Greg Cole
Member
I am reposting this from my post on ICS ( figured i'd save Mikey the trouble).
I would appreciate your honest thoughts. NOT reguritated Piranha marketing but your honest thoughts.
Lisa, Shane and the others that responded to my post under the Bishop topic:
Lisa, I appreciate how you feel. Perhaps that was the solution the IICRC had back then, but there has to be a better way. Piranha marketing has made tens of millions by teaching people to label people as unethical. I mean no disrespect (and I appreciate your efforts with the CRI) but can you honestly be unbiased publically on this subject? If you agreed with me it would go against everything you and joe have built your reputations on.. But I appreciate your input and fully support you in your fight regarding CRI
Shane, it’s no secret- I am well aware! The IICRC instructors also used to corner their students and push a particular product and/or manufacturer that they owned or wroked for down their throats! Paying hundreds of dollars for a sales pitch! Talk about bait & Switch! < ad Yes that has pretty much disappeared>
However my point is this: But by openly declaring war on any and everyone that uses similar marketing or employment practices, you alienate a large portion of the industry. I have openly encouraged my contractors and my employees to attend IICRC classes, SFS, etc. However, it is inappropriate to show videos that paint EVERYONE with the same brush.Why should I encourage people to go there only to lose them or have them feel bad about their industry. There are many ingredients to a company. One or two that are shared with disreputable companies should condemn that company.
When they showed a 12 year old anti-couponers video at a VAST class I have my wife and several employees at- they crossed the line. I called Steve Toburen out on this on this very site. Steve openly and publically apologized and promptly removed it from the curriculum. You can affect change by education, etc. Due to SFS – I raised my prices considerably and shored up my operation.
You can educate people as to reasons why they shouldn’t bait and switch. BUT it shouldn’t be an ethical debate as opposed to making it an economical debate. PROVE to the people going to the classes that they CAN’T succeed running a 1-3 truck operation by advertising with coupons. Show them the math. They will be more inclined to run high $ O&O's.
Ethics and morality are a big deal in our country (as well as our industry). Every person has their own idea of what is right and wrong. Does pointing to a coupon and saying “this is evil and immoral” REALLY change anyone’s mind? On the contrary, I believe it makes the accuser look petty, and paranoid.
I will concede that there are a number of people in our industry that shouldn't be (couponers as well as O&Os). The problem with painting people with a broad brush is that good people get covered with the paint as well.
I can easily make the argument that an O&O charging .75 - .95 per sf is ripping a customer off. Interestingly enough there are numerous cleaners in this industry that do just that and are applauded for “RAISING THE BAR”. Unfortunately this makes many consumers think that cleaning carpet is “excessively expensive” (especially in this economy) This perception could (and likely has) resulted in a drop in business. Should I paint all O&O’s as opportunistic bandits? After all- there are O&O’s like this in every city in America (just like low ball couponers)
I have directly and indirectly spent tens of thousands of dollars with the IICRC for education. I subscribe to all of their cleaning principles and have publically endorsed them. Yet, my company can no longer be a firm because of who cleans for me and how I advertise. This shortsightedness is wrong. Mandating how people run their business makes it so that people feel there is no value in bringing IICRC certification into their business.
While my membership number is not #1 it is in the low 14000’s (1992) I believe that the IICRC should go back to educating and allow those that want to join the certified firm status to pass a series of background checks or some other sort of vetting.
Taking my money for classes and dues for 18 years and then saying that I can’t advertise it is wrong! Having rug manufacturers say that you HAVE to use IICRC certified firms and then denying membership based on work force and advertising procedures is wrong! Plain and Simple! Furthermore, the question pops into my head: IS IT LEGAL to force people to get a membership for their company in order to stay in business (not void warranties) and then deny membership based on practices that are common in our industry < AND NOT ILLEGAL> ?
Before you start screaming that I am gearing up to sue – NO I AM NOT! I personally like the IICRC and the steps it has taken to provide training to our industry. I wouldn’t do anything to financially harm it. However, I suspect that there are others in the industry that don’t feel the same way.
There is a flaw in their reasoning and it needs to be fixed. Otherwise others will zero in on it and exploit it. Plain and simple.
The IICRC should remain an education center NOT a police force. Jeff Bishop (someone that I don’t always agree with but highly respect) is surprised that the IICRC wasn’t consulted by the CRI.
My point is this : Why would CRI (or anyone else for that matter) consult the IICRC when the personal agendas of those involved in the IICRC have for years been at the forefront of many of their decisions for decades? Perhaps the new leadership can change the face and perception of the IICRC?
