[HN Gopher] What happens to all the stuff we return?
___________________________________________________________________
What happens to all the stuff we return?
Author : pseudolus
Score : 150 points
Date : 2023-08-16 16:15 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.newyorker.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.newyorker.com)
| RandallBrown wrote:
| A little surprised there's no mention of Nordstrom since their
| return policy is famously generous.
|
| I worked for Nordstrom for a few years and one stat about returns
| that I heard was absolutely wild. Apparently something like 80%
| of all dresses sold got returned.
|
| A lot of this was because people would buy an expensive dress for
| a single event and only want to wear it once, but people would
| also order a few sizes and just return the ones that didn't fit.
|
| We worked on a few different things to make the latter process a
| little better for the consumer and cheaper for the business. A
| fun solution was allowing you to set up a reservation for a
| dressing room at a local store. You would choose a bunch of items
| and then "reserve" them to try on. Once you made the reservation
| someone in the store would go pick the items in various sizes and
| get them ready for you. When you arrived at the store, a dressing
| room with your name was ready and (if I remember correctly) you
| could just walk out with the items you wanted and leave the rest.
|
| I'm not sure this experience ever made it outside of a few stores
| in the Seattle area.
| skipkey wrote:
| My wife and I have definitely used Nordstrom's return policy by
| buying two sizes and returning the one that fit worst. But
| Nordstrom still benefits because we would return the online
| orders at the store in person, and if we are there we are going
| to do some shopping.
| SomeRndName11 wrote:
| I live in ex-USSR Central Asia and there is no such a thing
| as return, but many stores allow you to take an item and
| echange for different size if does not fit.
| RandallBrown wrote:
| Yeah, buying multiple sizes and returning the bad fits was
| never something anyone really wanted discourage. Most of the
| ideas were around making people confident they could get a
| better fit without ordering multiple items or making the in
| store return experience better so people would use it.
| bombcar wrote:
| Buy and return is the only option offered at some places now
| that the dressing rooms were removed for Covid and never
| returned.
| miah_ wrote:
| Some stores (generally high end clothing) offer 'Personal
| Shopper' service that does what you described, its not just
| Nordstrom. There are also small businesses, and people who will
| do 'Personal Shopper' services across brands / stores.
| TylerE wrote:
| My understanding is an actual personal shopper does a lot
| more than that - they're the ones even selecting the
| candidate options.
| RandallBrown wrote:
| What I described is a bit different than a personal shopper
| program, which Nordstrom also has.
|
| This experience involved basically no interaction with a
| store employee. The Nordstrom app would alert the store that
| the customer was approaching and their dressing room would be
| readied. After that the customer only interacted with
| salespeople if they wanted to.
|
| Nordstrom also had a pretty cool personal shopping system
| that I'm not sure still exists. Apparently stylists and
| customers can have fairly close relationships and it was
| pretty common to exchange numbers so a stylist could alert
| the customer of new items they might like. You could link
| your Nordstrom account to your phone number and stylists
| could send you items and you could simply reply with a yes or
| no to buy them.
|
| This was done using a custom texting app on the stylist's
| end. This gave Nordstrom some more visibility into their
| customer's shopping habits and prevented the stylist from
| having to give out their personal phone number.
| coding123 wrote:
| I think their new return policy is:
|
| Please do return it, k thanks.
|
| https://www.npr.org/2023/08/14/1193726286/smash-and-grab-mob...
| hammock wrote:
| I know what happens to LL Bean returns (no longer lifetime
| sadly due to abuse) .. they go to the Bean Outlet in Freeport.
| We have a lot of randomly-monogrammed tote bags and towels in
| our house purchased from there, haha.
| twobitshifter wrote:
| LL Bean had the best lifetime return policy but they had to get
| rid of it. People would get something from a thrift shop, bring
| it to ll bean and demand a new one, then resell the new one. Even
| genuine customers would have 40 year old muck boots they would
| try to change for a new pair. People treated it as a lifetime
| shoe, glove, hat subscriptions rather than a satisfaction
| guarantee.
| Scalene2 wrote:
| In my city there are multiple stores that just bulk buy returns,
| dump them into bins and sell at a fixed price per item that
| starts at $25 goes down every day until the end of the weekly
| cycle when everything is a dollar.
| telotortium wrote:
| https://archive.ph/1C888
| ThePhysicist wrote:
| Sometimes Amazon will issue a refund immediately when you drop
| off a package at DHL (i.e. right after they scan the QR code in
| the shop). I always wondered if that means they won't bother to
| look at what you actually return to them and it will simply go to
| a recycler or landfill.
| LouisSayers wrote:
| There was a famous incident of a guy returning boxes of dirt
| and keeping all the items[1].
|
| Not sure how they deal with this now.
|
| 1 -https://www.foxbusiness.com/retail/amazon-dirt-
| scam-22-year-...
| bombcar wrote:
| It just means they credit you, it still returns to Amazon
| (unless it was a shipped by Amazon, sold by someone else, in
| which case it may be destined for some poor woman in Canada
| [22]). Some of them Amazon puts in amazon warehouse, some they
| trash, some they throw in giant bins that get auctioned off to
| scavengers.
|
| [22] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/amazon-
| shoe-...
| telecuda wrote:
| https://www.loveseat.com/ is a great example of a business built
| on a second market for returns (Austin, San Antonio, San Diego)
| dan-robertson wrote:
| Do those auctions shoot up in price shortly before the end of
| the auction? They currently give the impression of a
| surprisingly good deal, and that's already what I was
| expecting.
| MarkusWandel wrote:
| I had a basic smartphone from Costco (Moto G Play 2021). While
| perfectly adequate for me, the fingerprint sensor stopped
| working. Even a factory reset didn't restore it. A friend asked
| "How long since you bought it?" Well since you asked, 364 days.
| Well then you have one day to take it back.
|
| The lady at the customer service counter couldn't care less what
| was the issue with the phone, just that the charger and cable
| were included. Off it went, presumably, to one of their clearance
| centres, where someone got a half price (or less) smartphone that
| just turns out to not have a working fingerprint sensor. I wish I
| could have somehow communicated this - what's wrong with the
| device and why I returned it - but nobody cared. I then turned
| around and bought the same phone again, at the same price.
| crazygringo wrote:
| Did Costco change their return policy? It's now 90 days on cell
| phones, which is the return policy for most of their items. And
| that's already _far_ more generous than most retailers with
| either 30 or 14 days.
|
| A year is crazy. I assume it was under warranty though, so Moto
| would have replaced it?
| 93po wrote:
| Man if you just return your phone once a year is that free
| upgrades forever? Assuming the phone costs stay the same as
| they improve yearly
| bityard wrote:
| You certainly could scam the system to get perpetual free
| upgrades for all kinds of electronic equipment, and some
| people do. But thankfully, most of us are more ethical than
| that.
| 93po wrote:
| It was not a suggestion, but rather an observation inline
| with the hacker ethos.
|
| Also, I think ethics arguments fail somewhat when it comes
| to "harming" one of the largest companies on the planet
| operating within an exploitive capitalist framework
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| This all strikes me as just so gross and inefficient. My guess is
| that half the people who buy 5 dresses to try them on and then
| return 4 also will state how they are "worried about the
| environment" and will shame you if you don't have 3 separate
| recycling bins.
|
| I don't blame the consumers - businesses have deliberately
| trained them to act this way. But something simple, like
| regulation requiring all returns to cost like 5% or something,
| would drastically cut down on these returns which have a large
| environmental cost.
| 93po wrote:
| This logic can go forever though. Oh you care about fast
| fashion but you're not vegan? Oh you're vegan but you don't
| donate half your paycheck to orphans with disease? Oh you
| donate but not your kidney to a stranger?
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| No, that's not the point I was making (you seem to be saying
| "Unless you're as altruistic as Jesus, why bother?")
|
| What I was saying is that if you _do_ really care about
| something (say, the environment), it doesn 't mean that you
| just go live in a cave in the middle of the woods, but that
| you _should_ focus your efforts on reducing your
| environmental impact in ways that actually work (and, more
| importantly, industry and governmental leaders should focus
| efforts on things that have the biggest impact). That is, if
| you care about the environment, but you 're someone that also
| orders a ton of product with the intention to return most of
| them, it's probably a lot easier, and will have a lot bigger
| impact, if you just stop that behavior, than if you, say, get
| rid of your car and only force yourself to walk and bike
| everywhere.
| solardev wrote:
| This was such a fantastic read. Thanks for sharing. I won't
| return this one.
| burcs wrote:
| There's a business near me that just buys truck loads of returns
| from Amazon, Lowes, Home Depot, etc... and allows customers to
| bid on each item individually.
|
| You can definitely get a good deal there on expensive items, but
| you have to be careful because more often than not things were
| returned because they were broke. You just pay extra to allow for
| returns.
|
| Was able to get a seemingly new iMac, couch, semi-automatic
| coffee machine, and lawn equipment.
| rwmj wrote:
| Is it something like the store that this youtuber went to?
