Hi, Guest
10-05-2013, 01:23 AM
Dear McDonald's - or can I call you Ron.
This letter is about the Monopoly game currently underway at McDonald’s and I will start by asking you a question; and depending on your answer, you can stop reading and recycle my note, or you may wish to read on and consider a customer’s viewpoint.
Q: Is the purpose of your Monopoly game (a) to teach customers lessons on morality, ethics and the value of slavishly adhering to the letter of the rules, or (b) rewarding customers for their patronage, incenting them to visit your restaurants more often, and engaging patrons’ children for the purpose of making a connection with your brand?
If your answer is (A), then I guess you should toss the letter now because, in my case, you accomplished your mission; last night I was suitably and publicly lectured about how the rules are there to be followed and what kind of a parent was I to suggest that they not be. Unsophisticated, but I certainly got the point.
If your answer is (B), then may I suggest that you offer some additional training to your front-line management staff – because after last night’s experience, I’ve told my 11 year old son to forget the monopoly game he likes so much, because we won’t be going back to McDonald’s for quite some time.
The rule in question is the “No purchase necessary” rule which is printed prominently (if not completely) on both the game card and the tray liner.
When I asked my son Owen what he thought that rule meant, with the logic and clarity that sometimes only children can offer he said “it means I don’t have to buy anything to play the game.” I guess I still have something of the inner child in me, because that’s exactly how I answered the question too. Interestingly, every parent in the restaurant last night who I asked, said the same thing.
Also interesting, is what everyone didn’t say – which is “no purchase necessary means you have to send in a stamped self-addressed envelope, hand written only, with return addresses matching only and you will receive a game piece by return mail.” It’s hard to imagine that not one person I asked came up with that answer, especially considering it is what McDonald’s actually means by “no purchase necessary.”
I guess like me, no one had read the full rules and was mistakenly relying on the abbreviated version as it was printed so evidently in front of them. But this is only peripheral to my point.
My complaint is not about the rule. Even my son understands that the spirit and the intent of the game is to encourage people to visit McDonald’s and buy their product; as an incentive and as a reward for patronage behaviour McDonald’s runs these promotions and gives away prizes – makes perfect sense, even to an 11-year old.
Owen also understands that what McDonald’s doesn’t want is people flocking to their stores and asking for a “no purchase necessary” game piece then leaving without purchasing anything. That’s counter-intuitive to the spirit and intent of the game and he gets that too. He’s a smart kid, with a good memory.
But what he doesn’t get, and neither do I, is McDonald’s response to those patrons who do live up to the spirit and intent of the game, but don’t happen to like or be able to eat any of the foods to which a game piece is attached.
Owen likes to do his own ordering and paying – he likes the responsibility of offering the money and counting the change – he likes delivering the food to the table – and so I let him order for me too when we go to McDonald’s and other similar places (3 or 4 times a week; after Tae Kwon Do and art class and Saturday mornings for breakfast with mom and sister).
He also likes taking the game piece off the package and sticking it to the card – a great engagement device; it's no wonder this is one of your more successful promotions. We eat often enough at McDonald's to know what food the game pieces are attached to and he knew last night that he wasn’t going to be ordering any of them. My motto is “it never hurts to ask” and so that’s what I encouraged him to do.
I found it kind of heartbreaking to hear Owen ask for the treasured game piece, knowing full well that he hasn’t ordered the “right” food, but also satisfied that he was honouring McDonald’s intent for the game, only to be lectured by the 18 year old behind the counter that he was asking her to break the rules and he shouldn’t ask her to do that.
It was harsh and Owen was suitably cowed, - I felt bad for him as he handed her the $20 and looked at me and shrugged his shoulders as if to say, “sorry dad, I tried.”
But In a way I understood where the young server was coming from – even though it could be argued that my son wasn’t really asking for a “no purchase necessary” game piece – as he was in fact making a purchase – there was a process in place to handle that possibility and that was what they were told to say. The rules are the rules after all, and at McDonald’s apparently that comes above all else.
What I didn’t understand, however, was the almost belligerent way that the manager responded to me when I presented her with the same logic I’m presenting here. The conversation lasted far longer than it should have – and it was only after seeing how much attention the other patrons were paying to the exchange (and apparently agreeing with my logic versus hers) did she relent and give my son an empty hash brown wrapper.
