[HN Gopher] Amazon allegedly resells damaged books
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Amazon allegedly resells damaged books
        
       Author : lepus
       Score  : 75 points
       Date   : 2023-12-30 20:07 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (twitter.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
        
       | lepus wrote:
       | > Of note: if a customer orders a copy from Amazon, and a
       | damaged, returned book is shipped to them instead, no new KDP
       | printing orders kick in. This means I don't get paid at all,
       | because they only pay me when a book is printed.
        
         | gumby wrote:
         | That statement jumped out at me too, but I'm not sure what to
         | think about it. I also hate to say anything that might seem
         | sympathetic to Amazon, a company I consider somewhat unethical.
         | 
         | These two statements below should be uncontroversial:
         | 
         | 1. If Amazon prints a defective book _and rejects it in QC_
         | then Amazon should get no revenue nor should the author. It
         | should be recycled. Another copy should be printed and shipped
         | and the revenue distributed as normal.
         | 
         | 2. If Amazon prints a defective book _and it is shipped
         | returned due to defect_ then amazon should get no revenue nor
         | should the author. It should be recycled. A new book should be
         | printed and sent to the customer (assuming they didn 't ask for
         | a refund) and no payment to author / no extra revenue
         | recognition to Amazon.
         | 
         | But then:
         | 
         | 3. It's better that Amazon resells products that are returned
         | in perfectly good condition rather than trashing them
         | (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/28/amazon-returns-what-
         | really-h... https://www.howtogeek.com/what-happens-to-amazon-
         | returns/ and a ton of other easy to find links)
         | 
         | 4. Amazon should not resell products returned that are
         | defective.
         | 
         | The problem is: how should it know? They can't take the word of
         | the customer returning the product. Amazon does resell high
         | value returned items like TVs and monitors after checking them.
         | But the cost of looking for the defect in the book is quite
         | high -- I'd be surprised if it gets more than a casual
         | glance/flip through.
         | 
         | I'm not sure what they should be doing in this case, but I do
         | think the comment "This means I don't get paid at all, because
         | they only pay me when a book is printed" is a side distraction.
        
           | washadjeffmad wrote:
           | The contention, to me, is if returned or refurbished items
           | are being labeled and sold as 'new', then Amazon may be
           | running afoul of FTC truth-in-advertising laws.
        
             | sparky_z wrote:
             | If I go into a physical bookstore, buy a book, walk out
             | with it, walk back in and return it still in good
             | condition, should they not just put it back on the shelf?
             | Would that be fraud? It's technically no longer "new" at
             | that point.
             | 
             | True this was returned as "damaged" but how damaged was it?
             | We aren't told and there are no photos.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Amazon "checks" them hardly at all. I ordered a warehouse
           | item (and I recognize this risk) for a Chicco stroller holder
           | and received a Chicco box with a broken Gracco stroller in
           | it.
           | 
           | That's not very checked. And there's not much I can do but
           | return it (they don't even have a "you got scammed, idiots"
           | option to tell them to check again).
        
             | scrapcode wrote:
             | My luck they would check it upon return and pin me for some
             | kind of fraud.
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | Whether the author gets paid is a very important issue too.
           | 
           | The math is simple. Books sent to customers minus books
           | returned from customers equals royalties paid. And apparently
           | that's not happening here.
        
       | doctorpangloss wrote:
       | Who returns books?
        
         | andrewflnr wrote:
         | Well, definitely people who get damaged books.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | If I receive a damaged item I will return it whether it's a
         | book or not?
        
         | _a_a_a_ wrote:
         | I received 2 extremely bad books, same press, illegible. Maybe
         | print-on-demand, not sure. Complained, got a refund. Was told
         | not to bother returning the books.
        
         | kristianp wrote:
         | I have returned a book to Amazon. Poorly printed, blurry text,
         | unreadable. Low quality cover print. What other choice is there
         | but to return it? You can't let them get away with sending out
         | rubbish.
        
           | hef19898 wrote:
           | _If_ the book was print-on-demand, nobody at Amazon ever saw
           | or touched the book. And Amazon is not running recurring
           | audits, not even for initial shipments, on those small
           | external partners. What happens, is that as soon as too many
           | concessions are triggered (refubds or replacements), the
           | partner gets warned or shut down (depending on the clout the
           | partners Amazon contacts have, well, politics do happen...).
           | Or, if the partner is big and important enough, people like
           | me at the time, whom are operationally responsible for that
           | partner, get the assigent to straighten things out togwther
           | with retail.
           | 
           | With millions of customers every day so, the number of fuck
           | ups is high in absolute numbers. It is, at least as far as I
           | ever saw, minuscule in relation to the overall volume
           | handled. Much lower, I might add, than anything I ahve ever
           | seen in aerospace manufacturing for example.
        