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6V85qfsu3g
| duxup wrote:
| The secondary market can be really weird too. I recall someone
| studying the TV secondary market and found used TV selling for
| awfully close to and sometimes more than the equivalent new. It
| made no sense ... but it was happening.
|
| The local auction company near me too gets some wild weird bids
| that I see. Seems like there's an endless amount of people
| willing to take chance.
| hooverd wrote:
| Listed for or selling for? I think there's an assumption on
| CL or Facebook marketplace that you're going to get bargained
| down 20% regardless so might as well start a little higher.
| nfriedly wrote:
| Also, the things that are actually listed for a good price
| tend to disappear much faster. So when you're looking at
| search results, you're mostly seeing the higher priced
| items that haven't sold yet.
| moduspol wrote:
| There's definitely a strategy to it. You want to avoid
| generally appealing things (like TVs and common electronics)
| for the reason you described, but the opposite end of the
| spectrum (niche ones) are often great.
|
| We got two of the highest-end Toto bidet toilet seats for 60%
| off retail, still sealed in the packaging. Baby-related items
| were also pretty heavily discounted and still good.
|
| It is taking a chance, but the chances seem to be pretty
| good. So far the worst we've seen is a baby swing that needed
| a little elbow grease to solve a minor assembly issue. It was
| something like 80% off retail.
|
| We moved away from their closest warehouse so we haven't
| bought a lot recently, but IMO anything that reduces waste
| and implicitly reduces the cost of returns to retailers (by
| increasing the price these auctioneers pay for the goods) is
| good.
| burcs wrote:
| Yeah, as it's grown in popularity I've noticed this too. I
| often times stop myself and think, it's probably better
| spending the extra 10% or so to get a manufacturer warranty.
|
| I was assuming it was from resellers, but maybe it's just the
| idea of getting a "deal"
| justin66 wrote:
| If there's a way for the seller to take cash in payment, one
| completely rational explanation for what might be happening
| is money laundering.
|
| > selling for awfully close to and sometimes more than the
| equivalent new. It made no sense ... but it was happening.
| hackinthebochs wrote:
| Shouldn't be too surprising after the lessons learned from JC
| Penny. The emotion of feeling like you're getting a deal is
| motivating regardless of the truth of the matter. Buying on
| the secondary market inherently gives you that feeling, which
| apparently is worth a significant markup.
| prmoustache wrote:
| I buy mostly second hand but that is just because I hate
| waste. I still take a look at price as new and make a lower
| offer, giving the link of the cheaper as new item if that
| is the case.
|
| Prices can vary so much in 6 months/1 yesr that they truly
| think they offer a low enough price.
| duxup wrote:
| Oh man I used to just shop at JC Penny almost exclusively.
| I remember when they stopped the sales. I stood in the
| store and just knew they were screwed. There was just no
| way the existing customer base was going to suddenly change
| behavior.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Interesting. One of the reasons I prefer shopping at
| Trader Joe's instead of Albertson's is that they don't
| have constant stupid sales all the time. (Also because
| TJs is usually 30% cheaper.) Maybe groceries are
| different?
| gffrd wrote:
| Parent is right. "Discount buyers" are their own camp,
| and aren't buying on price, objectively--they're buying
| on perceived savings. Note that I say _perceived_.
|
| If you had a group of discount buyers shopping for chips,
| and split it in two groups ...
|
| - Group A sees a bag of chips marked down from $5 to $3
|
| - Group B sees the same bag of chips for $3 as "retail
| price"
|
| ... you can expect to see more chip sales coming from
| Group A. Heck, you'd expect A to beat B even if the
| discounted price was _higher_ than the retail price.
|
| Now throw "limited time offer" or "first 50 people" in to
| the mix and watch them fly off the shelves ...
| Ekaros wrote:
| Lately in grocery stores I get this sort of feeling when
| I look at prices. I look at it and hey that is pretty
| decent looking price. And then I read the small print
| that has the non-sale regular price. And slight mental
| math oh I would save 50 cents on something I don't really
| need just now... Pass!
| duxup wrote:
| Certainly it is about expectations. JC Penny was all
| about the sales. That's when you knew to shop. So they
| trained their customers for it and suddenly abandoned it
| and people didn't know what to think.
| ignite wrote:
| It's the people. If you shop for "fun", then you probably
| like sales. It's a game.
|
| If, however, you don't like to shop, and you do it solely
| to acquire things, you probably don't like sales.
|
| Very clearly, Ron Johnson was in the latter category,
| while JC Penney shoppers were in the former.
|
| https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/j-c-penney-
| apologize...
| TheBolivianNavy wrote:
| I understand why it failed and I realize that I am not a
| typical consumer but I loved when JC Penny eliminated
| sales and just charged a flat price. I don't shop for
| clothes often, I don't want to wait for sales or figure
| out which coupon is slightly better, I just want a no
| hassle transaction.
|
| They also killed their Big and Tall clothing line (The
| Foundry) last year which was my go-to for plain shirts in
| tall sizes.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| Was it before or after you could easily price check
| online by simply pointing the camera on an item?
| spookthesunset wrote:
| I remember way, way back in the day the "used" PC parts you'd
| order on ebay would wind up getting bid so high they'd be
| sold for more than a brand new "latest and greatest" model.
| jrmg wrote:
| That's still pretty true. Good condition used items on eBay
| often seem to go for near MSRP - even if it's easy to get a
| new one below MSRP from regular retailers!
|
| It's interesting what eBay has done to the used market in
| general. Before the internet, it was a rule of thumb that
| something second hand (from e.g. local classified ads)
| would be no more than 50% of the retail price.
|
| I think that eBay drove prices up by opening the market
| nationally (and internationally), so that people who
| _really_ wanted anything could find it - and the large
| discount previously necessary to guarantee sale in a small,
| local, pool was no longer necessary.
|
| I wonder if there have been studies down on this.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| For international it made sense, because not every retail
| would ship internationally, but a private seller on the
| eBay might. Otherwise, I don't see why a national buy
| would choose a used item from ebay over a new one from an
| online retailer.
| bradley13 wrote:
| Abusive customers should pay. Otherwise, the costs of this
| nonsense get passed on to everybody.
|
| You buy 12 dresses and return 11? So sorry, you're still paying
| for 6 of them. I buy all of my clothes online and - aside from a
| blatant defect - have never returned anything. It's just not
| necessary, as long as the retailer is honest with their sizing.
|
| No returns on holiday goods after the holiday. No returns on used
| generators after a storm. Etc.
|
| Seriously, just stop. It's not like you're going to lose
| worthwhile customers.
| ranting-moth wrote:
| > honest with their sizing
|
| The sizing system is broken. We need a new comprehensive
| standard sizing system.
|
| Garments can still say size X on it, but then include a bunch
| of other standard encoded measurements.
| mikestew wrote:
| _It 's just not necessary, as long as the retailer is honest
| with their sizing._
|
| Yeah, and if a frog had wings, it wouldn't bump its ass when it
| hops. An otherwise reasonable comment marred by a disconnection
| from reality.
| rescbr wrote:
| The problem is that at least for clothing, product descriptions
| are crap, dimensions are all over the place, products don't
| match the picture and every other brand has its own definition
| of sizing.
|
| The retailers/brands are the dishonest ones.
|
| Other items, sure. At least in my country there's a 7 day no
| questions asked return period for returns on online purchases.
| Otherwise, unless it's a defective product, it's a done deal.
| [deleted]
| tryptophan wrote:
| It's people like you that are too honest that these companies
| make most their money from.
|
| They are arbitraging morality. Providing a financial incentive
| to be shitty and dishonest.
| roadbuster wrote:
| > too honest
|
| Consider some reflection on this statement
| adrr wrote:
| No one would buy from you if you have very restrictive return
| policies. If you start denying people claims, you piss people
| off and having motivated angry customers is very bad for
| business. You also risk the government coming down on top of
| you especially if your marketing includes things like "hassle-
| less returns" or "no questions returns".
|
| Also even if you return 11 out of 12 dresses, the margins
| around clothes is so high, the company still makes money.
| Landed costs for the dress was probably under $10 and probably
| sold for $100. When I worked for apparel company, we encouraged
| people to buy multiple products and return the stuff that
| doesn't fit or didn't like because in the end, we had 70% gross
| margins and most people are lazy and don't return stuff.
| antihero wrote:
| Part of the reason online shopping works and can replace the
| high street is that you can buy stuff, actually try it on, and
| return the stuff that you don't like though. It's not abusive
| in the slightest.
| ebiester wrote:
| Sizes are not standardized, and most people don't know how it's
| going to fit until they try it on. Maybe the right answer is to
| have every piece tailored, and I'd say that's a valuable way to
| reduce the need to return, but I've definitely seen clothes
| online that I didn't like when I had them in my hands.
|
| The answer, to me, is that I won't order clothes online.
