Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Academy 6 in Pasadena SUCKS!!! (and how to manage customer complaints)

This is topic Academy 6 in Pasadena SUCKS!!! (and how to manage customer complaints) in forum Ground Level at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=001255

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-04-2004, 03:32 AM:

The Academy used to be a dollar house that charged something like $4 for a double-bill. The prints were scratched all to hell and the sound was mono. No frills.

My uncle had just told me a few days ago that he would never go to that theatre because he had a bad experience there. (The film broke in the middle of the show.)

Tonight he made an exception because his girlfriend wanted to see THE VILLAGE. I noticed that the cost of tickets had gone up and it now cost $6 for each feature. I asked what they had done to the place to justify the increase and the lady working the box office (turned out to be the manager) told me that she had shown the workers how to clean the butter pump.

She tears our tickets and we head off to our auditorium. By our watches we are 15 minutes early. The show was advertised as a 9:45 start on moviefone.com. My uncle then examines the ticket and realizes that it says 9:50 so we're even earlier than we thought. But when we get into the auditorium, the movie is already in progress.

So we head back to the box office and that's when I notice that the manager lady had punched up tickets for HAROLD AND SOMEBODY AND A CASTLE, which is clearly the wrong feature.

She tells me that's the movie we asked for and I told her that was impossible because we had never even heard of that movie so there is no way we could ever have asked for tickets to see it. Then we learn that the showtimes on moviefone were all wrong and there are no evening shows of THE VILLAGE.

Okay. Fine. No problem. We'll take a refund.

They don't give refunds at the Academy theatres on Colorado Blvd. in Pasadena. She runs off and comes back with passes WHICH CANNOT BE USED ON SATURDAY.

I told her she was full of shit. We just gave her cash. She punched up the wrong ticket by not paying attention and running off at the mouth about how good she can clean a butter warmer. If she's going to give us passes, they should at least be "good as cash" and hence valid for ANY day. Furthermore, these passes will expire in 30 days.

NOW GET THIS:

Some other dude comes back to the box office...It's 9:30pm and she had sold him a ticket for THE VILLAGE...for the12:30 matinee!

Posted by Rich Granata (Member # 2285) on 09-04-2004, 10:51 AM:

with awful customer service like that, i don't know if that place could stay in business long.

I think its inappropriate for her to mention that they now clean the butter pumps. "Good, what do I care?". Either way, that raises a lot of questions in somebody's head. "What else DON't you clean?" there is always job related news/gossip. Employees should not burden customers with stuff like that. They just want to see a movie.

Sorry to hear about that.

Posted by Scott D. Neff (Member # 185) on 09-04-2004, 12:00 PM:

The Academy has been in business for quite some time, and will probably continue to be, as many of their customers don't seem to care, or at least they don't care enough to mention problems to the management.

I think the $6 admission is a bit steep, but sadly in an area that charges $9-$9.75 for tickets, $6.00 is still a bargain. Perhaps they did raise their prices for one last hurrah before they close up shop.

But I went there back when Face Off was in theatres, and they were showing that movie and I think 2 others with the wrong lense, and it wasn't just in the preview like somebody forgot, it was the middle of the feature, as though they either couldn't play scope in some auditoriums, or they just didn't notice the difference.

Honestly I think the building itself is a wonderful testament to how multiplexing got out of hand at an old single screen. That place is hilariously funny and it might be worth the $6 for a good laugh.

Posted by Jason M Miller (Member # 2597) on 09-04-2004, 12:19 PM:

wow.....man I will remember not to goto that theater if I am ever around that area.....or maybe I will just so I can complain to the management during the show on everything the projectionist is doing wrong [evil]

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 09-04-2004, 12:37 PM:

The place is a dump. But they do get good use out of their prints. I've seen them play titles for months after they had been played out everywhere else.

Projectionist? Ahem, the lady bragging about her butter pump is what passes for a film-putter-inner at that place.

$6.00 for a single second-run now... That matches the new first-run matinee prices here.

Posted by Tony Bandiera Jr (Member # 2365) on 09-04-2004, 01:34 PM:

Indeed that place is a dump. I had the misfortune of being called in to service the total [bs]

that tries to pretend to be projectors. Old CFS consoles (junk even when new) with panels off and K-mart box fans to cool the rectifiers, [Eek!]

horrendous CFS mono sound, etc. Century? maybe Cinecita? heads (been a long time since I was there..) that were abused heavily.

But the biggest joke of all was the alleged architect(?) who didn't understand the concepts of KEYSTONE (maybe he/she was thinking keystone cops [Big Grin]

), projection angles and sightlines over seated patrons.

That place has changed ownership several times and for good reason. The best thing that could happen to it would be a large earthquake and some insurance money. [evil]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-04-2004, 01:59 PM:

Its always been our policy to give cash refunds if the complaint/personal emergency/whatever happens less than halfway through the movie. Even then exceptions can be made for people who come out later in the feature.

Whatever policy your theatre has it should be common sense to give a cash refund in the situation Manny describes. Ridiculous.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-04-2004, 02:19 PM:

Of course, when my uncle finally does get around to using those passes, the distributor won't see a dime because those tickets will be generated as "free passes" when, in effect, they were actually paid-for in advance.

I wonder...What are the odds that she gave us those awful passes and then later refunded our tickets, keeping the cash for herself?

Also, I'm not up on the points of the exhibition agreement so I'll ask here: Is it kosher for tickets to be torn by the same person who sold the ticket?

Oh. And about that popcorn. I bought a small bag -- waaaaay too much salt...and no less than three scorched pieces. [Eek!]

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-04-2004, 02:37 PM:

Usually its not a good idea to have the cashier act as ticket tearer also, only makes double selling that much easier. Unfortunately on many days-particularily during the school year-having a seperate ticket tearer can't really be justified cost wise.

However, it is a policy with the company I work (not the same one that owns this theatre) that the manager is to never sell tickets.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-04-2004, 02:46 PM:

We generally have a "no refund" policy. However, it does have certain thresholds that I think are legally arguable.

If you've paid money to see a show and it either doesn't start or you change your mind before it does start... I think you'd have an argument for getting your money back. The only exception we apply to that is if you've grossly misbehaved to the point we've had to call in 'de law'... in which case you get nada.

If Manny had called the cops, they'd have probably seen a case for fraud, whether the company has a 'no refund' policy or not.

Posted by Eric Hooper (Member # 1730) on 09-04-2004, 03:22 PM:

Oh hell no...

If I pay cash for something and don't get what I paid for, I had better get a CASH REFUND or heads will roll and the sh*t's gonna hit the fan. Just wait to f*ck with me like that. Just wait.... Maybe it's an urban SF thing or something...but we don't put up with stuff like that.

I remember a recent screening where the movie had to be stopped 20 minutes into the film and the management of the theatre wanted to just give passes to everybody, and they almost had a riot on their hands. Needless to say, they went and 'opened the safe' (their excuse) and gave everybody cash refunds AND free passes.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-04-2004, 06:36 PM:

Our policy is passes first and refund second. The trick is, while offering passes treat the customer with the respect and dignity in which they are due. More often then not they will accept the pass if a staff member makes them feel like a human being. This has worked well over the years (especially among senior citizens who think they are getting something for nothing).

