RadioShack Stops Being Nosy
jackbang writes "One small but positive step in the gradual erosion of personal privacy and increase of corporate intrusiveness - RadioShack will no longer ask for your name and address when all you want to do is buy some batteries. Now if only they would agree to remove the motion sensor that rings a bell every time someone walks in or out of the store..." Always freaked me out being asked my address just to buy some solder or something.
Also, I remember when they put up the privacy policy in late 2000. It didn't seem to allay customers fears. Instead, I would tell them to just give me fake information
13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.
I made a purchase at Toys R Us one day and gave them my info. I got a call about a week later. They wanted feedback on my shopping experience in exchange for a $5 gift certficate. I spent the time with them, but never got the certificate.
I don't think they were trying to mislead me, but they blew an opportunity there. I'm happy to share my info as long as they reward me for it, but failing to send me the gift certificate changed my mind about that. Now, when I go there, I decline to give them my info when they ask for it and I explain why.
Companies like Radio Shack need to realize that they have to reward their customers if they're made to jump through extra hoops.
I used to work for a Radio Shack dealer store and the pressure to get the addresses was constant because we got money from Radio Shack for each address we provided. When I was taken to task about my low address count one day, my buddy was offered up as an example: HE got over 90%. So I asked him how he did it. His secret? He used to copy random names down from the phonebook when the store was slow!
Yes, you got added to a mailing list--Radio Shack's. Nobody else got your address. They were religious about that and if anybody ever suggested to the people in marketing that it was otherwise, they witnessed somebody turning purple with apoplexy.
They jealously guarded their lists because they viewed their mailing list as a competitive advantage. Nationwide, marketers who send direct mail advertisements are ecstatic if they get a response rate of 1/2 a percent. Radio Shack had something like a 40% response rate on its direct mail advertisements. They weren't about to give that up to anybody else.
I myself have been victimized by this. They keep track of what you have bought and returned. If you returned too many things that costs a bit ( The stuff they make commision on ) they will stop selling you anything and have that manager tell you that you can't buy the item. I have had this happen on more than one occasion.
I can assure you that this is totally commision related. The last time they told me NO they looked up my history and said "You return too much stuff". This is what is so bad about tracking your name is now the salesman can check your name to see if your someone he should waste his time on.
I remember a few years ago, when Radio Shack was the talk of the takeovers and such. The customer data base was valued as much as the rest of their assets combined.
As it has already been said you can just say no anytime your asked for your personal info. But what you may not know ( or may not have thought of) is WHY they ask you in the first place. Ok yeah, tracking statitics and what not, but that's not what I mean. The reason this still goes on in many retail stores is because people don't say no. They figure it's part of the process of purachasing whatever. If people would start refusing to divulge information, companies would be less apt to attempt to get it from you.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
Well, one day (this must have been 1989) I went in and bought something minor and the shop assistant asked for my name and address. Well, I knew darned well what they wanted it for, because I was getting three Tandy catalogues all with different variations of my name and address so I told him "no".
He said: "But you have to give me your name and address."
"Why?"
"Because I can't sell you this without it."
"Rubbish. You just want to put me on your mailing list."
Well, the argument proceeded and he wouldn't sell me the stuff and frankly REALLY pissed me off big time.
This was a bad move, because in the UK you're not allowed to collect personal information to store on a computer system without a) making it clear an b) registering that you are going to do so.
I checked Intertan's (Tandy's parent company) registrations details. It turned out that they hadn't registered properly. BIG mistake number 2.
So, I complained to the Data Protection Registrar that I believed that Intertan were breaking the law. They tried to contact Intertan. Intertan refused to talk to them. BIG mistake number 3.
Eventually this escalated and finally Intertan caved in and stopped asking. Well at least for a couple of years. I stopped shopping there in the end. Mind you, so did everyone else and they shut down :)
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Being the sort who appreciates some security in my everyday transactions, I actually like it when the Radio Shack people ask for my zip code. (They've never asked me for a name, is that unusual?) The fact that they have some idea of where they sell more batteries is fine by me -- it allows them to build market demographics without a notable loss of my privacy, and I get improved availability of products I like.
:)
Likewise, I've been very encouraged to see some of those automated gas pumps now requiring that you key in a zip code from the billing statement -- not just possessing a credit card. Since I'm already providing my name and billing information through the credit card, this is not the invasion of privacy that some folks think it is. Yay authentication and authorization!
On the other hand, it used to be particularly irritating when I wrote a check and a clerk would insist that I provide a home phone number or even two phone numbers instead of some useful authorization info. (They're permitted to ask in my locale, but not allowed to require it.) After a particularly nasty incident at Ikea a few years ago -- when I declined to provide the number an assistant manager looked up my name in the phone directory and wrote the info on my check anyway, accompanied with a lot of foolish and insulting comments -- I decided to print TeleCheck's local phone number on the checks as a home phone. It doesn't stop the bad practice, but at least it protects my privacy a bit without wasting my time. (And it never comes up as a bad number
Most frustrating of all (recently) was an encounter with a certain large bank. To make a long story short, they informed me that electronic funds transfers can be executed by any merchant with my bank routing and account numbers. When I pointed out that the numbers are identification and not authorization, they replied (paraphrased) "Posession of the number IS authorization. If you didn't give them authorization, they wouldn't have the number." Can you believe a major bank thinks that possession of your authentication data is equal to authorization? AAUUUGGGHHH!!! When I pressed further and pointed out that the account & routing data is on every check that anyone writes, I was informed that they (the bank) know it's awful, but that's what the US Federal Reserve rules require. Double-AAUUUGGGHHH!!!
IMHO it's disappointing when the local Chevron station provides better financial transaction security than the bank managing my 401K.
-Jon
I think not...(*poof*)
All you had to do was say "No". I dunno about you guys, but the local Radio Shack people just let it go after that. It's not like you *had* to give your information.
I'm the stranger...posting to