| throwway120385 wrote:
| Have you ever gone dress shopping with a woman? Because I've
| gone with my wife and I can tell you from observation that the
| size numbers are meaningless, the measurements don't tell you
| anything about how it fits, and nobody ever carries the right
| size in the right dress. Women who wear dresses can spend hours
| or days shopping around.
|
| Three measurements are not enough to describe the shape of
| anyone's body and you should stop pretending that it is.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I would say an abusive customer is one who wears the item,
| literally uses it, and then returns it to get a free use out of
| it.
|
| But if someone is ordering things to simply try them on for
| size or look, and end up returning it, I do not see how that is
| abuse. If it is costing the retailer too much, then they should
| dissuade it by enforcing return fees.
|
| I love online clothes shopping because in store shopping wastes
| time when they do not have the size I need. So I order 3 sizes,
| the size I think will fit me, the size above, and the size
| below. I keep whichever one works best, and return the other 2.
| I never take any tags and whatnot off, so I hope the retailer
| can simply inspect the item and put it back in inventory.
|
| But who knows, maybe the labor costs to inspect returns is too
| high. Either way, if a retailer wants to advertise free
| returns, that is their business.
| tehwebguy wrote:
| Plus returns done this way are a replacement for the fitting
| room, which cost the retailer money to own or rent, build out
| and maintain, staff and keep climate controlled etc whether
| you shopped there or not.
| endisneigh wrote:
| A retailer could do what you're suggesting - and then they'll
| find no one will bother with them.
|
| There's a reason every popular retailer offers hassle free
| returns.
|
| The only way it could _possibly_ work is if this place you
| propose were much cheaper, but returns don 't cost enough to
| the company to possibly make up for the lost revenue - alas.
| renewiltord wrote:
| That's some half of all online clothes buyers who buy multiple
| sizes to get something that fits and return the rest. It's a
| normal enough flow that some stores enable it explicitly like
| https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=...
| paxys wrote:
| If companies don't want people buying 12 dresses and returning
| 11 of them then they can easily enforce it somewhere among
| their hundreds of pages of terms and conditions. Buying
| multiple sizes, colors, varieties and returning most of them is
| exactly how most of the world shops online, and retailers are
| perfectly fine with that, because they are competing with
| physical stores where you can do exactly that. Using a service
| exactly as it is intended to is not "abusive".
|
| If you aren't happy with the practice then shop at a site that
| explicitly bans this and quit your preaching. It's not mine or
| anyone else's job to ensure that a corporation's profits are
| maximized. You are free to take any moral stance you want, just
| don't impose it on everyone else.
| jaclaz wrote:
| I may be wrong but if there is a percentage as high as 30-40%
| of items that are returned and that cannot be resold to other
| customers and are either liquidated or destroyed, the
| (greedy) corporation has already raised all prices 50% higher
| than what would be possible if there wasn't such waste.
|
| At the end of the day customers are the ones that pay for
| that, if they are happy, it's fine of course.
| edmundsauto wrote:
| Cost to the companies is usually a lot lower than retail.
| 1-2-4 is common - $1 to produce, $2 cost to company, $4 to
| customer.
|
| 40% return rate would increase cost to the company ~20%,
| plus operational expenses to process the returns.
|
| I think it's even more complex - consumer confidence in
| return processes probably makes them more likely to buy
| something in the first place, which reduces overall cost
| due to scale. So if you reduced consumer confidence, they
| would buy fewer items, which probably also harms the
| business (and raises consumer prices because scale is
| reduced).
| paxys wrote:
| Do you think the company would start charging less than
| what consumers were willing to bear if the rate of returns
| suddenly dropped?
| Shaanie wrote:
| Yes? Competition is a wonderful thing.
| progman32 wrote:
| Unfortunately, I don't think the last sentence holds if one
| looks beyond money. Everyone ends up paying for it
| eventually, in the form of the resources that went into
| growing the cotton, burning the fuel for electricity and
| transportation, etc, just to take the end product very
| nearly directly into the trash heap. It's shameful.
| gffrd wrote:
| First posted yesterday, 5/15:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37128642
| Shounak wrote:
| If anyone is in the NYC area there's a huge store called Bingers
| Bargain Bins that stocks returns and overstocked items from
| Amazon and other retailers. They have a cool model: on Fridays
| inventory gets restocked and all items are $7, and the price goes
| down by $1 each day until everything is $1 on Tuesdays (store is
| closed Wed & Thu).
|
| https://www.insider.com/new-york-city-store-sells-overstock-...
| moduspol wrote:
| Yes. One just opened in the Pittsburgh area, too.
|
| https://www.yinzbinz.com
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| They did a show on this place on the Travel Channel I think.
|
| It was pretty cool because the people who run it are pretty
| smart. Every day they change the locations of items so people
| can't monopolize certain items and it forces people to actually
| dig to find stuff.
|
| I've also seen several online places who will sell you Amazon
| returns by the pallet. You can choose a broad, general category
| like "electronics" and most of the time you have no idea what
| you're getting since they wrap all the stuff up.
|
| There's Youtube channels of people who buy this stuff, bring it
| to their warehouse, then unpack it and sort it and then they
| sell most of it on CL, Ebay or other marketplaces.
|
| The secondary market for a lot of this stuff is still very
| active.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| How does one buy a bull return from Amazon or likes?
| gumballindie wrote:
| > She wasn't planning to keep the lot
|
| Yeah that person should be banned from online shops. Genuine
| returns? Sure. But buying just to try out? Come on.
| lfowles wrote:
| Explicitly supported many places!
|
| https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=...
|
| https://www.warbyparker.com/home-try-on
| gumballindie wrote:
| Well, ok, for a small number of items, but not 10. That's
| incredbily wasteful.
| antihero wrote:
| What's wrong with wanting to try stuff out? Or buying multiple
| sizes in order to get a fit? That's just common sense if you
| can't try on in person.
| probably_wrong wrote:
| To me, this is the line of reasoning that happens when you
| start with a bad idea and build reasonable steps on top of
| it. Ordering several items with the intention of returning
| all but one is a _rational_ response to a problem caused by
| an idea that 's flawed from the beginning.
|
| Online shopping for clothes is a bad idea because, as a rule,
| you can't try stuff before buying. The solution would be to
| have physical stores - it would be good for your
| neighborhood, reduces waste, can be quick, etc.
|
| However, it turns out that customers would rather not leave
| the comfort of their computers to go to the nearest shopping
| mall, so instead we'll send the stuff to them with free
| returns to make up for the fact that this is not an efficient
| method of buying clothes. We generate a ridiculous amount of
| garbage out of perfectly good items, we burn a whole lot of
| fossil fuels sending them back and forth, we destroy the
| neighborhood economy, and we lose a lot of money and time in
| the process. All of that to make a bad idea seem good.
|
| Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| > The solution would be to have physical stores
|
| Now I think _that 's_ the bad idea and the solution is
| shopping online.
| toast0 wrote:
| The problem is variety. Are your stores going to stock all
| the clothing items I need? What if I'm outside the normal
| size ranges? What if my fashion preferences aren't the
| global or local trends? What if I'm traveling to Australia
| and need flipped season wear? (Although I read an article
| that some stores in Florida stock based what people
| traveling from South America will want to bring back)
| jrussino wrote:
| It turns out that customers would rather not spend extra
| time getting measured and then waiting for garments to be
| custom-made, so instead we'll ship large quantities of pre-
| made generic clothing in every possible size to a store in
| a shopping mall and then let them drive there, park, try
| on, buy the ones they like best (or move on to the next
| store), and drive home. We generate a ridiculous amount of
| garbage with all of the packaging and unsold inventory and
| the cheaply-made clothes that get worn out and discarded
| more frequently, and we burn a whole lot of fossil fuels
| shipping those products from factories to warehouses to
| shopping malls and making people drive to those malls,
| park, drive home, we take work away from tailors and
| seamstresses and homemakers, and people waste time and
| money in the process...
|
| Not saying you're entirely wrong, but it's interesting to
| see how quickly the "new thing" becomes the "old thing"
| that's getting disrupted.
| mushbino wrote:
| It's like the person in a long ice cream line who needs to
| ask for a dozen samples one after the other, but this then
| makes the ice cream store stop giving samples entirely.
| vkou wrote:
| If the ice cream store was selling ice cream on a 70%
| margin, they wouldn't give a crap about how many licks of a
| tasting stick that customer would take, as long as they
| bought a scoop at the end of the day.
|
| Clothing retailers don't, either. They make way more money
| from someone who buys 50 dresses a year and returns 45 of
| them, than from you agonizing over a single shirt purchase.
| taneq wrote:
| Nothing's wrong with asking to try things out. If you're
| shopping online, though, the answer is no. You're in a
| different city, maybe a different continent, treating items
| that you bought online like dressing room try-ons is
| disingenuous. 'Buying online' = sending a
| purchase order = entering a contract to buy the
| item = if you receive the item and it is as
| advertised then the contract is complete.
|
| It's not a 'tHe cUsToMeR iS aLwAsY riGHt" free for all.
