It’s an age-old story: Single girl, single boy. She’s connected, he’s from the other side of the tracks. He pursues her, she declines (and declines, and declines).
But eventually, he finds the magic words. She gives him a chance. They date. Things get serious.
She ignores warnings from those familiar with the fellow while introducing (and defending) him to the family. They make their relationship official, giving him creditability within the circle of influence he’s admired from afar. They’re the golden couple at the Big Holiday Party.
Then, after the holidays have passed, her phone stops ringing. She calls, she emails. She wrestles for scraps of conversation.
After months of heartache, she quietly takes off the ring.
Then it happens. The inevitable. People begin asking questions.
Sadly, this mirrors the brief relationship between The 3/50 Project and American Express. [click here to continue…]
Earlier this summer, two interesting (read: brow raising, eye popping, make-you-gasp-for-air) posts appeared on The 3/50 Project’s Facebook page, each beginning with the following line:
Good news! Juice is donating $1000 to The 3/50 Project….
For a grass roots organization in need of capital, comments like that tend to get one’s attention. Fast.
Emails were swapped, phone calls made…
…and Juice in the City sent a $1,000 check to The 3/50 Project. Color me thrilled.
Then my self-built pothole appeared. [click here to continue…]
This week, Facebook dropped their (ill-conceived) “Deals” program—a relief to those of us who understand how financially crippling these hit-and-run-discounts are for the vast majority of brick and mortars. My post on The 3/50 Project’s Facebook page about the topic resurrected the debate between consumers who love getting things at cost (or below) and the business owners who have been financial crushed by these so-called “deals.”
Bottom line? Consumers don’t see the bottom line. They have no idea what these “deals” cost a merchant, how many big chains use them to crush local merchants, or how little return business actually comes from these “deals”…which is why I’m going to stick my neck out and share an analogy that will hopefully put this in perspective. [click here to continue…]
This is the kind of stuff that makes my blood boil.
The stationery industry has faced it for years—brides come in to touch, feel, and get professional advice while searching for wedding invitations, then take that valuable knowledge online, or worse, home as a DIY project.
The assumption that stores provide floor samples and professional advice for free is absurd; they pay for those samples, floor displays, and employee training, all for the purpose of making a sale. Using those resources with no intent of purchasing from the providing retailer is just this side of shoplifting. Yes, my language is strong on this point, but as a past retailer who watched the practice first hand, I know what it costs in very real financial terms.
A lot.
This past weekend, USA Today pushed the “use-em-and-leave-em” concept to the extreme, actually instructing consumers to peruse computers in local stores, then go online to make the purchase, complete with a list of online discounters happy to make the sale (on a brick and mortar’s back).
States are gasping for air as their sales tax revenues drop. Commercial property tax roles shrink as brick and mortars go dark. And our quality of life, directly connected to emergency services, sidewalks, streets, state agencies, school programs, park systems, etc. suffer.
I understand the high cost of outfitting kids for school. No question. But telling consumers it’s okay to “use” a local store’s resources with zero intent of making a purchase is just plain wrong.
Here’s the article—I hope retailers reading this will head on over there and add their two cents to the comments. Your voices need to be heard.
Well, color me happy. The initial launch phase of LookLocal is going beeeee-autifully, thanks to all you wonderful “pro-local” souls out there. So…where do things stand moving forward?
Android version
The Android platform is a bugger to build—more challenging than Apple’s iOS platform. Our genius coder is banging away on it, but admits it ain’t pretty (translated: it doesn’t function smoothly or as expected). As someone not open to launching a half-baked app, I’ve told the developer we’ll move forward only after everyone is convinced the Android version is bulletproof. Might take a while longer than expected, but I refuse to hand you something that will disappoint.
Updating those who didn’t update before
I’ve taken a lot of heat from Supporters who didn’t update their records in May and June, upset because they’re on the website but not in LookLocal. Admittedly, about the twenty-third time someone on Facebook got angry about it, my own patience began to wear thin (it stings to be chewed on when you busted your buns to help folks out with something that’s free to begin with). [click here to continue…]
And NOW, kind souls, we change the game.
How many groups and communities out there are publishing lists of independent brick and mortar merchants? (Answer: Not enough) How many consumers actually carry that list around? (Answer: Even fewer)
How do we fix this?
Answer: We give them the list on their smart phones.
Welcome to LookLocal, The 3/50 Project’s brand-spankin’-new iPhone app, connecting consumers to locally owned, independent brick and mortar merchants with a tap or two of a finger. [click here to continue…]