Getting belligerent and demanding one's money back is ignorant at best and, in my opinion, downright asinine.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-04-2004, 07:15 PM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
The trick is...

First -- there's no "trick" to this. [puke]

Business is business. You can't deliver the product? Give the money back. Why keep it?

I hereby challenge you to give me a defensible position as to why the theatre or distributor is entitled to hold onto that person's cash.

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Getting belligerent and demanding one's money back is ignorant at best and, in my opinion, downright asinine.

So let me see if I have this correct..?

It's asinine for me to stand up for my rights as a consumer?

And...the correct thing for me to do is to play dumb and act as though the pass is like getting something for nothing? If your default assumption is that I'm some kind of idiot then are you really "treating the customer with the respect and dignity in which they are due" ?

That's lip-service and I have zero respect for anyone who speaks with a forked tongue.

Anyone who treats customers like that is an ass.

And anyone who could make such statements about the elderly is, in MY opinion, an insensitive asshole with fucked up ways.

Slimeball theatres like that are part of the reason why people are staying home to watch DVDs.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-04-2004, 07:24 PM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Getting belligerent and demanding one's money back is ignorant at best and, in my opinion, downright asinine.

Like hell it is. I recently picked up cable internet service from Cebridge Communications. These people are complete morons in every sense of the word. Not only is it IMPOSSIBLE to get through to their tech support lines, it is DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE to get through to a supervisor at the order center. My cable connection never worked properly from day one, yet they are trying to bill me for services, despite my estimated 4 hours on hold trying to get through to a human being and my estimated 1 hour explaining to a dozen different employees that the service was not working, to send a tech out. These morons even told me over the phone "oh yeah we can see your connection is down"...but did they do anything about it? Of course not. In fact, even my letter telling them to cancel the service didn't work. After 3 months, they finally "turned off the service" (that never existed) and turned it over to a bill collector...which turned out to be an automated service! That's right, I can't even get through to a human there either explaining that I refuse to pay for a service of which I never received. It's not the amount of money owed. In fact it would be far easier to just pay it, but it's the principle of the matter.

Having a theater take money from a customer and then not provide the service purchased is the same thing. Now I am fine if passes are offered first and then cash refunds are CHEERFULLY given if a customer requests it. However for anyone who requests their money back, the theater OWES those customers a CASH refund. No ifs ands or butts...or it is the manager who is being assinine. Any manager who does that to his customers is STEALING from them. There is no reason to sugar coat it. That manager would be a criminal.

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 09-04-2004, 07:42 PM:

I have to take the middle ground here. If there is a minor interuption, a pass to another film typically will suffice to make the customers happy. Management should, IMHO, offer the passes first, before anyone has a chance to ask for them.

If someone wants a cash refund, however, give it to them, and free passes.. Better to keep the customer than to keep their $10.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-04-2004, 11:00 PM:

I hereby challenge you to give me a defensible position as to why the theatre or distributor is entitled to hold onto that person's cash.

Nobody said they were "entitled" to hold onto the cash. What was said is our policy is passes first and a REFUND second.

quote:
Business is business, You can't deliver the product? Give the money back. Why keep it?

Very true Manny and I agree, yet being a businessperson requires a certain finesse in which the customer's desires are met, yet the base profit doesn't necessarily have to be given back. For example, a candy company delivers a large order to a theater, but the Gummy Bears aren't there. Does the manager call up and bitch that he wants a refund on the entire order? No he wants a CREDIT on the gummy bears. Thats what a pass is --- credit. My comment about the seniors was a joke in that they get shit all the time in which they consider "free", but its poor bastards like you and I that pay for it everyday.

quote:
Its asinine for me to stand up for my rights as a consumer?

No, but consumer protection is no different then the right of a business to show a profit. Your party was given an alternative in the form of a pass. As far as the law is concerned your rights were not violated. (Though it is a bunch of shit the pass couldn't be used on Saturday).

quote: Brad Miller
Now I am fine if passes are offered first and then cash refunds are CHEERFULLY given if a customer requests it.

And that is EXACTLY how we handle these situations. Nobody is stealing, nobody is fucking somebody over just for kicks, and nobody is being a dick. As many of us who work with the public knows ... its often them who behave in this way. What I meant by the "Belligerent" comment was that we've all seen asshole customers come out of auditoriums, talk so everyone in lobby can hear him, and exclaim: I'm Joe My-Shit-Don't-Stink and I WANT MY MONEY BACK!!!!! There are more tactfull ways of addressing a problem, and then there are these malcontents.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-04-2004, 11:47 PM:

I think *most* customers will come out and explain their displeasure with maturity and a reasonable level of patience (obviously given the severity of the problem) AT FIRST. However, if you (not speaking to anyone inparticular here) as a manager are the second, or third, or fourth person employed by the theater that the dissatisfied customer talks to, and especially if you took your sweet ass time getting TO the customer to resolve their complaint, by the time you get there it is almost guaranteed that the customers will become irate and "irrational".

Face up to it. You or your staff/equipment fucked up. It's your job to kiss their ass to whatever degree it takes by doing anything it takes to make them satisfied. If that means refunds AND a pass to make them happy, you should do it.

A perfect example of this has surely been had by everyone where you call into a company to report a problem, and you have to wade through a bazillion extensions and overly friendly (and overly slow) greetings on each voice menu just to get to where you need to get, only to have the phone system glitch and hang up on you...or the person answering the phone can't help you, or you ask to speak to a supervisor, but they take 15 minutes to answer your call (probably because they are too busy talking to their employee trying to prepare themselves for the confrontation). Every minute that passes by when something you/your staff/your equipment screwed up is just that much more angry they will be. Speed is crucial here, and the first thing that should be said to help have a smoother manager / customer discussion is an apology for "taking so long to get downstairs, etc" (whether you took a long time or not). It shows right up front that you care about them (again, whether you really do or not). Customers tend to relax a bit and tone their complaint down somewhat when they see how attentive you are to them and your obvious willingness to make whatever the situation is right.

Remember also that just giving a pass or a refund isn't really solving the problem. There is the amount of time you have wasted of your customers. For example, let's say you have a brain wrap 2/3 of the way into a 2 hour movie. We have...

*Patron effort to leave the house and drive to your theater.
*Patron money spent at your establishment (which you return in the form of a pass or refund).
*90 minutes watching PART of a movie they never get to finish.
*The aggravation of not being ABLE to finish watching the movie.
*(In Manny's case) the insult of being offered a pass on a Saturday that is not valid on Saturdays!
*Patron effort to drive back home.

In reality, you owe them far more than a simple pass or refund. This is why at theaters I managed, it was my policy to refund their money whether they asked for it or not AND give them a pass. Special situations would warrant 2 passes, at my judgment. That in my opinion is taking care of your customers. You do want them to return, right?

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-05-2004, 12:16 AM:

Manny, you went back right away to the ticket office to demand a refund. There is no gray area here. You did not even see the movie - whatever it was. Passes is not even an option. I would have demanded cash or would have threatened the bitch by calling the cops.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-05-2004, 12:29 AM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Very true Manny and I agree, yet being a businessperson requires a certain finesse in which the customer's desires are met, yet the base profit doesn't necessarily have to be given back.

