Why Toys R Us Online Stinks...VENT

[tinkmom2]

On Saturday I went to use a $40.00 gift card at Toys r us. I purchased two Leap Frog Explorer games and had to use my paypal card to contribute towards the total for shipping. For some reason my paypal didn't work and at 12:25pm Toys r us sent me both a suspension of order and a order cancellation. I tried to do the order online again only to find out it will take 3-5 days for my gift card to be credited back.
I called Toys R us and they could not explain why my order was suspended and cancelled at the same moment. Most retailers will at least give you a chance to use a different payment method.
So it's going on Thursday and still my gift card balance is zero. They have lost my business that's for sure!
PS It also bugs me that the store will not match the online prices and vice versa.

 

[kaytieeldr]

While it does stink that they still haven't credited back your gift card - do keep after them - respectfully, I don't see any reason why a bricks & mortar store should be expected to price match the company's online store. Each has VERY different operating costs. It's way more expensive to run a b&m store.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

While it does stink that they still haven't credited back your gift card - do keep after them - respectfully, I don't see any reason why a bricks & mortar store should be expected to price match the company's online store. Each has VERY different operating costs. It's way more expensive to run a b&m store.

IMO--take it for what it is worth

An on-line store is just an extension of the B&M store.

TRU bugs me b/c when you mention their on-line store, you might as well be mentioning walmart. It's like it is their wicked stepsister or something. I have dealt with other venders, and their B&M stores don't respond the same way. It is very weird.

 

[Yoshi]

I don't like the shipping costs for video games on their site and the bad inventory control that they have. $5 shipping for 1 game is high enough but a lot of times when you add multiple games, it still charges $5 per game. $15 standard shipping for 3 games that weigh under a pound total is ridiculous.

 

[SandrA9810]

I was pissed at the B&M store here because they were running a sale on B1G1 half off on disney movies... But never recieved any copies of the blu ray sorceror apprentice. And only had like 5 other blu ray Disney titles, which I have all of them. I was so glad to be using the last of the gift card. The manager cashed out the remainder 3.75 on the card. Which they can cash out any below 10$.

 

[ssawka]

IMO--take it for what it is worth

An on-line store is just an extension of the B&M store.

TRU bugs me b/c when you mention their on-line store, you might as well be mentioning walmart. It's like it is their wicked stepsister or something. I have dealt with other venders, and their B&M stores don't respond the same way. It is very weird.

Yes, it is very much like Walmart. Walmart also sets different prices in their B&M stores versus online. Sometimes the prices are quite a bit different. Last year I bought DW a sewing machine (which she still has not used! ). Anyway, online it was $79, in the store it is $99. In addition to operating costs, online the stores know their competitors are simply a click away. Checking out a competitor at a B&M is far more difficult. Although, smart phones are changing that as well.

 

[Swimalie]

I won't shop at Toys R Us any more because 72% of their toys have been tested as "toxic".

http://www.valheart.com/blog/health-issues/despite-promises-toys-r-us-is-still-selling-‘toxic-toys’/

 

[bicker]

An on-line store is just an extension of the B&M store.

If that were true, the manager of the B&M store would get credit for sales made online. That isn't the case, even though consumers may wish it was.

 

[ssawka]

I won't shop at Toys R Us any more because 72% of their toys have been tested as "toxic".

http://www.valheart.com/blog/health-issues/despite-promises-toys-r-us-is-still-selling-‘toxic-toys’/

With all due respect, this article seems unjustly biased against TRU. Now I'm not a huge TRU fan, but is TRU selling many toys that are different from what the other stores are? Granted, TRU has the biggest market share and should be using their influence to put pressure on the manufacturers, however if that Barbie Dream House (example only) that is for sale at TRU is made with harmful chemicals, then so is the one for sale at Target, as is the one for sale at Walmart.

 

[#1hoosierfan]

I actually need to call TRU today.

I placed an order right after Thanksgiving. One of the items didn't come. When I checked the status, it had been cancelled..... no e-mail to tell me that. They also did not credit my account because they said they would ship it when it came in..... after Christmas. Well that wouldn't work. Now I am on my 3rd phone call trying to get my gift card credited back

Very frustrating!