| turtlebits wrote:
| If you're selling items where fit/look/comfort are unknown
| and you don't have a brick and mortar store- online
| purchasing and returns is the only way to try things on and
| is just a cost of doing business. Fortunately markups are
| very high on fashion items.
| Tijdreiziger wrote:
| Dutch (maybe EU?) consumer law disagrees with you. A 14-day
| return policy is mandated by law, for the specific reason
| that consumers can't inspect items prior to purchase (as
| they could in a physical store).
| throwawaaarrgh wrote:
| This is dystopia to me.
|
| It's impossible that all that money could be thrown away by
| companies without it being dirt cheap to produce the products.
| And it couldn't be dirt cheap to produce them without exploiting
| cheap labor and the environment. And it's impossible to sustain
| without tricking consumers into buying more than they need, and
| tricking investors that their sales numbers equal their value as
| a company.
|
| Consumers are the fuel for a machine that pollutes and exploits,
| and churns out great wealth for a select few. Between 10 and 40
| percent of the consumer economy has to be exploitative in order
| to sustain the return rate. Madness.
| arboles wrote:
| Is it that the companies are so filthy rich that they're eager
| to eat up the risk of customer's recklessness, or is it that
| the current prices account for the items that get returned, and
| the cost of refunds is ultimately on the consumer?
| jmholla wrote:
| This was a good article, but I don't think the closing quote
| implies what the original speaker or the article writer think:
|
| > " 'I'll sell you a computer for the same price as the one you
| have now--a nice, expensive computer. But it will be twice as
| durable, and it will weigh half as much, and its battery will
| last twice as long, and it will have twice the processing power
| and twice the memory.' " The only condition, he said, would be
| that returns would not be allowed, for any reason.
|
| > "This was Georgia Tech's sustainability center, so these were
| super-smart engineering hippies," he said. "There were probably
| forty or fifty people, all M.B.A.s." Hogan assumed that they
| would all jump at the deal. But no hands went up--not one.
|
| > "I was blown away," he said. "It's just astounding how embedded
| returns are in our behavior. When I finished my talk, I said,
| 'Thank you all. I definitely picked the right industry.' "
|
| To me that could also mean that these people didn't see the value
| in the better computer he was selling. They already have a
| computer that works and costs them $0 to keep. Maybe though,
| since the audience was MBAs, they'd expect to be able to sell
| their current computers for that exact price?
| saulpw wrote:
| I think it's more a lack of trust: sales and marketing can and
| will say anything to get us to buy their products. I can tell
| you right now that if someone made me the above offer, alarm
| bells would go off in my head. What's wrong with it then?
| What's the likelihood the computer will be nonfunctional on
| delivery? Will it catch on fire if used outside on a sunny day?
| Is it incompatible with the software I'd want to use? I can
| think of dozens of reasons why the given specs might not be
| incorrect, and still I wouldn't want it. Or the salesperson
| might just lying outright!
|
| As consumers the only reasonable recourse we've been given is a
| return policy. As it is, I've been burned way too many times on
| "deals", to the point that even if there's a return policy, I'm
| skeptical. Returning things is a hassle at best, and I often
| have to pay for shipping. Even if the return policy is "we'll
| give you a complete refund and you don't have to ship it back"
| now I have to dispose of this thing I don't want, which might
| be unwieldy (ever tried to take something to the dump on public
| transit?) or contain toxic materials.
|
| No thanks. A company that won't stand behind its product is not
| a company I want to do business with.
| bombcar wrote:
| You can split the difference with a short "no questions
| asked" return period (say, 30 days) and then a longer
| warranty period (or no warranty period at all).
|
| For certain products, I'd be satisfied with that.
| jrmg wrote:
| I wonder what was actually asked. I'd say 'no' to the question
| as written in the article too, because it implies that I can't
| return it if it is defective or breaks.
| lm28469 wrote:
| There is an Amazon center in Slovakia just to burn some returned
| products because it's illegal in most other countries
|
| The best part is that they don't even operate in Slovakia
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| >they don't even operate in Slovakia
|
| Like they don't have a local site, or they don't even ship
| there?
|
| Where I am, I'm forced to use UK or DE amazon, despite there
| being a center here (and a whole lot of AWS/employees).
| lm28469 wrote:
| You can't order from Amazon in Slovakia, they don't exist
| besides the return center
| crazygringo wrote:
| Do you have a source for that?
|
| Because a quick Google search reveals that Amazon absolutely
| does have a fulfillment center in Slovakia, but I can't find
| any reference whatsoever to burning anything.
|
| It's a pretty bold claim so I'm curious where you got it.
| lm28469 wrote:
| Yes it's extremely hard to find info about it, almost as if
| they didn't want it to be too visible
|
| Here you go, it used to be on youtube but was deleted for
| some reasons: https://amp.dw.com/en/so-long-
| superstores/video-65225396
|
| At 35min you learn about a returned box of coffee pods that
| travels about 2000km through France, Germany, czech republic
| and end up in Slovakia in a garbage processing plant. The
| product was unopened and had an expiration date 2 years in
| the future, it's just cheaper for them to dispose of it than
| verify its status and restock it
| crazygringo wrote:
| Thanks for that source.
|
| So returns go to Slovakia because it's centrally located in
| Europe with a cheaper labor supply, the video states. Makes
| sense.
|
| There's no indication it's in order to burn products.
| There's also no suggestion that this is a question of
| economics, but rather of health and safety. Returning
| anything you ingest (food, beverage, drugs) is a special
| category.
|
| So Amazon tosses returned food for health and safety, which
| goes into the local garbage plant. Which uses incineration
| to reduce landfill waste, as many garbage plants in Europe
| do.
|
| What's the alternative? I'm not really sure how effective
| it would be to try to donate coffee pods. It's not like
| homeless shelters have Nespresso machines. And the people
| with Nespresso machines generally don't want coffee that
| has been sitting around a total stranger's possibly filthy
| and unhygienic house for weeks -- whether or not you think
| that's a rational attitude.
| actionfromafar wrote:
| Just another way large companies arbitrage jurisdictions.
| kitanata wrote:
| [flagged]
| msluyter wrote:
| Random story.
|
| I used to have a pretty intense phobia about returning things,
| and 90% of the time I'd opt to just eat the cost rather than
| doing so.
|
| When we had our first child, we bought this automatic
| rocker/chair thing. I got it out of the box and put it together
| -- it had these locking joints where like a spring pin would pop
| into internal slot, such that once put together it was impossible
| to disassemble.
|
| Once I'd finished, I put our daughter in it, and when turned on,
| one part rubbed against part of the structure, making an annoying
| clicking sound. My wife, half mad from lack of sleep, took one
| look/listen and told me to get it out of the house. (In much more
| colorful language).
|
| Just then, our daughter, who was still in the chair, who was
| wearing diapers a size too small because we'd run out of her
| normal size, pooped. We quickly got her out but there was a
| quarter size stain on the fabric. We cleaned that as best we
| could, but it was still visible.
|
| I collected the pieces, which no longer fit in the box because
| you couldn't fully take it apart, put as much in the box as I
| could, and took it back to the store. As I stood in line for the
| return with this overstuffed box with various rods & parts
| sticking out all askew, I kept replaying horror scenarios in my
| mind. Like the clerk taking it out of the box and shouting in
| front of everyone "YOU CAN'T RETURN THIS, YOU MONSTER, IT HAS
| POOP ON IT!"
|
| The clerk barely glanced at the box. I'm no longer afraid of
| returning things.
| whartung wrote:
| Another random anecdote.
|
| We ordered a custom glass shower door from Lowes because we
| were remodeling.
|
| During the process, we found we were happy with a curtain
| (which we did not have before, we were replacing an existing
| door).
|
| So, we asked Lowes if they would take it back, and they did.
|
| A custom sized, $1500 door -- and they took it back. We were
| really surprised and grateful for it, to be sure. No idea what
| the aftermarket is for random sized shower doors.
| buttercraft wrote:
| I have a custom glass shower door that I bought at a discount
| because someone returned it. Not to Lowe's though. It was
| some local tile shop.
| guyzero wrote:
| I suspect this is the case of a retailer prisoners dilemma -
| if one retailer offered no-questions-asked returns and one
| did not then the one offering returns would get a lot more
| business. If neither of them offered unlimited returns they'd
| both be better off, but as soon as one offer it (defects)
| then they both have to do so.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| Amazon used to be like that, but now they are making their
| returns harder.
| ronyeh wrote:
| Thanks for the morning chuckle. As a 2x parent I remember the
| poop blowouts (fondly?)....
