SunnyDays2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If I get $7 for the shop and $11 for the burger at
> the "fast Casual" place and it's 2 miles down the
> road...then I think $18 bucks for 20 minutes is
> worth my time


I certainly don't mind considering reimbursement for food as part of my "payment" as it's food I don't have to buy elsewhere. However, very few shops I've done take 20 minutes to perform AND prepare the report to submit. Not even when they're a mile down the road. But even at 40 minutes to an hour, I still don't mind $18, especially if I don't have to cook that night.

When they start promoting MS as

"Well, chalk your work up to helping others. Forbes, the media empire best known for publishing lists such as the “Forbes 400 Richest Americans” and the “World’s Billionaires” has recently published another list. The list is “America’s Most Promising Companies” and consists of 100 companies in a variety of industries. The number one most promising company, according to Forbes, is Smashburger. The article states that they run 131 “fast casual” restaurants throughout the U.S. With annual revenue of 39.4 million, it has gone up 658% from 2008 until 2010. WOW! A company with that kind of growth is doing something right."

then I have a vision of being a charitable institution. I do so many charitable work and will continue to do so for years to come. But I did not get into mystery shopping to do volunteer work. If I feel that I am doing a shop so I can provide added revenue to some businesses through my purchases, then, I stop doing it.

Reimbursement for some food I would not choose to eat anyway is not my idea of compensation. As someone said, until people stop accepting shops that are losing ventures, the industry/company will not pay attention. I just got paid $23.86 for my ever first shop with CORI which started at $4. I would have felt bad had I deleted the company from my list a(or even taken the $4 as a rookie in the company), had I not read Lisa's tip in this forum. To each his own but I had taken a $3 (5 min) phone shop with bonus simply because I wanted to help out a scheduler. I am sure some of us have taken those types at least once in our MS life. But I myself will not do them anymore.

Irene_L.A. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shame on you MF.....I know someone is getting rich
> from this industry, not us.
> We shoppers will never get a raise when companies
> just throw us away for no reason, and move on to
> new shoppers. They are then able to keep prices
> down,
> Boycotting is one way, but of course, then you
> wouldn't get your lousey burger.
> The other thing is (my case), when we get too
> experienced, we also get too
> select and sort of find reasons for not doing the
> 7.00 job, this also allows
> companies to move away from us...kinda like a
> catch 22, experienced shoppers
> feel they should get gas $, higher fees, we bring
> experience, but companies
> like MF just move on. The article was an eye
> opener and believeable.

Why are you assuming that Market
Force is getting rich? The blog said their revenues were 53.8 Million, not that their profit was that amount. The blog said they had 385 empoyees. At the average of $20,000 thier payroll would be nearly 8 Million. If you assume their commissions to shoppers average 20%, that would be another 11 Million. Then there's rent, utilities, payroll tax costs, depreciation, supplies, and other costs.

I hope they are turing a decent net profit...that is the American way. Capitalism (supposedly, anyway) is based on supply and demand. As the economy improves, as we hope it will, that means more demand for Mystery Shopping, and probably less shoppers, as many will return to salaried jobs. That should result in higher fees.

Also consider risk involved for the investor/owners...that's an integral part of Capitalism. What would happen if Market Force was to lose their number one fast food account. They would have to do some fancy stepping to maintain their growth in revenues, and would probably be faced with lower revenues in, at least, the near future.

I think all shoppers, including myself, would like to have higher commissions for our efforts. However, we are Independent Contractors and are certainly influenced by the supply & depand aspect involved in our industry.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/20/2012 03:35AM by cpburt.

I have no doubt there are a select few who really ARE getting rich from the business. I think that'd be the exception, not the norm. Most companies have employees/ICs on a much smaller basis than three digit figures.

While I assume some are making a nice living off their MS companies, it's harder for shoppers because there's always someone new who's willing to work for less. Plus companies having their customer service audited isn't a requirement of the business to operate. So when money gets tight, it's often one of the first things to be cut. I don't think enough companies realize the benefit of shopping on their bottom dollar, either.

One thing I know is I'd NEVER want to try to have my own MS company. I think there are easier ways of making money. God bless those who do and the schedulers, too. I think they're crazier than the rest of us in the business.

> I certainly don't mind considering reimbursement
> for food as part of my "payment" as it's food I
> don't have to buy elsewhere.