Forgetting for the time-being that, in this case, the customer's desire was to get a cash refund...

Are you seriously saying that it's all right to report that 3 people attended a screening of that HAROLD AND HIS CASTLE movie when, in fact, those 3 people never even heard of it...and did *not* attend that screening?

It's okay to add one more to the count of your 12:30 matinee in the middle of the night?

It shouldn't even be permissable for a theatre to operate with a box office system that would honor that transaction in the first place. What other controls are absent from that system? All of this raises very serious questions about the accuracy of their accounting.

As for your Gummi Bear analogy. It doesn't work. We bought concessions and never once did we entertain the notion that those items should be refunded. We only wanted a refund for the product we did not receive.

Furthermore, implicit in your scenario is an ongoing credit relationship. Our (begrudged) visit to this movie theatre is entirely different. This was not going to be an ongoing relationship. I made that clear when I stated that we didn't really want to go to The Academy in the first place, and we certainly had no intentions of ever going back after this episode.

One more thing: Those Gummi Bears were probably not paid for. They would most likely have been invoiced and so a credit would be appropriate. Our case is entirely different: We bought our tickets with cash. The refund should match the original form of payment.

quote: Aaron Mehocic
Thats what a pass is --- credit. My comment about the seniors was a joke in that they get shit all the time in which they consider "free", but its poor bastards like you and I that pay for it everyday.

These passes might fly as "credit" if they were considered same-as-cash. Alas, they are not valid on Saturday and they expire in a mere 30 days. Furthermore, I explained to that woman that we had no intentions of ever coming back.

The only reason I did not pursue the matter any further is that my uncle did not want to create "a scene" and it was *his* money on the line. If I had been the one who paid, I guarantee we would have left with a cash refund.

I am tempted to write a letter to Buena Vista. Trouble is, I have doubts as to whether they would even care.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 09-05-2004, 01:38 AM:

Passes and credit are ok, but that is *ASSUMING* that the customer will be coming back.

In Manny's case, I dont think I would be coming back.

If the mishap is on the part of the business then they should give a cash refund upon request.

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 09-05-2004, 02:07 AM:

Too bad you left. I've heard great things about "Haroldi and Calvin see the Grey Fortress"

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-05-2004, 02:13 AM:

I think what is happening here is people arguing different things. Aaron seems to be tyring to make a point about giving out passes in general and most of what he said I would agree with. HOWEVER, Manny was describing a very specific experience. In Manny's case there was NO EXCUSE not to give him his money back. I mean christ, not only was moviephone wrong, but the manager sold them the wrong tickets. Manny and his group hadn't even watched a single preview before they asked for their money back.

It doesn't get much simpler than that, they should have gotten their money back, period.

Manny, if you really want to complain write a letter to the company that runs the theatre. They will most definatly do something about it.

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 09-05-2004, 06:39 AM:

quote: Aaron Mehocic
No, but consumer protection is no different then the right of a business to show a profit

In all the juristictions I've lived in, the rights of the consumer in a business to consumer transaction are very different to the rights afforded to a business to business transaction.

Posted by Brandon Willis (Member # 2345) on 09-05-2004, 10:37 AM:

Some theatres will have only one employee on duty for the matinees during the school year. They will put a box office terminal at the concession and that one employee will sell the tickets, tear them, and sell the snacks. When the employee has to take their break, between sets of starts, the manager will step in and cover their position. The showtimes are set up so that the first set lets out as the night shift, which will be a full staff (box office, concession, doorman, and usher) is arriving so that they can clean up.
With regards to refunds, I offer passes first, but I've always given a cash refund to anyone who presents a ticket and asks for it. No questions asked. You can't just screw up someone's night at the movies and then tell them they're out $30. They'll never come back and you'll probably get a comment card or letter from them. However, if they don't have a ticket, then they're SOL.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-05-2004, 01:12 PM:

About getting beligerent: Sometimes it is called for. Sometimes it's the only way to get what you're entitled to.

I was ready, willing and able to "go there" during the debacle at The Academy but my uncle decided to cut his losses. So, from that encounter, I can tell you that NOT getting beligerent will only get you the bullshit passes.

I don't understand how anyone in this business could say that a pass is the same thing as a refund. If that really is the case then why not give the refund?

To all of you with the "passes first" policy/mentality: What is the logic that allows you to keep the patron's money when you have not delivered what they paid for? Why make them ask for it when they are entitled to it?

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 09-05-2004, 01:25 PM:

I have to chime in on this one:

Here at my theatre - I have got a different sort of issue. Customers that watch an entire movie, with no technical diffculties, then demand their money back - because in their opinion - 'the movie sucked' (i.e. 'Open Water' or 'Suspect Zero'). Tell me how you handle that one.

/RANT ON/

Anyways, I have worked at theatre chains that have fired people for giving large numbers refunds instead of passes. Most larger chains train their managers to offer passes in lieu of cash refunds (in fact it is policy). My personal rule has always been - if the show goes down they get their money back and a pass. On the late night shows - this can sometimes vary because the money is already in the bank. Of course I would also like to know what managers would do if the electricity goes out and you have 5000 people in your auditoriums - can I please be a fly on the wall at your theatre that day? Refunds don't happen on days like that. If they do - managers lose jobs....

If a person demands thier money back - the circumstances involved determine the outcome of how I react to them. It is all a judgement call. I would say that on the board here we have people that go to extremes in either direction. I take into account each individual situation.
As far as the crotchety old lady at the Pasadena 6 - she sounds like she will be going to hell when she dies.....

/RANT OFF/

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 09-05-2004, 01:39 PM:

The big problem with giving refunds is this. You get a situation where a group of people come in to the movie. They go in and after 20 or 30 minutes a couple of the group comes out and goes to the box office demanding a refund for some reason or another. They say that the other members of the group have went on to the car while they get the refund. They have all the tickets. Refund is given they leave. When the movie is over you see the people come out of the movie that you just gave the refund too. Apparently the rest of the group stayed in the movie and let the other two back in basically ripping your service off. That is one of the big reasons why passes come first. You don't run the risk of being ripped off. A pass can be equally or more valuable than the refund because if you come back to see a movie you could come back at night and gain in value if the pass was given on a matinee ticket.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-05-2004, 01:48 PM:

Way back in 1994 when I was a box office cashier the refund rule was that the entire group had to be accounted for (with ticket stubs) and I think that's fair enough. I know I would get my ass out of that car and haul it back to the box office if it made a difference between getting or not getting a refund.

THAT is how you ensure that the theatre doesn't get ripped off...and c'mon...we all know that's not what passes are for.

The trouble with passes is that they aren't cash. If I accept the passes and then decide to "make it a Blockbuster night" I might have to go back to the ATM and now the evening has cost me $40 instead of $20.

Passes instead of refunds only cause further inconvenience to patrons.

I believe it is quietly hoped that the patron will lose the passes, forget about the expiry date, or just never actually use them. This happens all the time with passes -- I know because I've worked box offices and, at least once per shift, a customer would come up to the window asking if I would be so kind as to honor their expired passes.

Cash does not expire; passes do.