         | PKop wrote:
         | If there's a problem with it, why wouldn't you return it?
        
       | OnAironaut wrote:
       | Amazon does this with everything damaged that is returned.
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | Yes, the title's not really capturing that the complaint is
         | about royalties.
        
         | steve_adams_86 wrote:
         | Except for clothing, which apparently is fired directly into
         | the landfill. Both cases are not cool.
        
       | OJFord wrote:
       | The way this is said makes it seem like they're expecting to be
       | paid twice for two orders, one returned.
       | 
       | I assume what's being left implicit is that they're actually
       | _not_ paid for the  'KDP printing order' if it ends up returned?
       | So then when someone else orders and receives that one and
       | doesn't return it, there's a printed copy that was never paid out
       | for?
        
         | hunter2_ wrote:
         | > The way this is said makes it seem like they're expecting to
         | be paid twice for two orders, one returned.
         | 
         | Are you referring to the Dec 30 tweet text, the Dec 28 tweet
         | text, or the paper note in the Dec 28 tweet's photo?
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | Yes. The four tweets (not counting one from someone else) and
           | photo of the note that I can see without clicking 'show more
           | replies' and logging in.
        
       | sparky_z wrote:
       | Before getting pitchforks out, I'd like to see what this person
       | considered "damaged". If - and I know this is a big if - but if
       | it's something extremely minor, such that almost anyone would
       | consider it to be in "like new" condition, then frankly that
       | would be a case of Amazon doing the right thing, rather than
       | pulping a perfectly good book and printing a new one. The fact
       | that this person is apparently not providing any photos of said
       | damage makes this hard to judge (and honestly raises my
       | suspicions a bit).
       | 
       | > Of note: if a customer orders a copy from Amazon, and a
       | damaged, returned book is shipped to them instead, no new KDP
       | printing orders kick in. This means I don't get paid at all,
       | because they only pay me when a book is printed.
       | 
       | Why wouldn't this be true? Why would a return that is then resold
       | result in a double royalty payment? Is that something that
       | happens for traditionally-published books that are returned and
       | resold?
       | 
       | It might have to do with the fact that these particular books
       | were "author's copies" but I don't have enough information about
       | how those work in a print-on-demand context to know whether this
       | actually results in a loss of royalties in this case. Did they
       | pay for them to be printed as a self publisher or were they
       | provided for free as part of a contract with an external
       | publisher? Does Amazon's internal system distinguish between
       | "author" copies" and other orders, or do you just order some
       | copies of your own book via the standard interface? Would the
       | author's replacement copies go through that same system or would
       | they be printed like normal and incur royalties? No idea.
        
         | lepus wrote:
         | It's implied that he gets paid 0 times for either the return or
         | the resold book. There's more discussion on Bluesky
         | https://bsky.app/profile/joabaldwin.com/post/3khrp64a5pw22
        
           | sparky_z wrote:
           | But is that any time a book is returned and resold, or is it
           | just for a few "author's copies" that (I would guess) weren't
           | eligible to receive a royalty in the first place?
        
             | jxf wrote:
             | He's saying that he got some author's copies from Amazon,
             | some of which he returned for being damaged. Rather than
             | scrap those, Amazon resold the damaged copies as new. This
             | robbed the author of a sale.
        
           | beanjuiceII wrote:
           | why would he get paid other than the initial buy of a book?
        
             | Dylan16807 wrote:
             | It sounds like he wasn't paid for the initial buy either.
        
               | beanjuiceII wrote:
               | where does he say that? if someone buys his books in bulk
               | to sell them, isn't that the initial buy?
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | Not if it's a special author's copy with no royalties.
               | 
               | It's not completely clear what's going on, maybe returns
               | cause other issues, but he's claiming no royalties from
               | either sale. If he's not just confused that's a big deal.
        