I agree. I don't mind the meal as part of the deal. What does become frustrating, however, is when the shopper is penalized with not getting a drink because the enployee didn't ask.

The reimbursment is usually for the smallest order possible, then to not get a drink... seems like just one more way to keep shopper fees low.

Sbrahma: I have to agree with you. As long as there are shoppers who accept low pay, there is no reason for the MSC to pay more. I believe that if a shop is accepted too quickly, the MSC may believe that iy paid too much.

Yes, I am guilty to accepting shops that have paid $3 and reimbursed $2. My reasoning is that I do mystery shopping as a hobby and I won't always come ahead, but I hope that scheduler remembers me when a high paying assignment comes up (happens occasionally.



sbrahma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I really would like to hear from people who are
> taking these $3 shops.
>
> I also go to one location every Saturday where I
> have 1/2 hour to wait while my daughter takes a
> violin lesson. This mall has the famous '$7' shop.
> I can easily do this shop but I wont do it as the
> MS company is exploiting you.
>
> The MS companies will continue to keep the rates
> low if there are people like us taking these low
> paying jobs. We need to smarten up!

Phone shops are dicey. They sound real easy, but if you're not familiar with the MSC's typical input requirements, they may amount to much less than you bargained for. I've only done one purely phone shop, for MSI. Got $3 for it, and it was worth it...I guess. I like MSI generally but I won't jump at the chance for another.

I do the $7 "fast casual" shops frequently. I get paid, I get free food, and I don't have to buy food to feed myself, which to me is like double reimbursement. I don't do them as often as I used to. Some local competitor has been snapping up all the $9 "late night" versions. Grrr. Not all newbies are clueless.

I've done Cori's "home improvement" shop once. I got $12.23 for it, thanks to their weirdo bonus increments. The reimbursement is pitiful, but the store sells all sorts of household items too, like cleaning supplies and such, so there's always something you need that you can just get a discount on. I'd do it again, but not for less than $10. The store ain't that close.

I don't believe doing a $3 shop buys any goodwill at all. What it shows is that the shopper will work for peanuts. I've become a "go-to guy" for several companies because I'm willing to take last-minute shops, and because my reports are better than average, not because I've taken $3 shops. The MSCs have to pay up when they call me, and they do. I'm not going out of my way for a silly hero citation.

Pay should be commensurate with quality and effort. Anyone who has edited for an MSC will attest that a large percentage of reports are utter @#$%&. What this demonstrated for me is that my reports are worth more. If an MSC wants $3 reports, then that's their prerogative. But I won't be doing them. I deserve better, and so do many of you.

I did a phone shop that paid little. However, it took no time at all to do. But I did not get paid because I asked a "leading question." I was careful to follow the guidelines and not ask things they said I shouldn't ask but, apparently, when I asked a question that a real shopper would ask, that was considered a "leading question," so I was stiffed out of the little money they offered. Will never attempt that shop again. I'll bet they still submitted the report because there was enough on the phone call to evaluate the employee. The thing is, they seem desperate to get these shops done but never change the rate. Guess getting the shops done isn't all that important to them.

That really irks me when they don't pay because I too feel like they probably went ahead and sent it in. Many require an itemized receipt but if you pay cash, most places don't even give you a receipt! I recently did a shop where I didn't realize that the only receipt I was given was from my debit card transaction. I emailed the scheduler and would not submit the report until I heard back. There was no way I was going to submit a report they could use but not get paid because I had the wrong type of receipt.

cpburt Wrote:

>If you assume their commissions to shoppers average 20%, that would be
> another 11 Million. Then there's rent, utilities, payroll tax costs, depreciation, supplies, and other costs.

People don't go into business without wanting to make money and, as you said, that is within their right for precisely the reasons you listed. I think your estimation of 20% as the shopper fee is extremely high. They also play games with the fees. If they are having companies sign contracts for one to two years then it would follow that client is paying the same for the service throughout the length of the contract. It would also follow that the shopper fees would remain consistent for the duration of the contract. If they begin a contract being able to pay shoppers $12 only to find after paying that for a month that they are losing money, how smart would they be?

cpburt -- Why are you assuming that Market Force's executive suite isn't getting rich off their business while paying the workers the bare minimum?