So here’s my deal: Yup – I get it – the rules are the rules. They may be presented in a somewhat misleading format, but if you look hard enough you can find them and to be fair, McDonald’s has to enforce them equally; all understood and agreed to. If it was my game, I’d probably put the same rule in place too.
But then again, if it was my game, I would make sure that front line staff and management understands the not-so-subtle difference between someone asking for a free game piece and trying to “end-run” the rule, versus a patron purchasing a combination of product that, although not technically eligible for a game piece, nonetheless was consistent with the intent and spirit of the game.
I understand that there are certain products that McDonald’s wants to promote with this game – and so I don’t mind buying a medium coffee instead of a small one in order to play the game; the concept being that I already drink coffee.
But I doubt very much that it was McDonald’s intent to take an “all or nothing” approach to this marketing when the risk is there to turn customers off, and to in fact drive the kind of attitude and behaviour you don’t want – “I don’t like the way I’m treated at McDonald’s and I’m going to eat somewhere else.”.
For my part I don’t blame the restaurant staff – I kept my receipt if you want that info – I think instead it is a systemic problem and so I would like clarification of McDonald’s policy in the instance where patrons purchase “ineligible food” at your restaurant, but still want their kids to be able to play the game, right then right there, in the restaurant.
I look forward to hearing your response – however, if it is a canned response that doesn’t consider anything I’ve actually written here, then please don’t bother getting back to me – I would prefer something a bit more sophisticated and thoughtful than that.
Or if it’s “the rules are the rules and we stand by our restaurant folks who enforce them to the letter” response – I’ve already had that lecture at the counter and don’t need it again – I know how to respond to that one.
Thanks for your consideration
Ken Webster
Webster Communications & Internal Marketing
This letter is about the Monopoly game currently underway at McDonald’s and I will start by asking you a question; and depending on your answer, you can stop reading and recycle my note, or you may wish to read on and consider a customer’s viewpoint.
Q: Is the purpose of your Monopoly game (a) to teach customers lessons on morality, ethics and the value of slavishly adhering to the letter of the rules, or (b) rewarding customers for their patronage, incenting them to visit your restaurants more often, and engaging patrons’ children for the purpose of making a connection with your brand?
If your answer is (A), then I guess you should toss the letter now because, in my case, you accomplished your mission; last night I was suitably and publicly lectured about how the rules are there to be followed and what kind of a parent was I to suggest that they not be. Unsophisticated, but I certainly got the point.
If your answer is (B), then may I suggest that you offer some additional training to your front-line management staff – because after last night’s experience, I’ve told my 11 year old son to forget the monopoly game he likes so much, because we won’t be going back to McDonald’s for quite some time.
The rule in question is the “No purchase necessary” rule which is printed prominently (if not completely) on both the game card and the tray liner.
When I asked my son Owen what he thought that rule meant, with the logic and clarity that sometimes only children can offer he said “it means I don’t have to buy anything to play the game.” I guess I still have something of the inner child in me, because that’s exactly how I answered the question too. Interestingly, every parent in the restaurant last night who I asked, said the same thing.
Also interesting, is what everyone didn’t say – which is “no purchase necessary means you have to send in a stamped self-addressed envelope, hand written only, with return addresses matching only and you will receive a game piece by return mail.” It’s hard to imagine that not one person I asked came up with that answer, especially considering it is what McDonald’s actually means by “no purchase necessary.”
I guess like me, no one had read the full rules and was mistakenly relying on the abbreviated version as it was printed so evidently in front of them. But this is only peripheral to my point.
My complaint is not about the rule. Even my son understands that the spirit and the intent of the game is to encourage people to visit McDonald’s and buy their product; as an incentive and as a reward for patronage behaviour McDonald’s runs these promotions and gives away prizes – makes perfect sense, even to an 11-year old.
Owen also understands that what McDonald’s doesn’t want is people flocking to their stores and asking for a “no purchase necessary” game piece then leaving without purchasing anything. That’s counter-intuitive to the spirit and intent of the game and he gets that too. He’s a smart kid, with a good memory.
But what he doesn’t get, and neither do I, is McDonald’s response to those patrons who do live up to the spirit and intent of the game, but don’t happen to like or be able to eat any of the foods to which a game piece is attached.
Owen likes to do his own ordering and paying – he likes the responsibility of offering the money and counting the change – he likes delivering the food to the table – and so I let him order for me too when we go to McDonald’s and other similar places (3 or 4 times a week; after Tae Kwon Do and art class and Saturday mornings for breakfast with mom and sister).