I now believe that theatres have these policies in place because they're too cheap and/or greedy to take money out of the drawer.

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 09-05-2004, 02:26 PM:

BTW -

The company I currently work for doesn't allow the privledge of having extra passes lying around to give to customers. When I spoke of 'passes' in my earlier post I was referring to re-admit tickets (sometimes called rainchecks) that do NOT have an EXPIRATION date.

Also:

quote: Manny Knowles
I now believe that theatres have these policies in place because they're too cheap and/or greedy to take money out of the drawer.

Manny - you just figured this out now? I have known this for at least 15 years.....

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-05-2004, 03:05 PM:

LOL -- Thanks, Dennis. I'm smiling again! [Big Grin]

See...?

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 09-05-2004, 06:28 PM:

One reason why passes are often given is that they can be handed out quickly when refunds often take far longer since they need to be processed through the box office till system and the correct cash handed over / credit card refunded.

When working on box the till system required a 8-10 digit number (on the ticket) to be typed in (the barcode scanners never worked) for every ticket, then a (usually sarcastic) reason entered and a manager swipe/code. Then a paper form had to be filled in and the tickets stapled on.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-05-2004, 06:42 PM:

This is true and, in a large-scale situation involving more than (say) 15 patrons, it would be perfectly understandable. Even so, the passes should be unrestricted "same-as-cash." Ideally, customers should be given the option to wait for the cash refund, if they should be so inclined.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-05-2004, 06:45 PM:

Yup, that was what I always did. I gave a pass at the exit door of the theater and told them they could also get a refund at the box office in exchange for their ticket (but depending on the quantity of people that might mean a wait in line). For those who didn't want to wait, they could have another pass in exchange for the ticket (so they couldn't keep going back).

I always felt it was the manager's responsibility to have enough quantity of unrestricted passes on hand at any given point to handle any horrendous situation that may occur. Obviously depending on the quality of your projection staff and equipment may make that a typical or extremely high number.

BTW, I think in these situations most people refer "passes" to unrestricted passes. At UA they were called "emergency passes". Not sure what they are called at any given theater anymore since I stopped managing floor operations in 1998.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-05-2004, 07:23 PM:

Since it sounds like we're all friends again . . .

I don't want to beat this to death, but I think Dustin explained it best when he pointed out that I was speaking about policy, and Manny was arguing experience. With respect to the situation I would have handled it differently then the "manager" at the Academy 6, but I was trained to offer passes first. Guess you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

quote: Manny Knowles
To all of you with the "passes first" policy/mentality: What is the logic that allows you to keep the patron's money when you have not delivered what they paid for? Why make them ask for it when they are entitled to it?

You answered your own question and Dennis pointed that out in a direct quote. One might also attach this line from a former manager:
"I can care less how many people come through that door, but I care a whole hell of a lot as to how much money they're spending at that stand." He actually didn't mind giving passes because he knew the people would be extorted while buying concessions again on their second visit, but try getting a cash refund from him . . . well you know.

quote:
I have got a different sort of issue. Customers that watch an entire movie, with no technical difficulties, then demand their money back - because in their opinion - 'the movie sucked' . Tell me how you handle that one.

Yep we had another former manager who would hear that and suddenly run for the pass book. One of his assistants advised him to tell 'em:
"We don't make them, we just run them. NOW GET THE FUCK OUTTA HERE!!!" Unfortunately that never went over too well. Seriously though, people like that need to be put in their place. They've become too accustomed to this Wal-mart / Burger King philosophy of the customer is always right. Most of the time the average, non-theater employed customer really doesn't have a clue about what he / she is talking about.

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 09-05-2004, 10:09 PM:

Umm, actually the customer IS always right. I agree with the more ridiculous things ... but why are people so skimpy with the passes? The pass costs you, the operator, nary a cent (with the exception of the paper the passes were printed on). If all it takes to bring a customer back is a pass, I'm all for that. If it takes a cash refund, so be it. Please the customer and they will return.

"Seriously though, people like that need to be put in their place. They've become too accustomed to this Wal-mart / Burger King philosophy of the customer is always right. Most of the time the average, non-theater employed customer really doesn't have a clue about what he / she is talking about."

I would never "put a customer in their place." Some customers are more difficult then others, but there is always a way to please them. This "philosophy" to which you refer apparently works, because both of those companies are top-notch companies that are growing larger every day, while the average theater company is barely skirting bankruptcy. Do you understand the internal operations of a Wal-Mart? Does that mean that you have no right to complain about anything that goes on there?

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 09-05-2004, 11:16 PM:

quote: Mike Spaeth
Umm, actually the customer IS always right.

Ummmm.... well, that might be the topic for a whole 'nother discussion.

The customer is always "the customer". However, the customer is NOT always RIGHT.

In the years I've had my business, I've tossed quite a number of people who had that "I left my $5 at the boxoffice... I now own a piece of the rock" attitude. They're quite surprised to find that I won't tolerate their verbal abuse of my staff, or disrupting other customers in any way. The end result is that my staff is happy here, and loyal. They know they'll be backed up by management if a customer gets out of line. My customers are also appreciative of the place, knowing they don't have to deal with obnoxious patrons who get away with murder because the weasels that own the business put the customers money ahead of others' enjoyment of the experience.

Sorry to rant on this, but I do not subscribe to that "always right" label. It flat ain't so. Somewhere along the line, a business needs to have minimums as operational baselines... and most businesses I know of actually do have them.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-06-2004, 12:00 AM:

quote: Jack Ondracek
The end result is that my staff is happy here, and loyal. They know they'll be backed up by management if a customer gets out of line.

Hats off to you Jack. Theaters that have loyal staff members who keep the job for lengthy period of time is in my opinion a direct result of top notch management who cares about the people who work for them.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-06-2004, 12:23 AM:

I'm not currently in the theatre business now. I'm speaking as a patron, which is something I have not been for a while. Some of y'all need to try this because only when you've been on the working end of that "put the customer in his place attitude" will you come to understand just how bad it is for business.

Can you imagine how many people I've shared my "Academy 6" horror story with? My uncle has shared this story with some of his friends, too.

There is no way you could subscribe to that mindset once you have been victimized by it. I feel like I have been bullied and -- as you may have noticed -- I'm the sort who pushes back.

I'm determined to get a cash refund. I intend to call and have a word with the General Manager and, hopefully, he/she will be more reasonable. As an old friend would say, "I have seen the monkey, now let me see the organ grinder."

If it turns out that the whole operation is dishonest and unreasonable then I guess I'll write my letter and send it to Buena Vista and The Better Business Bureau.

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 09-06-2004, 04:33 AM:

Most customers are allways right, however the arseholes allways get the "YOU, FUCK OFF"
Don't want them, or need their demands/attitude/trouble/disruption/whatever.

Posted by Daniel Fuentz (Member # 1684) on 09-06-2004, 05:06 AM:

Manny, I understand your situation completely. I have only had words with management at two different theaters, and had totally opposite outcomes both times.

