Customer Points Multiplier vs Promotions
complete
B
Ben
At the moment if we run a double points promotion the customer points multiplier will multiply the promotion. i.e if we run a triple points promotion and a customer has a double points multiplier against their account then they will receive a 6 x points multiplier.
Could we suggest that there is a setting added to Customer Rewards where a retailer could set it so that the points generated from a transaction are based on the higher of either the customer or the promotion. This will avoid customers with multipliers receiving very high amounts of points.
It would need to be set so that if the multiplier is below 1 then the points are calculated in the same way as they are now. i.e. if a customers points multiplier is 0 then if a 3 x points promotion is run the customer would still receive 0.
This post was marked as
complete
This post was marked as
in progress
This post was marked as
planned
This post was marked as
in progress
This post was marked as
planned
Neil McQuillan
This has now gone for testing and all being well will be in the July release.
Neil McQuillan
An interesting one has come in when I've added Unit Tests. If we have a promotion which reduces points and an account multiplier then the account multiplier we're going to get some strange (or perhaps logical behaviour depending on your point o f view).
For example :
- We have a promotion which sets a zero multiplier on bikes;
- We have double points on the account.
Zero points will be awarded.
- We have a promotion which sets a 0.50% multiplier on bikes (e.g. a 50% reduction);
- We have double points on the account.
Double points will be awarded on bike sales.
B
Ben
Neil McQuillan: What about setting it so that if the multiplier is below 1 it will always be preferenced.
Therefore if you have either a customer who does not earn points (i.e. set at 0%) or a category that should always be lower (like your example of 0.5% on bikes) then these will always take preference. Otherwise it will take the higher amount.
This doesn't affect us as we would only have it either at a 0 multiplier or at 1 or above. But just adding the above in case it helped the development from not hitting a block.
Neil McQuillan
I've looked at the code and the change is viable I'm going to sort that this afternoon. The hardest part will be the automated test coverage :-)
Neil McQuillan
in progress
Neil McQuillan
under review
Load More
→