> A cardinal rule in all businesses is that the customer comes first. > Granted there could be an exceptional customer that deserves > to get the boot or who makes unreasonable demands. In this > case, resolving the problem to the customer's satisfaction, > in the big scheme of things, was a rather small concession > for B&H to make considering the volume of business they do, > the monetary amount, and the fact that the mistake was theirs.
I read a very illuminating article in the Harvard Business Review a few years ago which made a strong case for companies dropping the least profitable 10% of their customer base annually and replacing it with a combination of new customers and increased business (or more profitable business) from existing customers. I don't recall every detail but the article defended the idea that unprofitable customers were a cancer on the business, draining resources and costing, not earning, money and as a side benefit, sending these troublesome, difficult, expensive customers to your competition put more burden on them, benefiting you again. I cannot say I necessarily agree with every detail of this argument, but it does have points worth considering. In the particular instance under discussion, various compromise offers were tendered. None were accepted. Lawyers I know say a compromise is when both parties are equally dissatisfied. This customer declined all compromise efforts. Those here arguing this so vehemently should consider there's more to the tale than they know. -- - regards, Henry Posner Director of Corporate Communications B&H Photo-Video, and Pro-Audio http://www.bhphotovideo.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
