Loyalty Discounts

[Steve W]

Just a friendly suggestion: Cherry Audio might want to discourage third-party module makers from advertising specific dollar-amount loyalty discounts in posts and bundle descriptions.

[utdgrant]

Hi Steve,

Could you please explain your reasoning behind this request?
As a user/buyer, I'm quite happy to be made aware of bargains, whether from CA themselves or third-party devs.

Grant

[UrbanCyborg]

I'd bet it's because they quickly become dated, and don't get edited after the fact.

Reid

[Steve W]

Could you please explain your reasoning behind this request?
As a user/buyer, I'm quite happy to be made aware of bargains, whether from CA themselves or third-party devs.

Good question. Thanks for asking.

Sometimes its wrong. For example, one module maker lists a price and to me it is 19% higher. That kind of thing can turn people off and create a lasting negative impression. If, on the other hand, the PR just mentioned something generic like, "There's a loyalty discount for owners of one or more modules in the bundle," without stating the specific price, consumers feel special because they get a discount. No bad feelings because the price is higher than advertised.

Hope this makes sense.

I'd bet it's because they quickly become dated, and don't get edited after the fact.

This might be true, too. It wasn't my reasoning, but this can also present a problem.

[Steve W]

Just a friendly suggestion: Cherry Audio might want to discourage third-party module makers from advertising specific dollar-amount loyalty discounts in posts and bundle descriptions.

Could you please explain your reasoning behind this request?
As a user/buyer, I'm quite happy to be made aware of bargains, whether from CA themselves or third-party devs.

Good question. Thanks for asking.

Sometimes its wrong. For example, one module maker lists a price and to me it is 19% higher. That kind of thing can turn people off and create a lasting negative impression. If, on the other hand, the PR just mentioned something generic like, "There's a loyalty discount for owners of one or more modules in the bundle," without stating the specific price, consumers feel special because they get a discount. No bad feelings because the price is higher than advertised.

Hope this makes sense.

Let me explain further, with an example:

There was a new bundle I was interested in that was 19% higher than the price mentioned even though I already had more than enough other items in the bundle to warrant the stated price. Then, another bundle was created that include even more modules all of which I already owned. Yet the price to me was still higher than the price mentioned.

So, today, with Cherry Audio's new sale, the first bundle is still 19% higher to me, but the second bundle is now 11% lower to me since all I really needed/wanted were the three modules I didn't yet have and I had a higher percentage of modules in the new bundle.

I'd bet it's because they quickly become dated, and don't get edited after the fact.

As I said, Reid's point wasn't my original reasoning, but it is also a valid point. The vendor changed it once (sometime after my post, but before the current sale) and didn't have to change it again after that, thanks to the store's automatic calculations.

To me this strategy rewards loyalty and creates a positive vibe for the module-maker, Voltage Modular, and Cherry Audio.

Secondary point: I had demoed the three new-to-me modules in the bundle and decided they were not "must-have" modules. (I couldn't use them with my preferred patching / performance methods.)

Sometimes the store is set up so the discounted loyalty price is lower than the sale price. That doesn't encourage making purchases when a bundle is on sale. Sometimes the store is set up so the sales price takes into account the ratio of unowned modules to owned modules. That encourages consumers and rewards loyalty.

Hope these details clarify my original suggestion.

[ChR_is]

i know experiences like this are frustrating, but believe me this is just as frustrating for the third-party developer.

We can set up promotions and pricings and bundle discounts. but from there on we just have to believe that everything works as intended. there is no way for us to see a customer's perspective. so if sth doesn't add up the way we intend it to, we simply don't realize that.

if you spot sth like this or even just think that sth is wrong, please reach out to the according dev first and ask what's going on. we're more than happy to troubleshoot with you and make sure that you'll get the best price possible. we try to get it right in the first place of course, but there's only so much we can do. help us help you and everything will be fine in the end.

[Steve W]

i know experiences like this are frustrating, but believe me this is just as frustrating for the third-party developer.

We can set up promotions and pricings and bundle discounts. but from there on we just have to believe that everything works as intended. there is no way for us to see a customer's perspective. so if sth doesn't add up the way we intend it to, we simply don't realize that.

if you spot sth like this or even just think that sth is wrong, please reach out to the according dev first and ask what's going on. we're more than happy to troubleshoot with you and make sure that you'll get the best price possible. we try to get it right in the first place of course, but there's only so much we can do. help us help you and everything will be fine in the end.

Is this directed to me? I hope you didn't think I was expressing frustration. I wasn't. I was making a positive suggestion:

Just a friendly suggestion: Cherry Audio might want to discourage third-party module makers from advertising specific dollar-amount loyalty discounts in posts and bundle descriptions.

When asked why I made the suggestion, I clarified my reasoning.

Sometimes its wrong. . . .

meaning that an announced price might not be accurate based on the way the store calculates prices.

So, the initial example I gave was for the benefit of third-party developers who might lose customers. My goal was to give developers some useful feedback in case they weren't aware. At least one developer either saw my feedback or got the suggestion from someone else and made a change.

A month later (that is, when the current sale started) I saw that there was an opportunity to educate both developers and consumers (who are sometimes the same) as to how the pricing works by extending the original example.

I don't think there is anything wrong with educating both developers and consumers at the same time. My suggestion was for the benefit of both. It was directed towards all developers and all consumers so that developers would not lose sales and consumers would not be disappointed.

Based on some actual experiences I have found that privately e-mailing developers can sometimes is be a good idea, but often it is not. My initial suggestion, initial example, and extension of the example were intended for all developers as well as consumers for the mutual benefit of both.

[ChR_is]

Is this directed to me? I hope you didn't think I was expressing frustration. I wasn't. I was making a positive suggestion:

My goal was to give developers some useful feedback in case they weren't aware.

it's all good. i really appreciate the feedback. as i said, sometimes it's hard for devs to see customer's perspective, so we rely on your feedback.

I don't think there is anything wrong with educating both developers and consumers at the same time. My suggestion was for the benefit of both. It was directed towards all developers and all consumers so that developers would not lose sales and consumers would not be disappointed.

Of course there's nothing wrong with that. i was just trying to give some insight from a dev perspective why sometimes things might not work out as intended.

Also i need to mention the real MVP: Danny from CA support who always takes care of issues and always does everything to resolve situations as best as possible.