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| Good for you. I think I have PTSD from the first one, 22
| years ago.
| sillystuff wrote:
| In the US, you have a "credit report" for your retail returns.
| If your returns are determined to e.g., be excessive (even if
| your other returns were at different retailers), you might be
| denied the return.
|
| An example of one of these retail return consumer reporting
| agencies:
|
| https://www.theretailequation.com/
| 13of40 wrote:
| Yep. They (edit: in Costco, Walmart, or whatever in the US)
| don't care, and half the time they're happy to point out that
| it's OK what you're doing and please just calm down. My wife
| didn't grow up in the US, so wasn't used to this, but now she's
| addicted to doing returns when there's anything even slightly
| wrong.
| mindslight wrote:
| My own transition was when I returned a few items in a row that
| were brazenly unfit for their intended purpose. A heater fan
| that had locked up and melted without a thermal cutoff kicking
| in, a palm sander whose handle got extremely hot, paint that
| didn't stick to a surface and beaded up. The clerk just didn't
| care about any reasons for returning or feedback. I had
| _wanted_ to be asked questions because these items were clearly
| defective. But, no questions asked. Companies just really don
| 't care about the details of what they're selling beyond the
| immediate bottom line.
|
| Since then I've come to see the return window as an extended
| purchase decision. My stock of items sitting around is a local
| cache of things I _might_ need, rather than having to delay a
| project for another shipping time or waste time running to the
| store and getting gouged. I 'll even do things like buy a tool
| because it's on sale at a good price, then decide a few months
| later whether I really need it or not. Recently I've even been
| toying with the idea of skipping digging through piles of box
| store sheet goods - order some quantity much larger than what I
| need, have them load onto my trailer, go through at home at my
| own pace, and then bring back the rejects/unneeded and they can
| unload.
|
| It's not how I'm wired - when I make decisions I generally want
| them to be settled. But I'm paying for that overhead anyway,
| and there's no honor on retailers' part - stocking busted up
| goods to begin with, playing games with sale prices and
| coupons, terrible packing jobs, etc. So whatever, they chose
| the rules and I just play them according to my own incentives.
|
| I still can't fathom how the overall system adds up though.
| Intellectually I get it that if only 10% of items are returned
| and trashed, prices only need to go up 10% to compensate. But I
| don't understand how there aren't many more returns since that
| is the optimal strategy for taking advantage of
| sales/bundles/competition/etc. I can only think that most
| people are much more reluctant to have "spent money"
| outstanding in the short term, regardless of getting it back
| down the line.
| bityard wrote:
| They're better now but a few years ago, I actively avoided
| buying tools at Home Depot because they always just restocked
| broken returns and I got burned by it multiple times. I'm not
| sure why they would do this other than sheer laziness. They
| even asked why you were returning it. (Why ask if you don't
| care?)
|
| On one particular trip, I returned some kind of complicated
| saw or jig or something because it was broken in a spot that
| I didn't see until after I brought it home. (It also had
| obvious signs of use, so I wasn't the first "owner" of it
| either.) After the return, I walked around the store to get
| some other items and then came back to the tool isle to get a
| replacement and was non-plussed to see that the exact item I
| returned 15 minutes ago had already been put back on the
| shelf, without a discount sticker or anything.
| mindslight wrote:
| I feel like that was the period when stores were adopting
| the easy returns but hadn't really accepted the results of
| taking the loss, so employees had poor incentives to just
| stick it back out for resale.
|
| Then again maybe they're still doing it with tools bought
| in store and then returned there. These days when I buy
| tools at HD they're generally ship to home. And when I
| return stuff in the store, they're often a different SKU so
| they get an RTV (return to vendor) tag rather than the
| store reselling them. Which given the return pallets I've
| seen for sale elsewhere (ie this article), I wonder if it
| isn't a euphemism for dispose of, even if the box is
| unopened.
|
| I've also got to wonder about this from the angle of the
| financial arrangements. Part of me always wonders if all
| that inventory is even owned by Home Depot, or if the
| contractual arrangements make it closer to a consignment
| relationship where stuff that is declared as unsaleable
| (for whatever reason) is eaten by the vendor.
| flutas wrote:
| > I've also got to wonder about this from the angle of
| the financial arrangements. Part of me always wonders if
| all that inventory is even owned by Home Depot, or if the
| contractual arrangements make it closer to a consignment
| relationship where stuff that is declared as unsaleable
| (for whatever reason) is eaten by the vendor.
|
| My understanding, which may not be the best, from a few
| years of working retail.
|
| Most items for sale are actually owned by the big box
| company (retailer), but anything returned as defective is
| typically trashed and the big box company gets a credit
| from the manufacturer on their next purchase. So
| basically the manufacturer eats the cost, but it's also
| contingent on the retailer still buying their products.
| toast0 wrote:
| > they get an RTV (return to vendor) tag rather than the
| store reselling them. Which given the return pallets I've
| seen for sale elsewhere (ie this article), I wonder if it
| isn't a euphemism for dispose of, even if the box is
| unopened.
|
| I think return to vendors are shipped at the vendor's
| expense, so vendors tend to ship to nearby surplus
| processors for the most part.
| el_benhameen wrote:
| We had a Costco couch that fell apart after a few months. I
| wanted to Craigslist it, but my wife wanted to return it. I
| carried it and the biggest load of shame I've ever felt in to
| the customer service counter and apologized profusely to the
| guy working there. He shrugged and said "man, it happens all
| the time, no problem. You wouldn't believe the kind of stuff
| people return."
|
| Another Costco employee told me that they go by the 51% rule:
| if you have 51% of an item, they'll take it back, even if it's
| the bones and packaging from a two-month-old rotisserie chicken
| that you say you didn't like.
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| My sister in high school worked at a cosmetics counter at the
| Mall of America for Estee Lauder. They had the same rule
| which was even more generous. You could use virtually any of
| their makeup stuff and as long as their was 10% still in the
| bottle they would take it back and refund full price.
|
| She said they had a few girls and older women who knew this
| and would return stuff all the time. She asked her manager if
| they could blacklist them because it was obvious they were
| abusing the return policy.
|
| The manager's response? "Its above my pay grade. I'll keep
| returning their stuff until someone at corporate tells me
| otherwise."
| bityard wrote:
| I had a co-worker who moved into an apartment in the area and
| bought all of his furniture and appliances at Costco. A year
| or two later, he took a job in another state and instead of
| moving all of his stuff across the country or hawking it on
| facebook, he just returned it all to Costco.
|
| It's certainly not what I would have done but he said they
| took it all back, no questions asked.
| flutas wrote:
| I've heard of real estate agents staging entire homes with
| various goods from Costco (furniture, TVs, etc) and then
| simply returning it when the open house is over.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| A few weeks ago, a Costco manager made an exception to
| needing more than half the product for someone requesting
| a refund for an empty carton of blueberries.
|
| I would have told them to pound sand. It is basically
| other Costco shoppers paying for fraudulent returns.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| Yeah, and Costco has a mechanism for dealing with it
| because it it a club system. They can simply kick you out
| or temporarily suspend your membership. I returned open
| packages, but it was because the product was spoiled or I
| was not able to get ahold of manufacturers warranty
| department. Otherwise, it's an abuse.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| I have heard of people returning / exchanging Keurigs at
| Costco as soon as they use up all the sample pods...
| again, and again, and again.
| wizofaus wrote:
| I'd heard similar stories of customers buying goods they
| knew they only needed temporally that they simply
| returned afterwards and obtained a full refund for. It
| does surprise me a little that stores don't have
| mechanisms in place to prevent this being abused, it's
| hard to see how it couldn't be a significant financial
| drain for them. FWIW "no questions asked returns" aren't
| really a thing in Australia from what I've observed. But
| not having a receipt isn't usually an issue if they can
| find the payment on their system and it matches your CC#
| either.
| Claude_Shannon wrote:
| To me as European that just feels like a theft ngl.
| OfSanguineFire wrote:
| This sounds like the kind of abuse that led to changes in
| REI's returns policy. Back when you could return anything
| no questions asked for a full refund, people would e.g. buy
| a tent, sleeping bag, and stove, hike the Apallachian
| Trail, and then just return all the gear. Or buy one of
| REI's touring bikes, cycle one of the Trans-American
| routes, and then return the bike, etc.
| Arrath wrote:
| I once bought a triplet set of luggage from costco that came
| packed inside each other nesting doll style.
|
| Outer bag was pristine. Upon getting it home I opened it up
| to find the inner two bags had various scuff marks and
| _baggage claim tags still attached_.
|
| Fair play, previous Costco customer. But I had expected a
| more thorough check of the product before the store returned
| it to the shelf for resale. It wasn't even marked as
| previously returned or preowned!
| cancerhacker wrote:
| Fry's Electronics was the absolute worst about this. They
| would sometimes mark items on the shelf down if they were
| obviously returns, but more often than not they'd re-shrink
| wrap it and sell it as new. And more often than not
| whatever it was would be missing relevant important pieces
| so as to be useless. (This on top of the "we're going to
| search your bag on the way out of the store", which I would
| just glare my way out of.) I loved the idea of Fry's having
| what I wanted, but the actual experience was wretched.
| pengaru wrote:
| No couch should be falling apart after so little time. You
| shouldn't feel guilty when it's a legitimate unhappy customer
| situation.
|
| Your money sure as hell didn't fall apart after a few months
| of their receiving it. Except maybe if you paid in BTC.