Lisa -- There is no guarantee that the three year contract does not include some kind of annual increase. Some have escalation clauses, bonus clauses, etc. Since we don't have access to those documents, we have no idea what they've negotiated. Here's the thing, The $53 million "gross" income level is a hell of a lot of money for this particular company. Unfortunately, a lot of people have bought into the theory that exploiting the workers who do the day-to-day tasks that makes the company profitable and successful is acceptable. I believe most of us participating on this board would say it is not acceptable. The only way to know what the real story is is to get a hold of the annual report. Making assumptions and the defending those assumptions is a little nonsensical to my mind.

The
> only way to know what the real story is is to get
> a hold of the annual report. Making assumptions
> and the defending those assumptions is a little
> nonsensical to my mind.


At over 50 millon in revenue, it's safe to say that the top executives and owners are being paid much better that we are. Unfortunately, MF is a privately held company, so the records are not available.

I don't know of any of the companies that are public.

I did not get an itemized receipt one time for a carry out shop with MF. I received a very nice letter from MF telling me to get one the next time. They also paid me.

They did pay me and also told me to get one next time, but I have had some refuse to do so, so I check before submitting the report.

I am finding compensation and time are not necessarily related.
PHD Can you elaborate?
"This is why the federal government is moving to "protect" shoppers from themselves."

avitoots, that was part of the point of my post. I doubt the contract is written with the cost to go down yet the fees for shops are often dropped with 30 to 90 days. Sure there is the law of supply and demand, but that doesn't stop it from bordering or crossing into unethical when they take advantage of a crappy economy and people who are desperate for income. Personally, if a client is going to pay me X amount of dollars for a year which then allows me to hire workers at X amount of dollars, I would not continually lower their rate of pay. But that's just me.

I am new to MS also. What I've been learning is to perform shops that pay at least .50 cents per minute (e.g. $30/hour) to make it worthwhile. I know that is not do-able all the time but it's a figure to shoot for.

I am also learning about how important MS/SS/Evaluators are to MSC and their clients. So it seems logical that MSC should pay to keep trusted quality shoppers. MSC and their clients are very dependent on the work that MS perform -- that MS are a valuable part of a company's market research. The MS pay scales should reflect such important work that MS perform, we are the eyes and ears in the field. MS are where management cannot be.

Think about the tremendous service MS are providing for MSC and their clients. Shopping is, or could be, our livelihood if paid a livable commission. Maybe they don't pay more because we don't ask/demand more for our valuable service.
There will always be people willing to work for less. MS should not be on the bottom of the pay scale. That's the same mentality many "employers" have and is one reason for high turnover.
If the elephant will work for peanuts... I'm just sayin...

I agree with most everything you said, UnderCover. I once worked for a retail company and the mystery shop grades were included as part of the management compensation. That is not unusual. Managers at the company would likely be suprised, however, to discover that a part of the compensation they received was based on a report the company paid just a few dollars for.

As to your being paid fifty cents per minute... good luck with that. While some shops do pay well (and fairly), as one MS employee told me once, they base pay on what would be considered minimum wage. (It seems any more that "minimum wage" would be an increase.)

Good luck.




UnderCover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am new to MS also. What I've been learning is to
> perform shops that pay at least .50 cents per
> minute (e.g. $30/hour) to make it worthwhile. I
> know that is not do-able all the time but it's a
> figure to shoot for.
>
> I am also learning about how important
> MS/SS/Evaluators are to MSC and their clients. So
> it seems logical that MSC should pay to keep
> trusted quality shoppers. MSC and their clients
> are very dependent on the work that MS perform --
> that MS are a valuable part of a company's market
> research. The MS pay scales should reflect such
> important work that MS perform, we are the eyes
> and ears in the field. MS are where management
> cannot be.
>
> Think about the tremendous service MS are
> providing for MSC and their clients. Shopping is,
> or could be, our livelihood if paid a livable
> commission. Maybe they don't pay more because we
> don't ask/demand more for our valuable service.
> There will always be people willing to work for
> less. MS should not be on the bottom of the pay
> scale. That's the same mentality many "employers"
> have and is one reason for high turnover.
> If the elephant will work for peanuts... I'm just
> sayin...