         | beanjuiceII wrote:
         | looks like author responded
         | https://twitter.com/joabaldwin/status/1741202134845247606
         | 
         | "That's one page out of 600+, I returned 14 books: one was cut
         | to the wrong size (actually cutting the text, like an inch
         | smaller), others had totally bent covers and pages, others were
         | printed beyond the bleed area (offset too far from the max
         | allowed), or printed at an angle."
         | 
         | to me it seems a bit dramatic, if a customer felt that was an
         | issue they'd just get a refund from amazon
        
         | ajross wrote:
         | It's not even that big an if. Every vendor of every product
         | receives returns. And every vendor of every product has some
         | kind of process for deciding what to do with them. A few
         | product areas have specific regulation, but in general if you
         | get an unused return that is still in new condition you're
         | going to resell it. It's no different for Amazon than your
         | corner bookstore, who does exactly the same thing.
         | 
         | Basically this author did a bulk order of his own book from
         | Amazon[1], found something wrong, deliberately returned them
         | and then _laid a deliberate trap_ just to generate exactly this
         | buzz.
         | 
         | [1] Pretty weird to begin with. Marketing copies of your own
         | work are normally part of your contract with the publisher. Why
         | is he getting them retail?
        
           | sparky_z wrote:
           | > Marketing copies of your own work are normally part of your
           | contract with the publisher. Why is he getting them retail?
           | 
           | Because he's self-publishing. I can't imagine printers would
           | offer that perk to self publishers, because then you just
           | become a free vanity press.
        
           | morsch wrote:
           | Going by the bsky thread posted elsewhere, he's using Kindle
           | Direct Publishing, so he _is_ getting them from his
           | publisher, Amazon. And the books he returned were author
           | copies, sold to him at print cost.
           | 
           | https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G7BBN68RYX5UMDZF
        
             | ajross wrote:
             | Then why did he lay this trap? Again, this wasn't an
             | accidental discovery, he knew or suspected he could get
             | this publicity by going to war against his "publisher".
             | I'll be honest, everything about this screams "bad faith"
             | to me. Amazon didn't do anything that any other company
             | wouldn't have done. Arguably-slightly-flawed-but-still-fine
             | returned junk goes on the shelves of every store in the
             | world. This is the only guy who planted bombs in it.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | What's bad faith about not wanting a defective product to
               | be sold with your name on it?
               | 
               | He clearly didn't think it was "still fine" to be sold as
               | "new".
        
               | ajross wrote:
               | > What's bad faith about not wanting a defective product
               | to be sold with your name on it?
               | 
               | Come on... If he was upset about the publishing quality
               | he would have tweeted about that when he got the books,
               | letting his fans know he was upset about it. _He planted
               | metaphorical bombs_ in these books and returned them! You
               | know as well as I do he was looking for outrage, not book
               | quality.
        
               | Dylan16807 wrote:
               | They're both problems, the initial print and sending it
               | back out. I don't see what's wrong with doing a test for
               | the latter. "metaphorical bomb" sounds ridiculous to me.
               | It's a metaphorical _tracking beacon_.
        
         | buro9 wrote:
         | I received a book that had been written all over, full of notes
         | and scribbles... it was sold as "new".
         | 
         | I complained, and they sent another.
         | 
         | That too was scribbled all over, notes on every page.
         | 
         | The book wasn't that expensive, I was a bit annoyed, but it's a
         | rounding error to me, so I just ordered another thinking no way
         | would this happen again, and because I did need it quicker than
         | I cared to go through the service desk again.
         | 
         | The third was also marked on every page.
         | 
         | I complained, and they gave a refund for the 2nd one but not
         | the 3rd... all of them were ruined though, none of them could
         | be gifted (which was my intent), and ultimately I just sent it
         | to landfill / recycling / incineration.
         | 
         | I keep learning, if I actually care about what I receive I
         | avoid using Amazon. They're fine for some things, but the list
         | of things they're fine for seems to be ever decreasing.
         | 
         | All of this was UK btw, YMMV elsewhere and with different
         | categories of goods, etc.
         | 
         | Also, when I got the refund, which took about 20 minutes of my
         | time, the tone was weird "congratulations, we're able to offer
         | you a refund today"... this wasn't a prize, it was crappy goods
         | and you weren't even fully setting me good, I dread to think of
         | the number of refunds for obviously damaged goods are not
         | honoured such that this was worthy of congrats.
        
           | alpaca128 wrote:
           | And that's just the immediately visible problems. In some
           | product categories it's difficult to find a single product
           | where the description doesn't outright lie about features or
           | quality, and the only way to tell is the price.
           | 
           | Louis Rossmann recently tested some of the highest-rated
           | fuses sold on Amazon. It took over 8A to blow a 2A fuse.
           | 
           | By now I only order there if I can't find a more local
           | alternative, the only remaining area where Amazon is still
           | ahead (or rather, not behind) are delivery times.
        