While visiting a Cinemark location in another town, someoen turned the flourescent cleaning lights on during the credits to the movie. Not only did that blind the people still in the theater (There were still about 15-20 people in there) it made the credits unreadable. I went to the concession stand to tell the staff what had happened, and the worker said NOTHING to me. Not even a half-assed apology -- he said absolutely nothing! I sent an email to the theater, never expecting to hear back. I did get a very nice email of apology from the manager, and 4 passes. Because of the way they handled that, I do go back there, even though the theater itself isn't anything special...

Now, the bad experience I had was at a UA 8-plex here in town. I had already had some bad experiences at this theater, but returned against my better judgement because the movie I wanted to see wasn't playing anywhere else in town. About 20 minutes into the movie, I hear what sounds like hammering coming from behind me. This goes on for like 5 minutes, but I don't see anything so I am wondering if someone is standing in the hallway banging on the wall or something. Just as I am starting to get up and check it out, the noise stops. About 5 minutes later, the hammering noise resumes. I lok up at the porthole, and there is a worker, banging away at something while a show is running! I went to the box office, and told the person there that I was watching a movie in #5, and there was loud hammering going on that was VERY annoying. She said she would go up to the booth and tell them to stop. 10 minutes later... more hammering, and the sound of nails being torn out of wood. I went back to the box office and got the manager this time. I said this was the second time I had been up there to complain about hammering going on in the booth, and I would really like it to stop immediately so I could try and watch the rest of the movie. He did not apologize, instead offering the lame excuse "Oh, they're installing a new slide projector..." to which I replied "Can't they do that when a movie isn't showing?" They did finally quiet down until the movie was over, but I was so pissed off that I have never set foot in that theater again. (I would have left the first time, if the movie was showing anywhere else within driving distance!) Well, all the friends I told my story to all said the same thing... "Why weren't they doing that before the theater opened?"

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-06-2004, 02:37 PM:

quote: David Favel
Most customers are allways right, however the arseholes allways get the "YOU, FUCK OFF"
Don't want them, or need their demands/attitude/trouble/disruption/whatever.

In the interest of clarity...would *I* have fallen into this "fuck off" category?

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 09-07-2004, 02:15 PM:

Manny you went to the Academy 6, didn't you see the signpost ahead that you were going to get [sex]

. Sorry about that, but that theatre has been a dump since Mann Theatre dumped it in the early 90's. It was once a beautiful large single screen house and their best house in the area. (before the plexing) The theatre was picked up by the same owner that owns the old GCC South Bay Tri-plex. He just bought the equipment out of the former GCC, later AMC Beverly Connection 6 near the Beverly Center. He bought the booths and what was behind the screen and snackbar equipment recently. And he is a former theatre projectionist too.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 09-07-2004, 08:51 PM:

I can't believe we're even debating this. The ticket seller makes a mistake, the patron doesn't get to see the movie - they get the CASH back that they paid, period. It doesn't matter if it's inconvenient to the theatre - that's not the customer's problem.

The theatre has no right to a profit on that sale because they provided no service.

Technical problem during the movie? OK..I suppose no harm in offering passes first, but anyone who wants a cash refund should get one.

Customer decides they didn't like the movie at the END of a movie? I'd be friendly with the customer, but I would not give them anything. Customer decides they don't like the movie 20 minutes in? As long as they were nice, I'd give 'em a pass.

Lights come on during the credits? I'd apologize, but I'd only give a pass if the customer was really upset and seemed like a film geek who really cared about the credits.

For the record, when I've come out of a film in the 1st 15 minutes and told the manager that I didn't want to see the film because of the technical quality of the presentation or the quality of the print, I have always received cash back. I've NEVER had to ask for it.

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 09-08-2004, 02:40 AM:

quote: Martin Brooks
Customer decides they didn't like the movie at the END of a movie? I'd be friendly with the customer, but I would not give them anything.

I agree, of course. They paid to view a film, and view the film they did. Service provided. There have to be standards to what constitutes the issuing of a pass; and the more the standards favor a customer's whim as opposed to legitimate business practice, the more the theatre will be at the mercy of the cheapskates and whiners. Cash-back requires more rigid standards, since it can be a form of stealing from the theatre. (It's like demanding a refund for a subscription service AFTER the "30 day trial" period, in which you could have cancelled for any reason.) Customer X viewed Y-amount of Z-movie, thus the transaction was secured.

Manny's situation is clearly different. ALL of his claims were legitimate, as has been pointed out. And apparently this is one theatre I'll avoid the next time I'm in the area.

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 09-08-2004, 02:23 PM:

Mike,

I have to disagree... The customer is not always right, and, depending on the customer, you don't always want them back.

At Merriam (for those that don't know, a Cinemark 20 screen near the bad part of Kansas City), we made a determained effort to make nearly 1/3rd of our customers go somewhere else. These customers were largely teenagers who constantly disrupted our operations and the other customers. After we got rid of this 1/3rd of our customers - our attendance had increased by 11%. Basically, we made more people happy getting rid of the trash than we lost by making them feel unwelcome.

Posted by Barry Floyd (Member # 385) on 09-08-2004, 03:09 PM:

I am in total agreement with Jack. The customer is NOT always right, in fact 99% of the time they are blatantly WRONG. They perceive they are right, but in fact they are not.

Good example: Saturday night, I had a guy walk up to the concessions window and exclaim loudly to everyone "These Whoppers are stale, I want another box". I, thinking that's is surely possible with any boxed candy, I just take his old ones and hand him another box. He stands there, opens the new box and says... these are stale too. I go back to the store room, bring up an un-opened case of 48 boxes of Whoppers, and give him one of those. He takes them opens them up and says... "No, these are stale too. I take the candy from him, eat from the same box he had and say.."Nope... that's how it's susposed to taste". Then he says.. I know, I just don't like Whoppers.. can I trade them for a free box of Milk Duds. I looked at him and said NO!! I've opened 4 different boxes of candy, of which none of them I can now sell to anyone else... all because he decided he doesn't like that brand of candy in the first place!

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-08-2004, 03:29 PM:

As a customer, I agree that the customer is not always right. It's not fair to a customer who has a legit beef to wait behind some moron whining about a non issue. It's also not fair to the employee who gets a minimum wage to deal with such unwarranted abuse.

In this case, Manny clearly was a victim and the lady should have bent over backwards(obviously, no pun intended) to make him happy. He should have been refunded his money AND be given a free pass as a gesture to make up for his lost time.

Posted by Brandon Willis (Member # 2345) on 09-09-2004, 11:02 AM:

Jim - how'd you get rid of all the hoodlums? Did you just get the cops to run them out every weekend or what?

Posted by Kyle McEachern (Member # 2250) on 09-09-2004, 05:24 PM:

At one theatre I was at, a memo was sent out from the owner in the monthly newsletter or something of the sort, and the first line was "The customer is NOT always right...but it doesn't matter." -- most of the time yes, they're flat-out wrong, but they're the customer, they're the consumer, they're the one making the effort to come spend money at your establishment, and in general they probably will again if they have a pleasant experience. So if they're flat-out wrong, suck it up, deal with them, laugh at them behind their backs later, and move on. Don't know how I feel about the theory, but that was supposed to be "company policy".