| samstave wrote:
| Been there - but it still sucks !!! as a commentary of our
| society - and our inability to make lasting things for long-
| term FEAR OF LOSING PROFIT.
|
| Every first-world item made should have a 2nd/3rd world plan
| for it.
|
| When your comfy butt is done with thing - you should be
| able/required to hand-down iten to next party, and you should
| be happy paying the premieum to use the item freshly new, as
| well as be happy that you cared for it such that the next
| person still gets an appreciated object.
|
| THE LAST THING we need is for a primary buyer of [THING] to
| think the *next step* to their use is trash/landfill.
|
| If you disagree with me, hand me the hammer that you have in
| the garage from your great grandfather and maybe then he can
| knock some sense into to.
| bityard wrote:
| There are many of us that actively seek out bargains on good
| used tools and equipment through estate sales and the like.
| But it takes lots of free time. The average homeowner and
| contractor do not have hours to waste on getting 50% off a
| $200 tool.
| ng12 wrote:
| There are externalities with this approach. A big issue with
| clothing donations, for example, is they put local textile
| manufacturers out of business. Why buy locally made whatever
| when you can get second-hand name-brand clothing for cheap?
| InitialLastName wrote:
| There's a "paying the window-breakers to keep the glass-
| makers in business" illogic to that.
|
| Why work to prevent any waste when we can just hire more
| people to generate more wasteful things?
| ng12 wrote:
| Because it's inequitable. You rely on an impoverished
| underclass to prevent your waste, while harming their
| ability to change the situation.
| usefulcat wrote:
| > our inability to make lasting things for long-term FEAR OF
| LOSING PROFIT.
|
| I agree that's part of the problem, but even if that weren't
| an issue you'd still have the (IMO) much bigger problem of
| most consumers preferring whatever product is cheapest.
| samstave wrote:
| This is why thos who make plastic products shoul be held to
| greater account...
|
| Wht saddens me, and I seem to see lit. nobodoy talking
| about is our glamourisizing 3d plastics printing of
| billions of arbitrary objects - and where these plastics
| will end up in the ecos...
|
| 3d printers (I have an ender3) should be urged to have a
| recycling platform.
|
| Personally - I want a 3d recycling machine which will shred
| HDPE, melt it to pellets and make a filiment extrusion for
| the 3d printer.
|
| We should have the 3d printing community building recycling
| stations from 3d filiment and object fails etc... and try
| to close the loop as much as possible.
|
| (lookng at you cosplayers of microplastic contamination for
| internet points)
| progman32 wrote:
| Unfortunately there isn't a true, affordable (for an
| individual or small group) circular solution that I've
| found. I've taken to gathering all my scraps in a bucket
| (not mixing plastic types) then occasionally having a
| "recycling day" to melt them down into bars, rods, or
| sheets, which are then used for other things using more
| traditional manufacturing techniques. I made some very
| pretty swirly vases on the lathe, for example. It's not
| ideal.
| datadrivenangel wrote:
| You can build or buy a filament recycling machine.
|
| The issue is that it costs more than a 3D printer, and
| often times the filament is not as good later, so you end
| up spending time and energy recycling when it would be
| less time and energy to create new filament.
|
| It would probably be better to put that time and money
| into insulating your house and growing flowers for local
| birds and bees.
| bombolo wrote:
| That's why we need regulations and mandatory 10-15yrs
| warranty
| cainxinth wrote:
| When I was young, TV pitchman Ron Popeil sold a food dehydrator
| and advertized that it was easy to clean. My mom bought one,
| tried it out, and upon realizing that most of the food she put
| in there was stuck to the trays, packed up the whole thing and
| mailed it back, dehydrated apple slices and all. They refunded
| her without an issue.
| RajT88 wrote:
| Just as an aside, Ron Popeil products were generally crap. He
| made a lot of money because those products mostly were bought
| as gifts for people (who were afraid they would offend the
| gifter if they returned them).
| mahathu wrote:
| I had an issue returning a macbook to a major electronics store
| chain within the 14 day right to return law (EU). The returns
| person and their manager said it wasn't possible to return it
| because after signing in with an Apple ID when you turn it on
| it gets "locked" to that ID or whatever. Fortunately there was
| another store in the city I had to travel to for appointment on
| the same day and they just took it back and gave me a refund. I
| hope the person there didn't get in trouble..
| YeBanKo wrote:
| It's activation lock. They can actually check if your removed
| it or not.
| foldr wrote:
| If the store acquired it legitimately then they can get it
| unlocked by Apple. It's just some amount of extra work for
| them.
| Ylpertnodi wrote:
| >within the 14 day right to return law (EU).
|
| Eu too. My local, we get 30 days for an items bought online,
| so I tell the shops 'thanks for letting me look, I'll get it
| online just for the better returns policy'.
| eckesicle wrote:
| That's why you also by your car online or over the phone
| (applies to EU/UK). Have the dealership mail/email the
| paperwork. They will ask you to come in because they know
| this is the case, but just stand your ground.
|
| Then you have the right to return if you find any defects
| within 14/30 days.
| bombcar wrote:
| I feel bad about returns sometimes; I bought something from
| Walmart, and the product had no issues at all, but I had
| misread how it would mount to my bike, and wouldn't work. I
| didn't notice until I had opened the box - I carefully repacked
| it and returned it.
|
| It was still perfectly fine, they complained not at all.
|
| The next day, there it is on the clearance aisle for $10 off. I
| felt bad.
| Ekaros wrote:
| On other hand I would be somewhat annoyed as customer if it
| had ended up with new items back in the shelve. You never
| know if something is missing or slightly broken.
| progman32 wrote:
| I bought a carpet cleaner "new" from target via curb
| pickup. It was clearly used (presumably once), there was
| water in the plumbing, the bottle of cleaner was opened,
| and the cord was not machine wrapped. Never used curbside
| pickup after that. I did keep the machine though, for
| better or for worse.
| bombcar wrote:
| I would have at least gone in and complained and get a
| discount (I have a similar carpet cleaner I got from the
| Walmart clearance aisle, best $30 or whatever I ever
| spent there).
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| They really don't care. I returned something once and the
| lady behind the counter asked what the reason for returning
| it was. I said, "my wife told me to get that ugly thing out
| of the house." She nodded, scanned it and gave me the refund.
| bombcar wrote:
| Yeah, they only ask the question to see if it should go
| back on the shelf, back into clearance, or into the
| auction, or trash.
|
| A completely un-opened non-food item goes on the shelf, an
| opened item goes into clearance, and most everything else
| is auctioned or trashed. If you say it was broken, it goes
| into trash but I daresay they ding the manufacturer.
| undersuit wrote:
| I bought the wrong size of shower curtain from Walmart and for
| some odd reason I held onto it for 4 years. When moving into my
| new place I found the shower curtain, that still didn't have
| the right size... so I returned it no questions asked, I think
| the price had even gone up a little bit since I bought it.
| doh wrote:
| As a European living in the US it took me many years to adjust
| to the return system in here.
|
| In "Europe" (I'm super generalizing here), to return a product,
| it has to be in pristine condition, you have to the original
| receipt and even then they will go over it like you are
| smuggling drugs into the country. In US, nobody cares. This is
| built into the business model. You pay higher prices due to
| returns, but then you buy more stuff because you don't worry
| about returns.
|
| When I first moved to the US, I was extremely careful with
| money (didn't have any). So every purchase was carefully
| planned and I worried about it long after it was done. Then I
| made a mistake and bought pair of shoes. They were
| uncomfortable. I felt like an idiot. But I already wore them,
| so now I am stuck. I told my colleague about it and he looked
| perplexed.
|
| After bunch of back and forth he decided to teach me a lesson.
| He took me a to a grocery store. Bought a can of corn. We
| walked out, he opened the can, dumped half of it in a trash
| can. We walked back to the return counter. My heart was pumping
| so hard I was losing sight at moments. He put it down on the
| counter and said: I would like to be refunded. I thought the
| clerk is going to smack him silly and me with him. But he
| didn't even flinch. Gave him few coins and we were on the way.
|
| This was 18 years ago. I since very well adjusted to the
| system, maybe a little bit too well.
| stcroixx wrote:
| It used to be like this in the US too. I'm still
| uncomfortable returning things because that's how it was when
| I grew up. Walmart and e-commerce are when this all changed.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| > You pay higher prices due to returns
|
| Do you?
|
| I remember when I was a cash-strapped student in France
| ordering photo gear from the US (Adorama or B&H) because the
| price + international shipping + customs + vat (the last two
| being applied on top of the shipping) + UPS's fees for
| handling customs was cheaper than buying from Europe.
|
| You know what the kicker was? It was a tripod made in Italy.
|
| It said "made in Italy" on it, not just an Italian brand
| manufactured in China. This was generally true for "regular"
| photo equipment (made in Japan), too.
|
| I haven't checked the prices recently, though.
| lukas099 wrote:
| You pay higher prices than you would otherwise, not higher
| prices overall necessarily.