       | pbnjeh wrote:
       | They also ship books in oversized boxes with no padding. If
       | you're "lucky", they combined your book order with your order for
       | something hard and heavy that can help beat the book up while the
       | box tumbles.
       | 
       | Not always, but often enough that if I order a book from them, I
       | try to remind myself to to wait to order until nothing else I've
       | ordered has yet to ship. Then wait after I've ordered the book,
       | until the book has shipped, before I order anything else.
       | 
       | I don't order that much from Amazon, but my orders often
       | "cluster". For a recent example, the Christmas holidays. I got a
       | beat up book cover because they upped the delivery date of the
       | book by about a week (newish best seller), while in the meantime
       | I'd ordered a heavy object that always ships the next day and
       | that I didn't want to wait a week plus for. So, jacketed
       | hardcover arrives loose in the oversized space next to big,
       | heavy, sharp edged object, with no padding whatsoever inside the
       | box.
       | 
       | I guess if I'd returned that book, it simply would have gone --
       | damaged -- to someone else.
        
         | Pathogen-David wrote:
         | Unfortunately even ordering the book on its own isn't a sure-
         | fire way to get it well-packaged. The last several books I've
         | bought were shipped in a thin paper bag (or a bubble mailer if
         | I was lucky.)
         | 
         | As someone who takes care of their stuff, it's pretty annoying
         | to get my books pre-worn.
        
       | pcurve wrote:
       | Recently Amazon has been sending me items that were clearly
       | returned and poorly repackaged or damaged in the last year. This
       | isn't something I encountered or noticed prior to 2023.
       | 
       | Their screening policy for returned items may have changed.
        
         | kevingadd wrote:
         | It may be more common now, but I've had this problem with them
         | before in the past. In one notable case I bought a new game
         | console from Amazon.com and received a box that was so
         | obviously used (seals broken, shrinkwrap missing, etc) that I
         | didn't even bother opening it, I just returned it. Despite the
         | price of the item they raised no objections, so they're
         | probably used to this happening and just assume that most
         | customers won't notice.
        
         | Astronaut3315 wrote:
         | I purchased four used, like new smart plugs from Amazon
         | Warehouse Deals a few days ago. Two were the wrong model in the
         | right box and were very clearly used. One even had a scorch
         | mark on it. I've had similar experiences with other Amazon
         | purchases in the last few years.
        
       | jarjar2_ wrote:
       | I rarely buy new books anymore. I just use ThriftBooks. Haven't
       | had a problem with any of the books they've sent me.
        
         | takoid wrote:
         | ThriftBooks is great most of the time but the quality can be
         | quite hit-or-miss.
        
           | pbnjeh wrote:
           | I've had a few outright duds with them, but mostly their
           | product has been as expected.
           | 
           | EXCEPT, they ship mostly in plastic envelopes. And the items
           | not infrequently get damaged during transit.
           | 
           | I have a set of "very good" Magnum PI DVD's that I expect
           | shipped that way. But the DVD's weren't secured in their box.
           | The season 4 plastic case slid far enough out of the boxed
           | set to get dinged and broken. The internal DVD holder's mount
           | is destroyed and the DVD's are just floating around in there.
           | 
           | I was stocking up on some older, "classic" CS titles, and I
           | ordered several together (free shipping on orders over X
           | dollars...). They arrived all crammed into one plastic
           | envelope that looked like it had been dragged along for a
           | while behind the delivery truck. (In reality, this is what
           | the distribution center belts can do to an object, and a
           | heavy package in a thin plastic envelope does not fare well.)
           | 
           | With just a thin, flexible plastic layer for protection, a
           | number of corners on these "very good" books were bent and
           | beat up. I've had covers arrive abraded. One title had one
           | end of the binding crushed.
           | 
           | I still appreciate getting several titles I've wanted for way
           | off cover price. But I wish they'd take a bit more care when
           | shipping.
           | 
           | And, you never know what you're going to get. With them, I've
           | taken to trying to order such that DVD's and Blu rays won't
           | ship together with books (you can imagine what happens). But,
           | when an item may not effectively ship for up to a week, this
           | takes some schedule juggling and follow up. Plus, that used
           | item may sell out in the meantime. And it also means
           | sometimes foregoing the free shipping you get by clustering
           | items.
           | 
           | I guess these are all first world problems, but it's
           | frustrating. Plus, good condition items get trashed for the
           | sake of lack of care / expediency in one step. Wasteful.
        
       | nikolay wrote:
       | Yes. I purchased The Capital by Karl Marx for my son; at least 5%
       | of the pages were blank.
        
         | nonrepeating wrote:
         | Ironically, that ended up teaching him an important lesson
         | about capitalism.
        