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-09-2004, 09:56 PM:

We had a customer who stood up during the previews and began screaming at the other people in the auditorium: "WE'RE PAYING $8 TO WATCHING FUCKING COMMERCIALS! THIS IS RIDICULOUS!" and on and on and on. He then migrated out to the box office and proceeded to yell at the people in line: "YOU ARE GUYS ARE FUCKING PAYING $8 TO WATCH 20 MINUTES OF GARBAGE! YOU'RE GETTING FUCKING RIPPED OFF!"

Please note I can't remember the entire 'script' but needless to say there were a lot more explitives in the full speech.

So you see, the customer is NOT always right. I'd like to know who here would have given this man passes.

As a side note-I of course agree with his sentiment but his method of expression was clearly uncalled for.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-10-2004, 02:31 PM:

I would have asked the guy to leave, but before that I would have tried to remind him that the commercials were being thrown in for FREE, and the $8 movie he was paying for would be presented uninterrupted.

However, considering his language he was probably a neanderthal anyway and would have probably required the cops for removal.

I am always very cooperative and accommodating with the occasional people who have complaints, but if they start throwing foul language at me, my level of tolerance (and my willingness to give them what they want) starts to drop very rapidly. "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar."

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 09-10-2004, 09:29 PM:

The customer being right applies only to customers. When someone starts cursing, I no longer consider them to be a customer. At that point, they are a nuisance, and are treated as such.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-10-2004, 10:03 PM:

So if you were managing that theater Manny went to and your box office person didn't give him his money after he asked initially, then he spoke to you and dropped "a word" somewhere, you would no longer treat them properly? Sorry, but when the theater is wrong (and in this case, flat out wrong), Manny has every right to do more than just curse, because the theater stole from him.

IMHO, a good manager will have taken care of the problem before the customer feels the need to start cursing in the first place, whether that be staff training, or his/her own manner of handling the problem. Of course there will always be customers who will start yelling and dropping "words" right off of the bat, but that is mostly attributed to being treated poorly in the past (not necessarily by your establishment). Managers have to be able to handle a few naughty words now and then. (Oh by the way...stupid fuck moron shit damn cock asshole Barbara Streisand. See, bad words only hurt if you let them. [Wink]

)

Anyway, don't mistake me for thinking that some customers shouldn't be ran off or allowed to "never come back", because some of them really aren't worth the hassle and problems they do cause. I just felt like turning the last comment around since I got the jest of it as an absolute statement. (Plus I bet Mike's theater runs movies that have naughty words too! [Big Grin]

)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-10-2004, 11:53 PM:

Let me preface this first by saying Manny clearly should have received a cash refund without any delay or double talk. However, one's right to a refund doesn't necessarily give him the right to dole out a bunch of verbal abuse.

quote: Manny Knowles
About getting beligerent: Sometimes it is called for. Sometimes it's the only way to get what you're entitled to.

That really depends on the specific person you're targeting with the beligerence.

99% of time, customers will spray hateful profanity at somebody not even involved with the problem. They just find someone on staff and simply unload. Sorry, but anyone that does that is just being a dick. It is a symptom of just how out of whack our stupid culture has become. America really doesn't do shit at all with regard to instilling the value and virtue of treating other people with respect.

I've had some really good opportunities to do guilt-free venting at people. But I've managed to keep from indulging in it. One example: I was getting my truck's oil changed at, of all places, Wal-Mart. Too long a story on why I had to go there. Anyway, the oil change was done, I'd been in the store looking at DVDs and other shit. I start my truck and the life system computer says: "no engine oil." I shut off the truck, step out and notice a growing puddle of oil underneath the truck on the pavement.

Now, what would a lot of people do? I personally know of some who would go in and start a fist fight over this kind of thing. I held my temper. The manager was so grateful I didn't take off. He gave me a few free oil change coupons and refunded my money. He also sent home the guy who didn't screw in the oil filter correctly. The manager said if I had driven for any significant distance, Wal-Mart would have had to replace that Vortek 5300 engine and anything else that got damaged. I was actually kind a bit proud of myself that I didn't treat anyone like shit over that incident.

Here's another one I like: people who try that "the customer's always right" thing in a totally professional situation.

Our sign company had a job to install the new signage for a chain restaurant that was changing its name. When our install crews arrived on site at the time scheduled they were delayed for hours by construction crew problems (in other words, no f**king organization). My boss, the company owner, went to the location to see what was going on and help with the install.

It was late in the afternoon before our crew was able to proceed with the getting the building signs installed. The construction foreman comes over to my boss and our service manager and starts rudely running his mouth, barking orders about how our guys are going to stay there and work late. He added that he didn't care if it has to take them until past midnight. My boss smiled at the guy and said, "we don't need the work this badly; we're pulling out of here now. Find someone else to install all these signs." Needless to say, that foreman's stunt put the restaurant re-opening days behind schedule. The home office of the restaurant called us up days later, apologetic about the situation. They paid for the time we were there and the work we finished. I guess that foreman got his ass chewed out pretty good. We're still getting that restaurants sign service work.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-11-2004, 12:25 AM:

There's a big difference between somebody "dropping a word" casually and a load of verbal abuse. I'm just saying, if you make a complaint politely and ask for a reasonable solution, 99% of the time you will be taken care of. If you come off like a know-it-all/smartass/demanding loudmouth, you will probably get less satisfaction.

And yeah, we play the dirty-word movies. I never said I was a prude, for fuck's sake. [Big Grin]

Posted by Dominic Espinosa (Member # 2122) on 09-11-2004, 03:13 AM:

Think of it this way...It's Friday night and everybody just got off work. It's been a long Friday, maybe their kid puked on their good pants this morning, maybe their truck suddenly started leaking oil all over the wal-mart floor, whatever. They bring this shit that's been mounting all day, all week, all month to the movies and you tell them they can't bring that $4.00 crappucino from Sturbucks into the theater...You just released the torrent of stress. 90% of the time you just happen to be the unwitting target of this persons stress...They're not really pissed off that you told them to finish the drink outside or in the lobby, they're pissed off because that was the last straw.

Granted, there's some assholes, but comining from a state of mind that this person's not just calling you an asshole but just venting you can help yourself to keep the situation calm.
The best service is the kind of service Bobby got when they f*cked up changing his oil.
When there's a customer with a legitimate complaint honestly apologizing and giving them their moneys worth and a reson to return are the best thing you can do because you're making them feel as though they've accomplished something and you're encouraging them to come back to your establishment and spend money at your candy counter.
And when you send the message to the ass-bites who always start shit eventually they get it. When I worked the floor at a multiplex we were very good about catching movie-hoppers, loud patrons, etc. and after a while the problem stopped. Not because we banned them for life but because we told them "this is how it is, we understand that you want to enjoy the movie, but so does everyone else. so please keep it down".
Of course in some cases it's not only neccesary but also satisfying to say "I don't give a fuck, get out".

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-11-2004, 08:52 AM:

quote: Dominic Espinosa
They bring this shit that's been mounting all day, all week, all month to the movies and you tell them they can't bring that $4.00 crappucino from Sturbucks into the theater...You just released the torrent of stress.

Even if someone had a shitty, stressful day that still gives them no right whatsoever to verbally abuse other people. That kind of bile spreads like a flame. One guy's day is ruined, and then another's is ruined and so on.