 

[Fierce Fairy]

I have an issue with TRU cohesion as well. I purchased a toy from a TRU express store in the mall. I saw a better one a few days later at the stand alone store right behind the mall. I purchased that toy then asked the cashier if I could return the mall purchase here, she said sure we own the TRU express in the mall. I think great one stop. I get it out the car and was stopped by door greeters saying "We don't sale that here, you can't return it!" I am like I purchased this at the TRU express in the mall behind you and your associate said I could, it is all TRU right. I was told "NO" go to the other store. I was pissed. I had to brave the mall two days before Christmas. TRU needs to get it together.

 

[bicker]

TRU needs to get it together.

I'm not so sure. Perhaps they should just change the name of the kiosk, and come up with yet a third name for their online store, and work harder to make sure customers know the policies that provide for the separation between the various divisions within the company. With folks like Amazon.com out there, it is untenable to cover the overhead costs of offering a B&M experience, while folks can exploit pricing that, by its nature as an online price, must compete with retailers that don't offer the B&M experience.

Heck, the reality is actually much darker: Given the low overhead enjoyed by very very successful online retailers, it seems plausible that there is no rationale for trying to sell some things in a B&M store anymore. An increasingly small number of online Luddites will eventually be the entirety of the B&M customer-base for those things, and the B&M store will continually incur the costs of providing pre-sales service to customers who will actually give their money to someone else. Every time you buy something in a B&M store that is also available online, you should be thankful to the retailer for deigning to still trust you'll do business there (but I doubt most consumers will give retailers such credit, due to their antipathy toward businesses in general).

 

[ssawka]

I'm not so sure. Perhaps they should just change the name of the kiosk, and come up with yet a third name for their online store, and work harder to make sure customers know the policies that provide for the separation between the various divisions within the company. With folks like Amazon.com out there, it is untenable to cover the overhead costs of offering a B&M experience, while folks can exploit pricing that, by its nature as an online price, must compete with retailers that don't offer the B&M experience.

Heck, the reality is actually much darker: Given the low overhead enjoyed by very very successful online retailers, it seems plausible that there is no rationale for trying to sell some things in a B&M store anymore. An increasingly small number of online Luddites will eventually be the entirety of the B&M customer-base for those things, and the B&M store will continually incur the costs of providing pre-sales service to customers who will actually give their money to someone else. Every time you buy something in a B&M store that is also available online, you should be thankful to the retailer for deigning to still trust you'll do business there (but I doubt most consumers will give retailers such credit, due to their antipathy toward businesses in general).

What the B&M's need to do is change their business model. It is no longer useful for customers to go to a B&M store to see shelves lined with the same products they can get online for less. Stores need to offer demo version, allow the customer to take the products out for a "test drive" so to speak. That's what Apple did and look at how successful the Apple stores have been. They have been so successful in fact that Apple is helping Disney redesign their retail stores. http://www.ifoapplestore.com/db/2010/05/10/apple-helps-disney-recast-its-retail-stores/

 

[tyniknate]

I hate shopping at TRU. Our store isn't that old (several years) and it is filthy and disorganized. It's the same with every TRU store I've been to. I no longer shop there - the stores are just so dirty. And dont even get me started on their customer service!

 

[bicker]

What the B&M's need to do is change their business model. It is no longer useful for customers to go to a B&M store to see shelves lined with the same products they can get online for less. Stores need to offer demo version, allow the customer to take the products out for a "test drive" so to speak.

How is that going to ensure that they don't "test drive" it with the B&M store and then go ahead and make the purchase online, to save money?

Perhaps you're suggesting that they charge for the "test drive", with a promise that the rental fee would be applied to the purchase if the purchase is made through the B&M store? That would make your suggestion seem more workable.

That's what Apple did and look at how successful the Apple stores have been.

Apple has created a culture that people want to engage in. Yes, that's another approach for sure, but it generally only works for products and services that people are willing to form an emotional attachment to. I said this quite often: Customer loyalty is the willingness of a consumer to pay a premium for something, and Apple fans are loyal, for sure: They readily pay more than they have to, because of how Apple has worked to foster such emotional attachment.

However, people are much more likely to form emotional attachments to computers and smart phones - things that adult-purchasers use continually, every day - than, say, their children's toys.

They have been so successful in fact that Apple is helping Disney redesign their retail stores.