It would not be hard to figure out which companies have that mentality, such as Market Force, Trendsource, GFK, CORI and Second to None. The reports for Market Force show how little they think of their shoppers and how low their expectations are since many are not much more comprehensive than the survey on the back of receipt. Luckily, not all companies fit that mold and there are many which put a high value on their shoppers. Those companies do not expect shoppers to settle for minimum wage.

qpone Wrote:
> As to your being paid fifty cents per minute...
> good luck with that. While some shops do pay well
> (and fairly), as one MS employee told me once,
> they base pay on what would be considered minimum
> wage. (It seems any more that "minimum wage" would
> be an increase.)

What's always been amazing to me, Lisa, is that companies talk so much about customers service being the number one priority. Companies like Nordstrom and Ritz Carlton hotels have build brands based on customer service.

Others say that customer service is number one, and then they pay such a small amount to have it evaluated.

I've never been able to square those two concepts in my mind.



LisaSTL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would not be hard to figure out which companies
> have that mentality, such as Market Force,
> Trendsource, GFK, CORI and Second to None. The
> reports for Market Force show how little they
> think of their shoppers and how low their
> expectations are since many are not much more
> comprehensive than the survey on the back of
> receipt. Luckily, not all companies fit that mold
> and there are many which put a high value on their
> shoppers. Those companies do not expect shoppers
> to settle for minimum wage.
>
> qpone Wrote:
> > As to your being paid fifty cents per minute...
> > good luck with that. While some shops do pay
> well
> > (and fairly), as one MS employee told me once,
> > they base pay on what would be considered
> minimum
> > wage. (It seems any more that "minimum wage"
> would
> > be an increase.)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2012 02:11AM by qpone.

I'm new to the business and this is an eye opener. Thank you. I have been taking some low paying jobs just to get some scores and get my name out there. Is that wrong?

385 employees? Does that seem really high to anyone else, especially for a $50M technology company? If all of them are full time, that equates to $129,000 in sales per employee, which isn't exactly great.

Where they are a private company, we'll never know their true level of profit, but having that many employees tells me one of two things. Either they are turning an obscenely high profit and can afford to keep a large staff, or they're not very profitable at all.

Or, they're full of BS and trying to make themselves sound bigger than they are. Which given that this is a company run by marketing people, is entirely possible. (I work in marketing, so I'm allowed to say that ).

deleted



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2012 09:44PM by Irene_L.A..

I need to say if some of these smaller companies can pay twice the amount than MF, Cori or Bestmark, these larger more established companies should meet them. Business is business and I'm all for that, but making $$ in spite of the shoppers that write your reports, will in the long run keep you elimimating shoppers and seeking newbies. My half a dz. small companies pay well monthly, do not send out annoying emails for jobs out of your territory, call when they know something good comes up in your area, and are gracious when dealing with you. I have an excellent relationship with NSS, get gas $ withoug begging, and so be it.
We have our choices and for MF, Bestmark, Cori and such, nothing will change them because they are doing well for themselves, and they simply don't care
about anything else....we can move on as I have. No wasted time "watching"
Cori slowly raise their fees from 3.00 to 7, then (oh dear) to 10.00.
How much they make is not our business, how much we make is all we should be
concerned about.

qpone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A while back I took some phone shops that paid $6
> each. Seemed reasonable so I took several dozen.
> It turned out that the MS company wanted a virtual
> transcript of the conversation. Each shop took
> more than an hour. I learned my lesson and didn't
> take any more of those.
>
> In the last few days another company sent an email
> offering phone shops that paid ... $1.75 each.
>
> If the MS companies go much lower, we may be
> paying them for the privilege...


You are paying for the privilege if you are not a businessperson and do not value your time. Or maybe you are an Amway distributor and you go to malls to ambush people. Any contact is a good contact while you are waiting on line you can offer the opportunity. You are not there for the shop you are out to find a warm body and you can not do that at home watching TV.

On second thought who would want to duplicate that, The Amway business has advance since the days when they went to the mall and jumped out from behind plants. Sorry Amway people whom might be reading. Some seniors are lonely and they go to the mall just to be around people. There are so many reasons why a person might do the shops that others will not. I am not one of them. A Mickey burger may look like a banquet to some people.

I only go out when it is profitable for ME. I do not give charity to companies who will not pay a reasonable amount for my time and expenses.

jersey07032 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am finding compensation and time are not
> necessarily related.
> PHD Can you elaborate?
> "This is why the federal government is moving to
> "protect" shoppers from themselves."

There were posts on the forum indicating that the Federal Government is attempting to legislate the Mystery Shopping Industry. I Assume that is why the IC program on Jobslinger to sent invoices and appear to be legitimate independent contractors was instituted.