| wingworks wrote:
| Yeah, they're obviously never seen what other countries pay
| for the same products. I know here in New Zealand,
| especially anything tech has a "NZ tax" added, not a govt
| tax, just a saying here, meaning the price of living in NZ.
| It's not uncommon for things to be double the price here
| compared to buying in the US and shipping here (accounting
| for all fees).
|
| Recent example buying a Ubiquiti UniFi Lite 8-Port switch
| from B&H shipped to NZ, all fee's accounted for is $138NZD
| (82USD) cheaper then buying it local.
|
| Someone is making bank somewhere in the supply chain.
|
| People often say, well you live on an island in the middle
| of nowhere, that's the price you pay. But that doesn't
| check out if a company in the US can ship a single (not on
| sale, at RRP) item for way less. How can a wholesalers in
| NZ, who bulk ships it's here at wholesale rate, and cheap
| (bulk) shipping rate, then end up with a price so much
| higher at retail.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| At my first job, our office manager was a really nice Indian
| woman. She told the story of bringing her father over for a
| visit from India in the late 80's. He brought a suitcase with
| him that he had purchased at Macy's at Herald Square
| (Manhattan) sometime in the 40's and the lock had broken. He
| insisted that she take him there to get it fixed because "it
| has a lifetime warranty and I'm not dead yet."
|
| No amount of arguing would get him to stop so she gave up and
| drove the hour or so into NYC and went into Macy's expecting
| to be extremely embarrassed at trying to get a beat up old
| suitcase fixed. Instead, they basically got the white glove
| treatment. Macy's couldn't fix the lock, but replaced the
| 40-year-old suitcase with something that was similar, treated
| them to lunch at the store restaurant, the manager took a
| photo with her Dad, etc. He, of course, was thrilled to death
| by all the attention.
|
| They were a pretty well-off family, so I expect that it was
| probably an expensive piece of luggage when new, but even so
| I was amazed by the story.
| ReptileMan wrote:
| Brilliant Porsche add on the topic
|
| https://youtu.be/R8-9oIq1hxw
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| It is indeed amazing how you can order nearly any single
| old part at a Porsche center: if you've got the PET
| catalog reference, even better. And the people at the
| counter there for "new old" parts do know their job: you
| explain them which part you need, the number you think it
| is, and more often then not they'll find it in no time,
| warn you about this or that similar but not identical
| part, that other part you'll then need too, how
| complicated the replacement procedure is, etc.
|
| Now for some stuff and in case bootleg ones exist, you
| better buy the bootleg part for it's going to be much
| cheaper.
|
| Or eBay, parts from crashed cars (you often see a photo
| of the "donor", crashed, car). Had the "roof console"
| going cuckoo before I got the extended manufacturer
| warranty so it was on me (and they wouldn't sell me the
| warranty unless I fixed it)... Turns out the roof console
| depends on which extra the car has (like "homelink" to
| open your garage door or not, the color of the interior,
| etc.). So it's a part that has to be made specifically
| for your car: Porsche quoted me something like 765 EUR
| for the part + one hour of work + VAT (something silly
| like 1100 EUR altogether). I found a nearly identical
| part on eBay for... 48 EUR and installed it myself in
| literally 5 minutes. 48 EUR vs 1100 EUR.
|
| Also some people on forums are very good at finding which
| company is manufacturing that one very identical part for
| Porsche, but without the Porsche logo on it: gonna be way
| cheaper too and it's literally the same part. One example
| would be a Porsche battery charger which is just a CTEK
| charger with the CTEK logo replace by a Porsche one and
| sold 2x the price (not the best example as better example
| would be actual car parts but you get the idea).
| neilv wrote:
| Nice. BTW, musical score sounds like:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Honey_(song)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_KDPUTyDyQ
| qingcharles wrote:
| Good ear!
| Arcanum-XIII wrote:
| They're pretty good with their previous model. You can
| upgrade/improve nearly everything from an original 911
| which is incredible... or rebuild it from the ground up.
| Now that's why a car from 1980 cost is not far from a new
| one. And that they're investment.
| neilv wrote:
| Thank Santa? :)
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwck_UHXQWg
| c1sc0 wrote:
| Am I the only one who thinks this is a disgusting attitude?
| progman32 wrote:
| You're not alone. Just because we can do something, doesn't
| mean we should. We waste at our own peril.
| flangola7 wrote:
| What's disgusting about it?
| beebeepka wrote:
| The enormous waste? I do find it concerning. There are
| plenty of "we do it because we can" types and encouraging
| such behaviour would only make things worse.
|
| I am not against returns, of course. But abusing these
| systems annoys and saddens me.
| lukas099 wrote:
| Sort of, but it also feels disgusting to be treated like a
| crook when you're making an innocent return, so there are
| tradeoffs.
| chasd00 wrote:
| you don't even need to go to the same store. Take any hammer
| to HomeDepot and, at the very worst, you walk away with store
| credit to buy a new hammer.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| True, and it makes business sense in a rich country. But just
| like in parenting, this kind of experience and expectation
| can yield entitled personalities, which is indeed a common
| stereotype of Americans abroad. Or see American students'
| attitudes towards their university. They also approach it
| with the same customer attitude, and fair enough, they do
| have to pay hefty sums.
| doh wrote:
| I think that's the crux of the point. Americans are trained
| to be demanding customers. Whatever is then packaged as a
| product/service for purchase, will be treated equally.
|
| As you pointed out, students pay a lot of money for their
| education in US. Shouldn't they have a say in it? If that's
| not good for the society, maybe it shouldn't be sold as a
| product in the first place.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| I leads quite far away. Americans are demanding customers
| which makes the service and products better in a way. But
| people are similarly also litigious, so everything a bit
| higher stakes will be ridiculously expensive. If little
| Timmy breaks a leg while with daycare corporation, the
| parents are likely to sue, because Healthcare is also a
| business etc etc. It all has its reason, it's just a
| whole different system and lifestyle and concerns than
| elsewhere (not to mention the whole thing around tips in
| certain service sectors).
|
| So while for me American students seem entitled, they'd
| see it as standing up for themselves.
|
| In Europe, where education is state subsidized, students
| are not customers, it's their responsibility to study
| well, as it is they who are being paid. "I'm a paying
| customer so you better give me good grades" just doesn't
| fly in that case.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Heh, that euro approach to education can create a real
| nightmare for Europeans moving to North America.
|
| US: "we require transcripts sent directly from the
| university"
|
| Euro university: "no, we don't have a portal for students
| to request transcripts and mail them to any address they
| request. It's the student's responsibility to keep a copy
| of their own transcripts each year.
|
| [9 calls/emails later] If you reallyyyyyy need us to do
| something for you, fiiiiiine, you can pickup a copy at
| this office (except during summer). If you're overseas,
| send a friend to pick it up, what's the problem? What do
| you mean nobody but us can touch it and you can't just
| send it to them yourself?
|
| Why are you being so difficult about this? This is way
| more than anybody else ever requires from us"
| bonoboTP wrote:
| I've never heard about such a concept. Do American
| universities offer that as a button click online? Do you
| mean transcripts to apply to grad school, or jobs in
| companies?
|
| Getting the university to mail something in my name to
| somewhere, for my own purposes seems nonsense from my
| European view. Like what do they have to do with a third
| party?
|
| Of course they will certify and stamp any documents that
| state objective facts about my studies (during opening
| hours, after waiting through a long queue). And probably
| if you explain the things and it sounds important like
| you git accepted at
|
| That said, things do differ between countries. In Hungary
| most universities switched from physical booklets where
| the profs had to physically sign each grade they gave, to
| an online system about 15 years ago. So no need to
| collect copies physically now.
|
| In Germany, universities vary in their practices but you
| can at least print out a proof of enrollment yourself
| which includes a verification code that third parties can
| check.
|
| But I think it's possible to get such things done in the
| end but it will need a lot of explanations and appearing
| in person.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| > Getting the university to mail something in my name to
| somewhere, for my own purposes seems nonsense from my
| European view. Like what do they have to do with a third
| party?
|
| They're a business and it's a useful service.
| A_non_e-moose wrote:
| Good example for the above comments on how certain
| business practices can make people have expectations that
| can be interpreted as entitled
| bonoboTP wrote:
| I get it. Trying to highlight the difference in attitude.
| Almost all universities in Europe are public universities
| (state owned) so they are not seen as businesses and we
| don't consider them service providers in that sense.
| lukas099 wrote:
| It was surprising to me too when I encountered it, but
| yes, at least at my college, in the rare instance that
| you needed an "Official Transcript", you filled out a
| form on a portal that included the address for it to be
| sent to. I think we got three for free and then they were
| like $15 a pop or something. I have no idea why they did
| this and did not just stamp/seal it and expect me to mail
| it myself.
| youainti wrote:
| The goal is to prevent fraud. They don't want people
| passing fake transcripts.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| What if you also fake the envelope and pretend that the
| sender is the university?
