Comping rules, OK!Although often long winded, and inevitably the most boring part of any entry form, the Rules of a competition are extremely important. So you should always read them.
Now, it might seem that I’m stating the obvious for many of you reading this. But it appears, from recent comments on Chatterbox and elsewhere, that this fundamental requirement is in danger of becoming something of a forgotten art for an increasing number of compers. Indeed, for some, it’s an art that might never have been learned in the first place. In this age of ‘plain English’, ‘bullet points’ and ‘headline messages’, it can be easy to dismiss the small print as being unimportant since, if it was important, it’d be written bigger. And it takes far too much precious time to read anyway. Right? Well, no. Indeed, make that a resounding NO.
I really cannot over-emphasise the importance of the small print in any competition, and a couple of moments spent reading it at the outset will inevitably save misunderstandings and disappointments later. And equally important, once you’ve read it, is that you make sure you do exactly what it says. Sometimes rules are poorly written, inconsistent, or even downright pointless. But irrespective of what you think about them, you should always try your best to stick to them.
I can think of several recent examples where the small print has been open to interpretation and where we compers thought that the promoter had made a mistake. But not a bit of it! Whether a mistake had been made of course, but the promoters then decided to do the decent thing by still adhering to the published rules despite the fact that they should have said something different, is immaterial. In these cases, if you hadn’t stuck rigidly to the rules as published then you wouldn’t have won a prize. Simple.
The recent Dixons DAB Radio comp asked for a slogan ‘in twenty words’. And yes, as all of the winning slogans proved, they DID mean EXACTLY twenty words. Other comps have asked for slogans in ‘more than 15 words’. It’s very easy to misread this, or assume it’s a mistake given the more usual ‘less than’ instruction, but again – as the winners list proved – ‘more than 15 words’ was indeed correct.
And it’s not just with tiebreakers that we need to be on our guard. Every element of the comp must be closely checked. Are capital letters necessary, or a particular colour of ink? Are there any restrictions on entries? Do till receipts need to be highlighted in a particular way, or qualifiers attached to entry forms in a specific manner? Is that missing letter in a wordsearch really a misprint, or a deliberate trap? Is plain paper asked for? Or a stamped envelope?
Of course, sometimes we’re faced with a major inconsistency or other error in the rules that makes it impossible to totally comply. Two different addresses for entries perhaps, or conflicting closing dates. In such cases, you could always try to seek clarification from the promoter (a quick telephone call or e-mail to their Customer Care Department usually does the trick) or even, if possible, make multiple entries to cover every eventuality. In the case of conflicting closing dates, common sense dictates that you should aim for the earliest date just to be on the safe side – although industry guidelines stipulate that consumers must never be disadvantaged by obvious errors in Terms and Conditions, so in theory the later date should always prevail. But better to be safe than sorry.
Sometimes rules might seem particularly finicky, but that doesn’t matter. If a rule is there, then we must always adhere to it. Capital letters make it easier for judges to read your entry, for example. Black ink aids the scanning and copying of entry forms. A till receipt might need to be securely attached to an entry form if the judging process involves original entry forms being manhandled around several departments, and being passed around different judges, at a handling house. So always assume, when you’re faced with a particularly pedantic clause, that there’s a method to the madness. And even if you can’t think what it could possibly be, just grin and bear it and give the promoter what they want. You can’t be disqualified for sticking rigidly to the rules after all – however bizarre they may seem!