Many Shoppers and Marketing independent contractors are being exploited because they are desperate. That is all they have, even if it is $4 and a Mickey Burger. The government does not like that! It violates and skirts the minimum wage laws.

dal, I don't believe your approach is wrong, everyone has to start somewhere. Taking multiple jobs with the same company establishes your relationship with that company and lets them know you are a reliable shopper and keep your agreements. Lower paying jobs tend to be easier, and are a good place to start.

Don't think for a moment, however, that once you are established your name goes to the top of the list and shopping companies are just waiting for your application for the job.

The old saying about things being "a dime a dozen" is true, and in this case it is shoppers who are... and unfortunately, a dime seems to be about what they pay.


dal438 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm new to the business and this is an eye opener.
> Thank you. I have been taking some low paying jobs
> just to get some scores and get my name out there.
> Is that wrong?

You cannot determine the rate the client is paying for reports based on our fees. There is probably quite a mark up to cover the schedulers, editors, people who create the shop program, administrative expenses, etc. The only way to truly know what's going on is, as I said before, to see an annual report. If they are privately held, then we wouldn't have access to that information.

As far as the federal government regulating the MS industry, I don't believe the government is singling out the MS industry. What they're doing, and have been doing for the past few months, is tightening the enforcement of IRS regulations that determie who is an employee and who is an IC. I am involved in the pet sitting business and it is discussed quite a bit. If a business is telling someone when (set hours) and how (beyond the guidelines) to do a job, then the person is an employee. Many large companies, like Microsoft, have had people on their books as ICs who were required to work specific hours. The government started to crack down on that.

As far as paying us, businesses long ago devalued American workers' labor so we can't expect much different until that attitude changes.

qpone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What's always been amazing to me, Lisa, is that
> companies talk so much about customers service
> being the number one priority. Companies like
> Nordstrom and Ritz Carlton hotels have build
> brands based on customer service.
>
> Others say that customer service is number one,
> and then they pay such a small amount to have it
> evaluated.
>
Neiman Marcus requires a quality report. They do not offer a fee, but the lunch an evaluator is required to purchase is very expensive.

While a shopper can buy the same lunch in a diner for $30 less,the quality makes the same lunch (items) so much more enjoyable. Not to mention you get to live at a level way beyond your income level for about an hour and a half. When I get a taste of driving an Infiniti and eating lunch in a fine dining atmosphere it inspires me to make an effort to reach that income level in my other business.

I can tell rubbing elbows at a higher social level elevates me when I look at my effort and my figures a month or two down the road. $4 & $7 shops I do not believe would have the same effect on me. II I were forced to do $4 and $7 assignments knowing my expenses and time involved would have me working for a depressing compensation, I would feel dismal and hopeless.

I would sooner stay home with my head under the covers and feel sorry for myself than be taken advangage of by an MSC. I can not imagine anyone giving a quality report when the MSC thinks I am worth only $2 an hour after expenses. Remember you must include the time you put the assignment on your bookeeping system and travel to and from the location, fuel ($4 does not get you far, if you are doing multiple shops the expense is shared and averaged) and reporting it when you get home.

Some clients, like Neiman Marcus. want an evaluator to enjoy the shop and report accordingly. The servers and manager and other staff attend to you like you are a millionaire when you are in fact as they say in Texas, wearing a ten gallon hat and have no cattle but you act the part very well.


> I've never been able to square those two concepts
> in my mind.
>
>
>
> LisaSTL Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It would not be hard to figure out which
> companies
> > have that mentality, such as Market Force,
> > Trendsource, GFK, CORI and Second to None. The
> > reports for Market Force show how little they
> > think of their shoppers and how low their
> > expectations are since many are not much more
> > comprehensive than the survey on the back of
> > receipt. Luckily, not all companies fit that
> mold
> > and there are many which put a high value on
> their
> > shoppers. Those companies do not expect
> shoppers
> > to settle for minimum wage.
> >
> > qpone Wrote:
> > > As to your being paid fifty cents per
> minute...
> > > good luck with that. While some shops do pay
> > well
> > > (and fairly), as one MS employee told me
> once,
> > > they base pay on what would be considered
> > minimum
> > > wage. (It seems any more that "minimum wage"
> > would
> > > be an increase.)