He also likes taking the game piece off the package and sticking it to the card – a great engagement device; it's no wonder this is one of your more successful promotions. We eat often enough at McDonald's to know what food the game pieces are attached to and he knew last night that he wasn’t going to be ordering any of them. My motto is “it never hurts to ask” and so that’s what I encouraged him to do.
I found it kind of heartbreaking to hear Owen ask for the treasured game piece, knowing full well that he hasn’t ordered the “right” food, but also satisfied that he was honouring McDonald’s intent for the game, only to be lectured by the 18 year old behind the counter that he was asking her to break the rules and he shouldn’t ask her to do that.
It was harsh and Owen was suitably cowed, - I felt bad for him as he handed her the $20 and looked at me and shrugged his shoulders as if to say, “sorry dad, I tried.”
But In a way I understood where the young server was coming from – even though it could be argued that my son wasn’t really asking for a “no purchase necessary” game piece – as he was in fact making a purchase – there was a process in place to handle that possibility and that was what they were told to say. The rules are the rules after all, and at McDonald’s apparently that comes above all else.
What I didn’t understand, however, was the almost belligerent way that the manager responded to me when I presented her with the same logic I’m presenting here. The conversation lasted far longer than it should have – and it was only after seeing how much attention the other patrons were paying to the exchange (and apparently agreeing with my logic versus hers) did she relent and give my son an empty hash brown wrapper.
So here’s my deal: Yup – I get it – the rules are the rules. They may be presented in a somewhat misleading format, but if you look hard enough you can find them and to be fair, McDonald’s has to enforce them equally; all understood and agreed to. If it was my game, I’d probably put the same rule in place too.
But then again, if it was my game, I would make sure that front line staff and management understands the not-so-subtle difference between someone asking for a free game piece and trying to “end-run” the rule, versus a patron purchasing a combination of product that, although not technically eligible for a game piece, nonetheless was consistent with the intent and spirit of the game.
I understand that there are certain products that McDonald’s wants to promote with this game – and so I don’t mind buying a medium coffee instead of a small one in order to play the game; the concept being that I already drink coffee.
But I doubt very much that it was McDonald’s intent to take an “all or nothing” approach to this marketing when the risk is there to turn customers off, and to in fact drive the kind of attitude and behaviour you don’t want – “I don’t like the way I’m treated at McDonald’s and I’m going to eat somewhere else.”.
For my part I don’t blame the restaurant staff – I kept my receipt if you want that info – I think instead it is a systemic problem and so I would like clarification of McDonald’s policy in the instance where patrons purchase “ineligible food” at your restaurant, but still want their kids to be able to play the game, right then right there, in the restaurant.
I look forward to hearing your response – however, if it is a canned response that doesn’t consider anything I’ve actually written here, then please don’t bother getting back to me – I would prefer something a bit more sophisticated and thoughtful than that.
Or if it’s “the rules are the rules and we stand by our restaurant folks who enforce them to the letter” response – I’ve already had that lecture at the counter and don’t need it again – I know how to respond to that one.
Thanks for your consideration
Ken Webster
Webster Communications & Internal Marketing
2008 Fusion SEL MTX - DD1 * 2009 Fusion SEL - DD2 * 2007 Focus ZXW - R*I*P * 2004 Focus ZTW CD Silver - sold * 2004 Focus ZTW Black - sold * 2003 Focus ZTW Black - sold * 2001 Focus ZTW Gold - sold * 2000 Focus SE Wagon (ZTW option) - Black - sold * 2000 Focus SE Wagon (ZTW option) - Gold R*I*P
2003 Focus ZX5 infra-red Track Rat - R*I*P
2003 ZX5 CD Silver Track Rat - retired, but still in the driveway
New track rat: 2000 ZX3, Atlantic Blue * JRSC with lots more to come
* New Zetec crate motor - NFG - thanks Topspeed *
2003 Focus ZX5 infra-red Track Rat - R*I*P
2003 ZX5 CD Silver Track Rat - retired, but still in the driveway
New track rat: 2000 ZX3, Atlantic Blue * JRSC with lots more to come
* New Zetec crate motor - NFG - thanks Topspeed *
![[Image: ncclogo.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/Flofocus/ncclogo.jpg)