Different handling houses and promoters will set the rules for their promotions in different ways and for different reasons. Most, I’m sure, don’t deliberately set out to confuse or trap us into making invalid entries. The use of lined paper instead of plain, or the lack of capital letters, or blue ink instead of black, will probably be tolerated by many promoters providing your entry can still be processed without too much difficulty. But notice that word ‘probably’. Is it really worth taking the risk, when the adjustments needed to stay within the rules will probably take you just a couple of seconds? And bear in mind that there are promoters and handling houses out there who DO deliberately throw in extra hurdles to keep the number of valid entries down. You’ve probably seen the type of clauses I’m thinking of; the need to include SAEs of particular sizes and stamped with a particular – uncommon – value, having to write your details on a small piece of paper of a certain size, elaborate qualifier requirements including receipts dated within a certain period, tokens AND other parts of the packaging. These handling houses are typically those that are, in industry parlance, “Fixed Fee”. In other words, most handling houses will send a bill to a promoter after a competition has been run, which might vary depending on the number of entries that were received, the number of prizes paid out, and the amount of work that had to be put in to fulfil the promotion. Fixed fee companies however, charge a promoter a set amount at the very start. This might suit the promoter as their budget is set in stone at the outset, but from that moment on it’s in the handling house’s interest to keep the number of entries – and hence their costs – to a minimum. These organisations WILL probably deliberately build extra hurdles into the application process, and reject entries for the silliest of reasons, so why take the risk?
Time then for a little fun competition to test your awareness of the fine print. There are two six-month Compers News subscription extensions up for grabs. All you have to do to win is answer one of the following questions correctly, and complete the tiebreaker sentence in 12 words:
1. What is the Chatterbox website address?
2. Which Channel Island is the home of Compers News?
Tiebreaker: Comping rules, OK because…
Write your entry in block capitals and in black ink, followed by your name and address on the back of a standard plain white postcard. On the front of the card, in the top left hand corner, write the code ‘SMID0605’. Send your entry in a stamped and sealed envelope to: ‘Camping Rules OK’, Compers News, PO Box 427, St Peter Port, Guernsey GY1 3WY by standard first class mail, to arrive on 30 June 2005. All valid entries will be judged, and the two prizes awarded to those entrants who have completed the tiebreaker sentence in the most inane manner. Only one entry per person, and you must be a current Compers News subscriber. Please note that, in order to protect your personal data, your postcard will be destroyed prior to the competition being judged. If you object to this happening, please write ‘Yes’ underneath your name and address. Good luck!
SPRING COMP RESULTS
Thanks for all of your entries for my recent Order of Merit competition. This proved to be my most popular comp to date by far. I thought that it’d be interesting – and fairer – to arrive at a ‘winning’ order by aggregating all of the entries that I received, so every entrant was an unsuspecting member of the judging panel! The final result was F-A-H-B-C-G-E-D, with the first and last statements especially winning and losing by a proverbial mile.
Congratulations to Mrs. O Gardiner of Shepshed, who managed 6 out of 8 correct and so was the overall winner. She receives a 12 month Compers News subscription extension. A further 12 month extension was also available to be shared out equally between everyone who got just the first three statements correct in the right order. In the event, 7 of you managed this – Denise Kelly from High Wycombe, Joanne Halstead from Huddersfield, Marilyn Jones from Glossop, Catherine Morgan from Whitstable, Linda Holloway from Stoke on Trent, Celia Hooker from Basingstoke, and J Fletcher from Hatfield Peverel. Well done everyone, and because 7 into 12 doesn’t go exactly, we’ve rounded up the prizes to a 2-month extension each. Subscription records have been automatically amended.
Orders of Merit have been back in the comping news recently, as two high profile comps – on Primula Dips and Ambrosia – have both been judged and no prizes awarded due to there being no exact matches. Results were in last month’s Compers News. The Institute of Sales Promoters has now expressed concern over these ‘all or nothing’ OOM promotions, so hopefully changes are afoot. Watch this space!
Another point of interest arising from my OOM comp, and worth reiterating here, was how dog-eared some of the entries were when they arrived, how often the postmark had obliterated essential information, and even the number of entries where one or more letters had been omitted. All of which serve as useful reminders to everyone. Never write too close to the edge of a postcard – if you can, leave at least a centimetre all the way round. If possible try to keep the area to the left of the stamp right across the top of your card completely free to avoid potential postmark conflicts. And ALWAYS check your entry before posting it off. No-one was disqualified this time around but other promoters may not have the time or inclination to be so considerate, especially if they’re faced with thousands and thousands of entries. Why should they spend time deciphering your entry when the next one on the heap is perfectly clear? So always take these sensible precautions to improve the chances of your postcards being presentable and readable when they arrive at their destination.
Smid x
|
