4 ms·

I don't disagree with your assertion that the article is disingenuous. However, > "30-40 percent of online purchases are returned" what absolute hoopsla. I've

I don't disagree with your assertion that the article is disingenuous. However, > "30-40 percent of online purchases are returned" what absolute hoopsla. I've worked in online commerce and this is off by an order of magnitude. A very few segments (e.g. shoes) may approach such return rates. In the online retail world, a 30-40% return rate is common for apparel (clothes), shoes and accessory purchases. Certain categories, such as occasion (wedding, party, etc) could be significantly higher than 40%. Source: I was an executive at a Nordstrom subsidiary for many years.

xyzzyz 6y ago
You're supporting his point: apparel is one of the segments where such return rate is plausible, but it is completely off the mark for general merchandise.
- bergstromm466 6y ago
  Fair enough. But it sounds like you're arguing that it's ok to waste because it's not in all the segments mentioned? I'm missing the larger critique. Are you ok with this waste? I guess sometimes it seems to me like the HN community nitpicks over tiny details and fails to take part in the larger systemic critiques.
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    If you read my comment again, you’ll see that there is absolutely nothing there about whether “waste is ok”.
    - inopinatus 6y ago
      Since I started this by inadvertently writing the most upvoted comment, I'd like to put on the record that I'm against returns waste (and it boggles my mind to imagine anyone, or at least anyone with a soul, being for it), but I'm also against sensationalised tabloid journalism because I don't believe it's a constructive contribution to the discussion of how we get to a more sustainable supply-return chain. On the contrary it tends to cause exactly those firms who'd be most intrinsically part of the solution (and whose employees most certainly would love to say "we're part of the solution", because they are not the sociopaths some would paint them as) to get their backs against the wall, since anyone even participating in the discussion makes themselves primarily a target for invective.

xyzzyz 6y ago

You're supporting his point: apparel is one of the segments where such return rate is plausible, but it is completely off the mark for general merchandise.

bergstromm466 6y ago
Fair enough. But it sounds like you're arguing that it's ok to waste because it's not in all the segments mentioned? I'm missing the larger critique. Are you ok with this waste? I guess sometimes it seems to me like the HN community nitpicks over tiny details and fails to take part in the larger systemic critiques.
- xyzzyz 6y ago
  If you read my comment again, you’ll see that there is absolutely nothing there about whether “waste is ok”.
  - inopinatus 6y ago
    Since I started this by inadvertently writing the most upvoted comment, I'd like to put on the record that I'm against returns waste (and it boggles my mind to imagine anyone, or at least anyone with a soul, being for it), but I'm also against sensationalised tabloid journalism because I don't believe it's a constructive contribution to the discussion of how we get to a more sustainable supply-return chain. On the contrary it tends to cause exactly those firms who'd be most intrinsically part of the solution (and whose employees most certainly would love to say "we're part of the solution", because they are not the sociopaths some would paint them as) to get their backs against the wall, since anyone even participating in the discussion makes themselves primarily a target for invective.