It is that time of year when membership resets, and while this has been mentioned before, it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. I have even written the CEO with "Who was the marketing genius that dreamed this up" as from a corporate side (marketing tunnel vision) seems would push people to buy more, but in reality may have the exact opposite effect. What I am referring to is the practice on January 1 of netting all rewards purchase balance to zero. The suggestion is...just subtract $3500 or $1500, depending on level established for the year, but let the customer keep the excess above the $1500 or $3500 level, as a start for the year. In other words, if a person has $3800, they are able to start the new year with a $300 balance rather than a $0 balance.
Why does the current method actually work against the best interests of Best Buy? If I am going to lose the excess, after I reach $3500, where is my incentive to buy a major purchse vs defer the purchase for next year (or avoid sales tax and purchse elsewhere with a 'rewards' credit card. As an example, while this year didn't hit the $3500 until September, but have reached it as early as April. From that point on, there is no incentive to buy anything, other than incidentals like ink, from best buy. It becomes a time to "test" items you want to buy with full intention oof returning, then actually purchase after the first of the year after Best Buy nets the account to zero. Had you actually purchased the iten the prior year, you would have lost the value, but now you make it count with the current year purchase. I am not the only one that does that as talking to a Magnolia employee today as looking at sone B&W P7 headphones, he noted that he does the same thing...and it was a practice he picked up from another customer.