It goes without saying that Disney is another realm where that emotional attachment is cultivated and trumps the cold, calculating consumerist perspective of getting the best value.

Also: Beyond the fact that certain products and services lend themselves to the cultivation of that emotional attachment, while others don't, generally people are only willing to develop a limited number of such attachments. After a while, the weaker connections fail, because people are focusing on two or three loyalties.

And do we consumers really want more products and services cultivating that emotional attachment so as to exact premium prices from us? I see dozens of complaints about this phenomenon posted on this forum every week. I doubt the American consumer is really clamoring for more of that sort of thing.

 

[Swimalie]

With all due respect, this article seems unjustly biased against TRU. Now I'm not a huge TRU fan, but is TRU selling many toys that are different from what the other stores are? Granted, TRU has the biggest market share and should be using their influence to put pressure on the manufacturers, however if that Barbie Dream House (example only) that is for sale at TRU is made with harmful chemicals, then so is the one for sale at Target, as is the one for sale at Walmart.

One thing not mentioned in the article is that Toys R Us sells its own products under different names such as Animal Planet that can not be found elsewhere and that they have 100% control over. These were tested along with popular brand names sold elsewhere. But... they promised in 2008 that they would stop using this chemical in their packaging and yet, 2 years later they have not. And they did not label these toys as containing these harmful chemicals. They market as being the place for kids and yet 72% of what is on their shelves is harmful to kids.

Here is the original report http://www.toxictoysrus.com/documents/Toxic-Toys-Report_11.17.10.pdf

 

[Planogirl]

I hope that people keep the desire to "have it now" and that that will help keep the B&M stores in business. I'm one of those that likes to see what I'm buying first plus we have the postal service from Hades here. I'm not thrilled with having to buy more and more online.

 

[bicker]

I hope that people keep the desire to "have it now" and that that will help keep the B&M stores in business.

There will be some of that, for sure, but of course, there will be a premium applied for feeding that desire for immediate gratification. That will drive away even more of the business from folks who don't have to "have it now" resulting in even higher prices necessary to sustain the business. It's a spiral really. For many things, the spiral will go down so deep that the B&M stores will die. (See: Blockbuster, for a recent example.) But some B&M will remain, but rest assured people will rail on and on about the nerve of them charging so much!

 

[ssawka]

One thing not mentioned in the article is that Toys R Us sells its own products under different names such as Animal Planet that can not be found elsewhere and that they have 100% control over. These were tested along with popular brand names sold elsewhere. But... they promised in 2008 that they would stop using this chemical in their packaging and yet, 2 years later they have not. And they did not label these toys as containing these harmful chemicals. They market as being the place for kids and yet 72% of what is on their shelves is harmful to kids.

Here is the original report http://www.toxictoysrus.com/documents/Toxic-Toys-Report_11.17.10.pdf

ITA for products that are exclusive to TRU, but I do not believe that number is anywhere near the 72% that the article mentions.

 

[ssawka]

How is that going to ensure that they don't "test drive" it with the B&M store and then go ahead and make the purchase online, to save money?

Perhaps you're suggesting that they charge for the "test drive", with a promise that the rental fee would be applied to the purchase if the purchase is made through the B&M store? That would make your suggestion seem more workable.

Not at all! As PPs mentioned the desire to "have it now" while the customer is in the store will drive most consumers to shell out more money for the convenience. For example, grocery stores sell many non-food items at much higher prices then a consumer would pay elsewhere, but people pay the premium for the convenience (This reminds me of the convenience store ice cream thread from last week).

ITA that it depends on the product as some products do not lend themselves to being sold in such an environment, and in that case it is probably best that the B&Ms don't carry those products. Books and CDs are prime examples of items being sold almost exclusively online anymore.

However, people are much more likely to form emotional attachments to computers and smart phones - things that adult-purchasers use continually, every day - than, say, their children's toys.

I don't think that's necessarily true, unless the parent avoids the store all together. If the B&Ms can get the child and parent into the store, it is much more likely that the parent will buy the toy in the store. Think about it, how often do you see kids crying in a store because they want a certain toy. Now the parent could say that the child cannot have the toy, but I seriously doubt you'd hear many parents say "We will get you that toy, but we will have to go home and order it online and then wait a few days to receive the toy".