I think a parallel was mentioned that a movie playing movies with dirty words in them should have a staff willing to put up with customers using dirty words at them. I don't agree with that. It is one thing to be a third party to watching characters on the screen shouting profanity at each other. A personal confrontation is an extremely different matter; it ain't make believe.

Unfortunately in just about every service oriented business, you have to bite your lip and put up with a lot of pissy attitudes from people. But you have to be willing to draw the line somewhere on just how far customers are allowed to go with venting.

First, a customer should only be allowed to vent at the manager. That's it. If he's angry about the show and cursing about that, then he's still in okay territory even though he's acting like a child. When the venting turns into personal insults and attacks then the customer is walking out onto thin ice. Problems can be solved when the conversation is still that: a conversation.

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 09-11-2004, 01:01 PM:

It's too bad that we cant tell customers our opinions on their behavior, and how they should act in certain situations.

I phuggin hate all customers. [Wink]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-11-2004, 03:07 PM:

Bobby, where is this society you keep talking about? It clearly isn't on this planet. Customers WILL be rude and people WILL take out their bad day on each other.

quote: Bobby Henderson
Even if someone had a shitty, stressful day that still gives them no right whatsoever to verbally abuse other people.

Again, I agree, but just because someone has "no right" to abuse someone doesn't mean it won't happen. Dealing with angry customers is part of the job description when the managers sign up. Also in that is protecting the staff as best as possible from having to deal with customers that are behaving in such a manner. Unfortunately I see staff getting yelled at all the time because the manager doesn't want to come downstairs to face the irate customer and instead sends some passes down the tube so the at/near minimum wage staff member can offer them to the customer, rather than the manager who is getting paid to take the abuse and solve the issue.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-11-2004, 03:41 PM:

Brad, I never said we live in a perfect world or perfect country. In fact, our country is almost as far from perfect as it can be without it being a third world country. I'm merely pointing out the fact that absolutely no one has the right to verbally abuse other people. I've also pointed out examples of how people who fly off the handle can unwittingly make things worse for themselves. What in the hell has happened to people having manners?

Lots of people have this screwed up idea that it is okay to abuse other people, take from others and do all sorts of other selfish shit. It is extremely rare that any of these assholes are called on their shit. Employees have to hold their tougues and just take it. Too many idiots in this world take that lack of a reciprocal response as meaning their nasty behavior is okay. And perhaps they'll push even harder the next time.

Managers often aren't the ones getting the verbal abuse, though they are the only ones that should have to feel the brunt of it (and even that still isn't okay). It seems like the low man on the totem pole gets the crap. There's plenty of minimum wage people in all sorts of lines of work having to put up with all kinds of abuse. It seems like the better you're paid, the less you have to take that kind of garbage. I don't see a lot of high-paid white collar people having to handle that. There are exceptions, depending on occupation, but it is not the norm.

I did get a good laugh from an incident I witnessed a few weeks ago. A bit of justice. I was getting some gasoline for my lawn mower at the corner station. While waiting in line, some guy tries to pay for his stuff with a $100 bill. The store had a sign in clear view saying, "no bills over $20." The customer hit the roof when the cashier wouldn't take his $100. He used personal insults and F-bombs. Another fellow in line barked, "hey, asshole, can't you read that sign? Yeah, that's right. I called you asshole. That's what you are. She can't defend herself since she's on the clock. Pay for your stuff with a smaller bill."

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-11-2004, 05:16 PM:

Dear Santa,

Bobby needs a time machine so he can go back to better times when people had manners. Clearly this whole 2004 thing isn't working for him. If you can't bring him a time machine for Christmas, please at least bring him a calendar. [Wink]

BTW, I love your example about the $100 bill. Occasionally I have seen a customer at a random business fly off of the handle for something ridiculous like that and have made my own comments for the sake of the poor guy/gal having to take it. You might not think it would, but standing up for someone in that kind of position does make you feel good afterward, similar to stopping and helping someone with a broken car on the side of the highway. I do agree that the majority of the time customers are unnecessarily abusive, but then again some establishments DO seem to provoke it, and in such times deserve it (again, going back to Manny's original example).

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 09-11-2004, 05:26 PM:

I wonder about the legality of refusing to accept certain denominations of bills? All paper currency does have that little "This note good for all debts public and private." Thing on it.

Not that that excuses the gentlemen's behavior in any way.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-11-2004, 08:02 PM:

Dear Brad's Mom,

Please break the news about Santa to Brad.

--Manny

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-11-2004, 08:11 PM:

But Santa is my hero!!!

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 09-11-2004, 11:34 PM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
I wonder about the legality of refusing to accept certain denominations of bills? All paper currency does have that little "This note good for all debts public and private." Thing on it.

You can bet some attorney somewhere will probably draw up a lawsuit over the deal, sue a company for $300 million all under the guises of "helping the little guy" and just make things more costly.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-12-2004, 01:19 AM:

Since it was brought up, I might as well rant.

Any business who refuses to take a $100 bill (in addition to other bills) for a purchase over $100 deserves to go out of business, and certainly doesn't deserve my business.

If it's an issue of not wanting that much cash in the till at night, fine, they can drop a $100 bill in the drop safe just as easy as 5 $20 bills.

If it's an issue of not wanting to be short on change, well that's a stupid excuse (that I've got many times) since purchasing something for $105 with a $100 bill and a $10 bill doesn't leave you any shorter on change than if I paid with 5 $20's and a $10 bill.

Actually, gas stations that refuse $50's and $100's piss me off too. It's plainly retarded that I can't pay for $65 or $85 dollars worth of gas using $50's. Even $100's shouldn't be an issue, especially when purchasing $85 in fuel.

Oh, but we don't want to take the hit from accepting a large counterfit bill. Well, sorry, in Canada, and proably pretty much everywhere else, $20 bills are by far the most commonly counterfitted bill. Even before stores started refusing large bills, large bills were never counterfitted more than they are now -- which is a rare occurence.

You don't like my $50, fine, I'll buy a chocolate bar and pay for it with my credit card so you can eat the processing fees. Go for it, refuse to take the card for the $1 purchase and I'll call Visa while standing in your store... just wait to see what happens when they find out you refused to take their card!

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-12-2004, 03:26 AM:

Dear Diary:

Apparently Santa has been in the news recently. I sure hope he's okay.

Still being good for goodness' sake,
Manny.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 09-12-2004, 03:40 AM:

Dear Manny:

Santa was crushed by his sleigh while changing its oil.

--Your Diary.

Posted by Richard C. Wolfe (Member # 431) on 09-12-2004, 10:16 PM:

quote: Dustin Mitchell
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder about the legality of refusing to accept certain denominations of bills? All paper currency does have that little "This note good for all debts public and private." Thing on it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About 25 years ago at a time that I had been complaining about people using large bills to pay for small purchases, the following event happened. I was at that time a dollar house and it was not unusual for people to pay for a $1.00 ticket with a $20.00 bill. Sell $1.00 in goods, give back $19.00. If I had 300 ticket sales which was the average back then, at two tickets per transaction, I would get a twenty for each $2.00 in sales thus requiring $18.00 in change for each of those $2.00 in sales. Needless to say, it required an enormous about of petty cash for a small amount of sales.

