They will be sent a letter like everyone else, now can you please move on.
K.
kwatt wrote:Ade gonna STFU about Connect… please, drop it. They will be sent a letter like everyone else, now can you please move on.
K.
👿 No need to speak to me like that, the last I read, we were going to ask the members.
Re: Badda Bing
I said elsewhere, I’m tired and CBA today and you’re sounding like a broken record on this. Every time anything is remotely close to the subject up you pop with something about Connect, or that’s the way it looks to me.
Read back a few threads and see what you think.
Not to put too fine a point on it as, I call a spade a spade and, I’m sick of hearing about them in relation to this topic which seems to have a nasty habit of pervading most conversations.
So far as I was aware all were being treated the same, end of.
Or is it your opinion that CDSL should now get preferential treatment of some sort? Perhaps would should roll out a red carpet and ask how much we can do for the exalted ones?
K.
Re: Badda Bing
Right, I’ve got my tin hat on…
Had a bit of a wacky idea and I don’t know if there’s any merit in it, but here goes…
What if we asked one/any of the spares suppliers to sponsor the mailout of cards?
This would (or could) potentially massively offset the costs and get the money back on doing it quickly, i.e. more money into the TA coffers. My thinking was that we do that glue type thing to a printed sheet with the sponsors name on it as them helping the independent trade by supporting the TA if you see what I mean.
Just an idea to kick around.
K.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.