       | optshun wrote:
       | My favorite, or I suppose least favorite..., was when I received
       | a "new" book that came with a bookmark of a single square of
       | toilet paper.
       | 
       | Unsure about you all but there's only one reason I might use a
       | square of toilet paper as a bookmark.
        
         | steve_adams_86 wrote:
         | This exact thing happened to me and for weeks it would
         | spontaneously cross my mind. I thought one of my kids did it
         | yet I couldn't guess why, until one day it hit me: they were on
         | vacation with their aunt when I received the books and found
         | the toilet paper, and the book was slightly damaged when I got
         | it. Then it dawned on me that someone had read this book
         | before, likely while on their toilet.
         | 
         | For that and a few other reasons, I don't get books from Amazon
         | anymore.
        
       | joabaldwin wrote:
       | Author from original post here! For clarification, this is not a
       | new thing, but something I learned to do from this post:
       | https://bsky.app/profile/kristadb1.bsky.social/post/3kb4wbix...
       | 
       | In her case, she ordered author copies (that gives you no
       | royalties, of course) and got the same copies sold again to
       | herself as author copies.
       | 
       | In my case, I also ordered author copies, but they were resold to
       | a normal customer after I returned them.
       | 
       | From an order of 50 author copies, I returned 14. Packaging was
       | fine, so it wasn't a problem with how they bumped up during
       | shipping. They were misprinted, or had folded covers (they tear
       | easily after a fold, really bad), some were printed beyond the
       | bleed area (that's what bleed is for, you can't be printing
       | beyond it), and a few were printed slightly off angle. One
       | particularly bad copy was even cut an inch smaller than it
       | should've been, trimming every single page and cover, text and
       | all.
       | 
       | So yeah, that's why I returned them. But I do give you that some
       | of those defects would go completely unseen by someone at a
       | warehouse. You flip through the book, all pages seem to be there,
       | but how is a person there supposed to know what the margins of
       | the book look like? But most errors would not pass a regular
       | printing press QC, particularly the damaged covers.
       | 
       | Also, Amazon both prints and distributes these books, so QC is in
       | their hands from the start.
        
         | sparky_z wrote:
         | Thanks for chiming in! If you don't mind, I'm trying to
         | understand the exact accounting implications of this for you.
         | 
         | In the context of self-publishing, what does it mean to order
         | "author's copies"? Are they: A) offered for free, like they
         | would be as part of a traditional publishing contract? B) Sold
         | to you "at cost" of printing and shipping without any markup?
         | C) Sold above cost but with a discount greater than or equal to
         | size of the royalty? D) Sold above cost but with a discount
         | smaller than the size of the royalty? E) Sold at full retail
         | price but without any royalty?
         | 
         | I very much doubt A because then Amazon would basically be
         | operating what amounts to a free vanity press. But maybe they'd
         | throw in a couple as a perk.
         | 
         | I also doubt B because then they would be operating a revenue-
         | neutral vanity press, but maybe it would still be worth it to
         | them if they counted on gettong enough non-author sales to make
         | enough margin to fund the operation.
         | 
         | I also doubt D or E, because if so, then why would anybody
         | order "author's copies" of their book?. Just get your friend to
         | order them for you and reimburse them and you'll come out
         | ahead.
         | 
         | I would guess the answer is C. But in that case, it seems to me
         | that you _are_ getting implicit royalty on those  "author's
         | copies", but those royalties are baked into the discounted
         | price rather than being distributed to you later. (I suppose
         | this might also have advantageous tax implications for you on
         | those implicit royalties, compared to the alternative where you
         | just order normal copies and get your royalties later.) Am I
         | wrong about this?
        
       | manicennui wrote:
       | If you care about the condition of books you buy, don't buy from
       | Amazon. They'll throw a $100+ hardcover in a lightly padded
       | envelope and chuck it around. Or they'll put it in a box with
       | some other random item and a few inflatable shipping bags, but
       | not enough to keep things from shifting around freely.
        
         | bmitc wrote:
         | Their packing has gotten comically bad, particularly for
         | sensitively items like books and such. I've greatly reduced my
         | Amazon buying over the years due to issues with damaged items,
         | and lately, Amazon is getting more aggressive about
         | discouraging returns. But I'm not going to pay $30+ for a new
         | hardcover that comes damaged and covered with dirt and grime.
        
       | jazzyjackson wrote:
       | Ironically books are the one thing I don't buy on Amazon. eBay
       | has a much better experience, easily 9 times out of 10 I'm
       | confident I'm buying the book in the picture, and usually there
       | are several pictures of the exact condition.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-12-30 23:00 UTC)