One day one of my cashiers said to me: "Mr. Wolfe, you won't believe what I learned today" She was taking some kind of finacial course at the local community college and was told by her instructor that there are treasury laws that determine exactly what amounts of change are allowed in any given financial transaction. As an example... no more then 4 pennies are allowed to be used in any one transaction. No more then one nickel can be used. The same goes for paper bills as well. No more then 4 one dollar bills for any transaction. The reasoning for this is that when the 5th penny or dollar is needed, then a nickel or 5 dollar bill is to be used. This theory continues all the way through the money chain. You are never to use larger bills then the minimum necessary to make payment. Those laws therefore make it illegal to use a $50 or $100 bill for a $10.00 or even $20.00 charge. In fact it would even be illegal to use a $5.00 bill for a $1.00 payment. This all may sound a bit unrealistic, and of course isn't inforced, and I doubt many business' would want to enforce such. It wouldn't be practical.

The laws as she explained it to me, was to protect the seller from having to have unreasonable amounts of change on hand. The consumer has the responsibility to make payment with the smallest possible coin or bill that would require the least amount of change.

I never saw those laws in print. She didn't have a textbook to show me, as she only told me what her instructor had said in a lecture. I have always wondered if indeed that was the truth.

I'm curious if anyone else knows of such.

[ 09-13-2004, 11:48 PM: Message edited by: Richard C. Wolfe ]

Posted by Rachel Gilardi (Member # 1016) on 09-12-2004, 11:16 PM:

quote: Richard C. Wolfe
In fact it would even be illegal to use a $5.00 bill for a $1.00 payment.

No, because you would only be giving back four $1.00 bills in change which is the least amount possible, that is legal. If you were using a $10.00 bill for a $1.00 payment and they gave you nine $1.00 bills in change, that would be illegal.

I also vaguely remember hearing of that law from back when I was in middle school. Of course, that was a many years ago and I don't have anything on paper...but I do remember hearing something similar. I tried searching the web for it with no luck. Not sure if the law is actually true.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-13-2004, 12:19 PM:

quote: Richard C. Wolfe
there are treasury laws that determine exactly what amounts of change are allowed in any given financial transaction.

If that's true (and I would bet all the change I currently have in my pocket that it isn't) it's about the silliest thing I've ever heard. The work of some politician with nothing better to do.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-13-2004, 12:50 PM:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqcur.htm

quote:
Some movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations as a matter of policy may refuse to accept currency of a large denomination, such as notes above $20, and as long as notice is posted and a transaction giving rise to a debt has not already been completed, these organizations have not violated the legal tender law.

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Legal_tender

quote:
Legal Tender is payment that cannot be refused in settlement of a debt.

Legal tender is a concept that is frequently misunderstood: this is often a result of differing legal definitions in different jurisdictions. Cheques, credit cards, debit cards and similar non-currency methods of payment are not generally defined as legal tender. Some jurisdictions may forbid by law, or otherwise restrict, payment other than by legal tender (for example, by outlawing the use of foreign coins and banknotes, or by requiring a licence to perform financial transactions in a foreign currency).

As legal tender can be refused until a person is in debt, vending machines and transport staff do not have to accept the largest denomination of banknote for a single bus fare or bar of chocolate, and even shopkeepers can reject large banknotes. However, restaurants that do not collect money until after a meal is served would have to accept any legal tender, though they would not be obliged to provide change – the restaurant is not in debt, it has been given a gift.

The right of a trader to refuse to do business with any person means a purchaser cannot demand to make a purchase, and so declaring a legal tender other than for debts would be redundant.

Posted by Ron Yost (Member # 1850) on 09-13-2004, 02:49 PM:

The currency laws weren't set up to inconvenience anyone. They were necessary to help the Treasury regulate (regulate, as in how much currency was available in each part of the country, and how it should be used, to avoid shortages) and maintain an even supply of currency across the country, back when communications and transportation weren't nearly as rapid and reliable as they are today. Even with the system, shortages did occur once in a while, as I remember.

Also, nearly every transaction was CASH, for most people. There was practically NO credit, except for houses, cars, and a few other purchases of 'durable goods'. This was true until relatively recently, believe it or not.

Freely-available 'credit', with no collateral, hasn't been around very long. We had a 'cash on the barrelhead' economy for most of our history. If you didn't have the cash, you didn't get the merchandise, in most cases. We lived in a durable (not disposable) society. I think we'd be FAR better off today if credit was much more restricted, and we didn't produce so much disposable non-fixable junk that people wind up paying for forever at high interest rates, but that's a little personal rant. [Mad]

Back to the currency laws. I think it's a perfectly logical system, though obviously some of the details seem silly to us today. It wasn't set up by politicians with nothing better to do. [Big Grin]

Ron Yost

Posted by Richard C. Wolfe (Member # 431) on 09-13-2004, 11:44 PM:

ah yes Rachel, you are so correct. Thanks for setting that straight.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 09-20-2004, 12:32 AM:

Assuming that the information is indeed correct (and currently applicable) then the problem with that law is that it demands that we pay for everything with exact change.

It also brings up a question as to the legality of accepting overpayment and giving change.

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 09-22-2004, 08:27 PM:

quote: Mike Spaeth
Do you understand the internal operations of a Wal-Mart?

Yes. Wal-Mart is a Corporation. A corporation, under the law, is a legal person. However, it is a special kind of person. A person with no moral conciousness, no body to be killed and no soul to be saved, designed specifically by law to be concerned only for their stockholders and profits. The customer is merely an inconvenience which must be addressed in the pathalogical pursuit of profits and power.

Regarding customer service policies, the best policy is not to have one. Deal with each individual customer and complaint on an individual basis. Having a "money back" or "satisfaction guaranteed" policy opens up the floodgates for those customers who watch an entire movie and then demand a refund because it was not enjoyed. And often lie about it.

There is a grocery store chain down here called Publix which has a customer service policy along the lines of: We will never knowingly disappoint you. If your food purchase does not meet your satisfaction, we will cheerfully refund the full purchase price if your meal is not eaten and enjoyed. Those key words -- Eaten and Enjoyed -- have resulted in numerous problems. A friend of mine working for a store in the Boca Raton area has hundreds of stories of little old Jewish ladies bringing back their leftovers and demanding a full refund because the meal was not ENJOYED. [Roll Eyes]

All managers should carry a gun loaded with blanks. Customer starts getting loud, fire off a few shots and pray the customer doesn't have one loaded with live ammo. [Smile]

(note to self: add scene to screenplay)

=TMP=

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-25-2004, 01:06 PM:

George Jenkins (the founder of Publix) is not unlike Sam Walton in that he addressed a growing marketshare and then capitalized on his intuition. In other words: He was just another good ol' boy who got lucky. Now, I don't have anything against George (I think he's dead anyway), but that policy just blows my mind. Great explanation of the corporation as a body, though. Never thought about it like that. [Smile]

On a personal note I was almost related to Jenkins by marriage. My second cousin dated one of his grand-nephews and wedding bells were in the air. I know, its a stretch, but Missy knew that family well . . . until she caught the kid with sombody else. No bullshit story though.