BLOOMINGDALE'S 25% OFF EMAIL: WHAT 690 BRAND EXCLUSIONS REVEAL ABOUT CUSTOMER TRUST

Banner in the June 12, 2026 email from bloomingdales.com

When a Promotion Turns Into Work

In the world of luxury resale, a space I write about, trust and candid disclosure are everything. Buyers need to know exactly what they are getting, particularly when assessing the authenticity and true condition of a secondhand luxury piece. Those expectations of trust and candor were on my mind when I received a promotional email from Bloomingdale’s. The store describes itself as “America’s only nationwide, full-line, upscale department store” and for decades has used the tagline: “Like no other store in the world,” now adapted to “Shop Bloomingdale’s online – like no other store in the world.” A brand positioning itself that way sets an expectation that its promotions will be straightforward, transparent, and easy for customers to understand. This particular email shows how quickly that expectation can be undermined when a headline offer looks straightforward but the details are difficult to use in practice.

On June 12th, I received an email from Bloomingdale’s with the subject line: “It’s been a while! Come Back & Take 25% Off.” The message was puzzling, because I had placed an online order just six days earlier, on June 6th. That raised an immediate question about how recent customer activity is reflected in their promotional emails. But the bigger concern emerged when I clicked through to see the details of the offer.

690 Exclusions Later: When “25% Off” Stops Feeling Like an Offer

The exclusions were presented in a tiny font, dense, two‑page block of text. To understand the scope, I manually counted and numbered each excluded brand, from 1 through 690. (This two page list of exclusions is shown at the bottom of this post.) There was no categorization or grouping by product type; women’s fashion, accessories, and home, were all embedded in a single, undifferentiated list. From a customer standpoint, this format is difficult to use. It requires scanning hundreds of names simply to determine whether the promotion applies to anything a shopper is interested in buying.

At that point, the offer becomes much less compelling as a shopping incentive. The headline “25% off” may look generous, but the experience of trying to apply it feels constrained. What appears simple at first glance becomes complicated once you read the fine print.

There is also a question of credibility. When the visible promise is broad, “Come Back & Take 25% Off”, and the underlying exclusions are both extensive and hard to navigate, the promotion can start to feel less straightforward than the subject line suggests. Shoppers respond not only to the discount level, but to whether the terms feel clear and reasonable. When an offer takes this much effort to figure out, confidence in the message itself starts to slip.

Documenting the Experience for Bloomingdale’s

I was so baffled by the sheer volume of this fine print that I decided to test how their leadership handles constructive feedback. I sent a detailed letter to the CEO of Bloomingdale’s and the Chairman of its parent company, Macy’s, describing the flawed promotional structure and noting the 690 exclusions. To ensure they saw exactly what a shopper experiences, I enclosed the version of the list I had manually annotated, with each excluded brand numbered from 1 through 690, illustrating just how overwhelming the promotion felt from the other side of the screen.

In the letter, I also pointed out the operational mismatch between the “it’s been a while” framing and my recent order placed just six days prior. I provided both my email address and phone number, explicitly inviting a dialogue and making it as easy as possible for their team to respond.

Three weeks later, I have not received an acknowledgment or response. While companies receive large volumes of customer correspondence, the absence of any acknowledgment was disappointing given the detailed documentation that accompanied the letter.

The Problem Isn’t Exclusions; It’s Clarity

The issue here is not that exclusions exist; they are a normal feature of retail promotions. The problem is how they are communicated and structured. A more customer-focused approach would begin by framing the message to reflect the practical scope of the offer, so the headline accurately reflects where the discount can actually be used. The details should then be presented in a format that's easy to scan, using a larger font, grouping excluded brands by category, and clearly highlighting the major product areas where the promotion does apply. The goal should be to help shoppers understand, within seconds, whether the offer is relevant to what they want to buy.

When an exclusions list feels overwhelming, the promotion becomes less effective. Customers may stop reading the fine print altogether or decide the effort isn't worthwhile, reducing the likelihood that the promotion will achieve its intended purpose.

This principle is familiar in the luxury resale market, where buyers rely on accurate condition descriptions, transparent authentication processes, and clearly stated return policies before deciding to purchase a secondhand item. Whether the context is a department store promotion or a luxury handbag listing, the underlying principle is the same: when information is clear, usable, and transparent, customers are more likely to move forward. When it feels confusing, overwhelming, or difficult to interpret, they are more likely to hesitate. Trust is built not only by the offer itself, but by how clearly and honestly that offer is communicated.

Page 1 of the list of exclusions

Page 2 of the list of exclusions

Full Disclosure: The content in this post reflects my personal opinions and observations. It is intended for informational purposes only and should not be considered professional, financial, or legal advice. I’ve been a long‑time Bloomingdale’s shopper and have never been involved in any disputes with the company. I do not have any business relationship with Bloomingdale’s and have not received any compensation for writing this post.