I would appreciate your honest thoughts. NOT reguritated Piranha marketing but your honest thoughts.
Lisa, Shane and the others that responded to my post under the Bishop topic:
Lisa, I appreciate how you feel. Perhaps that was the solution the IICRC had back then, but there has to be a better way. Piranha marketing has made tens of millions by teaching people to label people as unethical. I mean no disrespect (and I appreciate your efforts with the CRI) but can you honestly be unbiased publically on this subject? If you agreed with me it would go against everything you and joe have built your reputations on.. But I appreciate your input and fully support you in your fight regarding CRI
Shane, it’s no secret- I am well aware! The IICRC instructors also used to corner their students and push a particular product and/or manufacturer that they owned or wroked for down their throats! Paying hundreds of dollars for a sales pitch! Talk about bait & Switch! < ad Yes that has pretty much disappeared>
However my point is this: But by openly declaring war on any and everyone that uses similar marketing or employment practices, you alienate a large portion of the industry. I have openly encouraged my contractors and my employees to attend IICRC classes, SFS, etc. However, it is inappropriate to show videos that paint EVERYONE with the same brush.Why should I encourage people to go there only to lose them or have them feel bad about their industry. There are many ingredients to a company. One or two that are shared with disreputable companies should condemn that company.
When they showed a 12 year old anti-couponers video at a VAST class I have my wife and several employees at- they crossed the line. I called Steve Toburen out on this on this very site. Steve openly and publically apologized and promptly removed it from the curriculum. You can affect change by education, etc. Due to SFS – I raised my prices considerably and shored up my operation.
You can educate people as to reasons why they shouldn’t bait and switch. BUT it shouldn’t be an ethical debate as opposed to making it an economical debate. PROVE to the people going to the classes that they CAN’T succeed running a 1-3 truck operation by advertising with coupons. Show them the math. They will be more inclined to run high $ O&O's.
Ethics and morality are a big deal in our country (as well as our industry). Every person has their own idea of what is right and wrong. Does pointing to a coupon and saying “this is evil and immoral” REALLY change anyone’s mind? On the contrary, I believe it makes the accuser look petty, and paranoid.
I will concede that there are a number of people in our industry that shouldn't be (couponers as well as O&Os). The problem with painting people with a broad brush is that good people get covered with the paint as well.
I can easily make the argument that an O&O charging .75 - .95 per sf is ripping a customer off. Interestingly enough there are numerous cleaners in this industry that do just that and are applauded for “RAISING THE BAR”. Unfortunately this makes many consumers think that cleaning carpet is “excessively expensive” (especially in this economy) This perception could (and likely has) resulted in a drop in business. Should I paint all O&O’s as opportunistic bandits? After all- there are O&O’s like this in every city in America (just like low ball couponers)
I have directly and indirectly spent tens of thousands of dollars with the IICRC for education. I subscribe to all of their cleaning principles and have publically endorsed them. Yet, my company can no longer be a firm because of who cleans for me and how I advertise. This shortsightedness is wrong. Mandating how people run their business makes it so that people feel there is no value in bringing IICRC certification into their business.
While my membership number is not #1 it is in the low 14000’s (1992) I believe that the IICRC should go back to educating and allow those that want to join the certified firm status to pass a series of background checks or some other sort of vetting.
Taking my money for classes and dues for 18 years and then saying that I can’t advertise it is wrong! Having rug manufacturers say that you HAVE to use IICRC certified firms and then denying membership based on work force and advertising procedures is wrong! Plain and Simple! Furthermore, the question pops into my head: IS IT LEGAL to force people to get a membership for their company in order to stay in business (not void warranties) and then deny membership based on practices that are common in our industry < AND NOT ILLEGAL> ?
Before you start screaming that I am gearing up to sue – NO I AM NOT! I personally like the IICRC and the steps it has taken to provide training to our industry. I wouldn’t do anything to financially harm it. However, I suspect that there are others in the industry that don’t feel the same way.
There is a flaw in their reasoning and it needs to be fixed. Otherwise others will zero in on it and exploit it. Plain and simple.
The IICRC should remain an education center NOT a police force. Jeff Bishop (someone that I don’t always agree with but highly respect) is surprised that the IICRC wasn’t consulted by the CRI.
My point is this : Why would CRI (or anyone else for that matter) consult the IICRC when the personal agendas of those involved in the IICRC have for years been at the forefront of many of their decisions for decades? Perhaps the new leadership can change the face and perception of the IICRC?
