updated 11 Oct 2009, 13:04
    Powered by
user id password
Sun, Oct 11, 2009
The New Paper
EmailPrintDecrease text sizeIncrease text size
Both parties could be at fault

I REFER to the report, "Sorry Ziyi, we're closed" (The New Paper, 1 Oct).

I have mixed reactions.

To me, both parties could be in the wrong. Why did Zhang Ziyi want to visit the shop only when they were preparing to call it a day?

As for the shop, the problem may have been sticking - a bit too strictly - to the stated closing time.

Establishments like high-end jewellery shops would be right to close once they have puta way their valuable items.

But if it was a boutique without such security concerns, it may have been wrong to turn away such a high-profile customer.

We must also take into account the fact that many shops do stock-taking and tidying up after closing, and the staff would be able to get some rest only after that.

They may not be too keen to extend the hours for one customer, especially when they do not know whether she is going to buy something.

I think this is an isolated case and does not reflect on Singapore's service standards, though there is room for improvement there, no doubt about it.

Tan Shao Ken

This article was first published in The New Paper.


readers' comments
If the shops extend the opening hours to serve the customers, good for them.

If they stick to their STATED opening hours, why should we fault them?
Posted by bbmwlover on Sun, 11 Oct 2009 at 12:14 PM
Honestly I feel that this is a small matter. It's fair for the staffs not to let customers patronize their shop when it's at closing hours. If customers are really keen on the products, y not just make a trip to that shop again during their operating hours? Case closed. Do not need to stir up this matter.
Posted by actBlur on Wed, 7 Oct 2009 at 23:30 PM

Copyright © 2009 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn. No. 198402868E. All rights reserved.