| mgkimsal wrote:
| In 2012, I ordered my transcripts from my university
| (from the 90s) and they sent me a copy. I didn't ask them
| to send it anywhere else. I was expecting a fee, but
| there wasn't any (perhaps just because I was sending it
| to myself?). There was no portal to click, but I emailed
| in, and had a back and forth email with someone, then got
| it in the mail a couple weeks later.
| [deleted]
| nonethewiser wrote:
| > But just like in parenting, this kind of experience and
| expectation can yield entitled personalities, which is
| indeed a common stereotype of Americans abroad. Or see
| American students' attitudes towards their university. They
| also approach it with the same customer attitude, and fair
| enough, they do have to pay hefty sums.
|
| "The customer is always right" is more true in America than
| Europe.
| bonoboTP wrote:
| That's precisely my point. There's a lot of upsides to
| that. It's often much smoother to get stuff done in the
| US. People want to solve issues and don't sweat the small
| stuff.
|
| To be more concrete than just Europe, if you take
| Germany, things tend to be more rigid and set in stone.
| But it's also changing with more experience interacting
| with American companies through globalization. And
| Eastern Europe is way worse than Western Europe which
| itself is behind the US. In the East you as a customer
| are made to feel small and the customer reps just want to
| get rid of you. It's probably a holdover from communism
| where stores and everything was state-owned so there was
| no profit motive to be nicer. It has lasting impact even
| down the generations, though more travel and foreign
| experiences are starting to change that too.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| I had a friend at a German company in the US that said a
| lot of their operational problems weren't shared by the
| headquarters in Germany because in Germany they had more
| power to tell people "too bad, you're just going to have
| to wait."
|
| Pros and cons I guess, but im not even trying to say one
| is better than the other. Just that the dynamic is real.
| IggleSniggle wrote:
| First time I've seen someone saying that Americans have
| better taste than Europeans (j/k)
| Paul-Craft wrote:
| No need for "j/k" here. The original quote was something
| to the effect of "The customer is always right _in
| matters of taste._ " It wasn't intended as a dictum to
| bend over backward to the breaking point and beyond in
| the name of "customer service."
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Well, I think my tastes are better than everyone's.
| That's why they're my tastes.
|
| But I actually have no idea what you're saying. Have you
| heard the phrase "the customer is always right?" Im
| saying that attitude is more strongly held in the US.
| tehwebguy wrote:
| Not for long -- more and more of our returns are going to a
| small number of retailers and they are all talking to each
| other anyway (via third party return companies). Some folks
| are already banned from returning from one big box store
| (and as a result, other big box stores). Expect this to
| expand to smaller shops soon!
| Paul-Craft wrote:
| > In "Europe" (I'm super generalizing here), to return a
| product, it has to be in pristine condition, you have to the
| original receipt and even then they will go over it like you
| are smuggling drugs into the country. In US, nobody cares.
| This is built into the business model. You pay higher prices
| due to returns, but then you buy more stuff because you don't
| worry about returns.
|
| Sounds about like the experience of trying to return anything
| to a Marshall's store in the US. I tried it once. I was
| attempting to return a defective water bottle (the seal on
| the top leaked). They say it has to be in the original
| packaging and unused. Well, how in the actual fuck am I
| supposed to determine if the seal is defective or not without
| "using" it?
|
| SMH
| criddell wrote:
| If a store did that to me, I would dispute the credit card
| charge. It's a defective product.
| jncfhnb wrote:
| This is part of why it works
| bityard wrote:
| Yeah, most US stores have generous return policies but this
| is not at all universal. Some stores have strict terms
| (must have original receipt, must be unopened, and returned
| within a 30-day windows), or sometimes the employee working
| the service desk had a bad day and decides to take it out
| on you.
|
| I know that I tend to shop at stores that aren't going to
| challenge me when I need to return things.
| naavis wrote:
| In most European countries you are allowed to return
| defective products without the original packaging and used.
| You just can't return items that way only because you
| didn't like them.
| agubelu wrote:
| In Spain, you can return things that you didn't buy in
| person (eg online, on a catalogue or via phone) within 14
| days of receiving it for any reason whatsoever, as long
| as it's still in good condition.
| beebeepka wrote:
| I believe this has been EU wide rule for a while.
| petesergeant wrote:
| > Most online mattress sellers offer free returns, in some cases
| for up to a year; used mattresses can't be resold, so the loss,
| usually some eight or nine per cent of sales, is folded into
| prices.
|
| So we all subsidise high returners, which is annoying
| actionfromafar wrote:
| The solution is more data mining on customers so the companies
| can avoid marketing to high returners.
|
| /s probably
| endisneigh wrote:
| It's definitely sad, but until there's some breakthrough in the
| ability to try remotely, the beatings shall continue.
|
| I buy a bunch of stuff on craigslist, where I know I won't be
| able to return. However I negotiate as much as 80% off the brand
| new price. Until I get similar discounts I would never bother
| with an online store that won't let me return.
| lukas099 wrote:
| And if you're really negotiating you can likely get back at
| least what you paid for it by selling it again on craigslist.
| ADifferentKyle wrote:
| I see a few comments going both ways here - punish the returners,
| etc., but I don't think punishment is really the right concept.
| When places like Zappos encourage people to buy extra just to
| return the excess, you can't blame people for getting used to
| online shopping this way.
|
| That said, I do agree with the general idea that serial returners
| should bear some of the additional costs (just not via
| punishment). I can't recall the retailer, but I remember buying
| something from a brand that had the option of "free returns,"
| which, if selected, would add a small percentage onto the overall
| price. If you didn't select it, returns would be even higher out-
| of-pocket. I think the idea was that not everyone who selected
| the option would actually return items, but having the option was
| a premium lots of folks would pay for.
| pc86 wrote:
| I would love an option like this. I would gladly pay 1-2% extra
| on items I _might_ return (and especially on something like
| shoes where I might buy two pairs to see which fits better if I
| can 't find the brand locally) and keep the discount for things
| I know I won't.
|
| My only concern with a system like this would be when you get
| an item that truly is defective/broken, are you expected to pay
| a return fee in those cases?
| open-paren wrote:
| Jet.com, before it was bought by Wal*Mart, used to do this.
| ADifferentKyle wrote:
| I think this was it! Thank you, that was bugging me.
| barbazoo wrote:
| I don't get it, sorry. What would the money do? The damage is
| done, isn't it? I'm assuming often the item can't be sold
| again so it's just discarded, no? We can't pay the
| environment back for the damage we do by overconsumption.
| ADifferentKyle wrote:
| You're right; the money is meant to make people think twice
| about the purchase. Like many people in the article, I
| would buy whatever with the intent of just returning
| whatever I didn't need. The extra cost made me reconsider
| that option. It had a lasting impact on my online buying
| habits, even though it's not available to me anymore and
| hasn't been in some time (another commenter helped me
| recall this was jet.com, which was bought out ages ago).
| deltarholamda wrote:
| >When places like Zappos encourage people to buy extra just to
| return the excess
|
| Yeah, but Zappos just sprays some of that stuff they use for
| the rental shoes at bowling alleys, which as we all know makes
| the shoes pristine, in like-new condition. All shoe retailers
| use this eldritch magick, created by the great Druid Alchemists
| that built Stonehenge, so that's not a fair comparison.
| kridsdale3 wrote:
| Airline seats seem to work that way. It's purchase insurance.
| idkyall wrote:
| I believe you're thinking of jet.com? they used to give a %
| discount if you waived the right to free returns[1]
|
| [1] https://www.enzasbargains.com/jet-com-return-policy/
| endisneigh wrote:
| what you're proposing seems like a good idea - except certain
| retailers have more money than others and will offer free
| hassle free returns along with a price match. This will result
| in there always being competition that's as cheap and having
| returns, resulting in the entire sale going to them.
|
| there's a reason retail is often described as a race to the
| bottom
| ADifferentKyle wrote:
| I think you're right - the ones offering the cheapest and
| most convenient option will naturally be the best choice for
| the most amount of people.
|
| Not to be that guy, but I do think there's an element of
| privilege in shopping any other way. I'd gladly pay a bit
| more for the comfort of not participating in the throwaway
| culture we're building, but how many people can really say
| that? I have time and money that a lot of people simply don't
| have.
|
| But I do think there are a lot of people in my situation and
| would do something similar. We might not bring down the
| amazons of the world, but a place for us can still exist.
| srvmshr wrote:
| > _Americans are the world's leading refund seekers; consumers in
| Japan seldom return anything_.
|
| Lived in America. Permanent resident of Japan. Imagine my culture
| shock.
|
| (Full disclosure/explanation: I was more shocked by the return
| culture, than the no-return culture here. More used to carefully
| choosing & keeping the item until it falls apart entirely. We are
| also very particular about non-burnables & e-waste. I am S Asian
| but with more ties to Japan & hence settled here. My culture
| shocks are a whole different story & worthy of a book chapter.
| American return culture, tipping & fanaticism for
| football/baseball team is unique.)
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-16 23:02 UTC)