9 ms·

Telling customers just to keep returns is wide open to abuse. Why not just sell discounted "non-returnable" versions of products, the same as you can buy disco

• lesuorac 4y ago
  I feel like this is going to backfire as a consumer. The whole point of the warranty is that the company is claiming the product will work for x days. If you start letting people sell things without a warranty they'll make products that last 0 days but advertise well.
  • wyldfire 4y ago
    You can have a "warranty" while still barring "any-cause" returns.
    • londons_explore 4y ago
      Except you often can't .. if you say the TV can't be returned without reason, your customer will pour a jug of water into it and claim it never worked...
  • HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
    I'm not talking about warranty/defective item returns. I'm talking about the fact that in America you can return pretty much anything, without having any reason. Don't want that party dress after you've worn it to the party? Return it! Don't want the big screen TV after your Super Bowl party? Return it! Can't profit from your stockpile of covid-shortage toilet paper? Return that too!
    • lliamander 4y ago
      Obviously that's an exaggeration. Except that Costco comes incredibly close to that. I've seen them accept returns for things I would never have imagined anyone accepting.
      • HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
        Yeah, a few years ago I remember a news story about Cosco accepting a returned real Christmas tree sometime after Christmas, by which time most of the needles had fallen off and the thoroughly used tree had no value other than mulch. Maybe good publicity, I suppose.
      • bombcar 4y ago
        Costco has (had) a satisfaction guarantee and they wanted you to abuse it a bit so that you’d feel safe splurging. But people returning ten year old mattresses and TVs hampered that a bit - but only in specific items. Computers are another one.
    • striking 4y ago
      Yeah, until you run into https://www.theretailequation.com/ https://www.theretailequation.com/. Which is used in more places than you think.
• adrr 4y ago
  You need returns for e-commerce because customers can't touch and feel the item or try it on prior to purchase. Top returned items are clothes and sizing is inconsistent across not only brands but styles/fabric.
  • humanwhosits 4y ago
    I've often wondered if retailers apply pressure on clothes manufacturers to provide more sizing information. S/M/L often requires simply guessing
    • mc32 4y ago
      Most do provide measurement translations into inches and cms. But oddly a 30” is 32” and 34” actually measures 36” for waist sizes even in “true to fit”. Vanity!
      • lunarplague 4y ago
        I can argue this point right now. I have measured my foot, it is 28 CM, and I have consistently bought shoes with that size in mind without fail. Until recently, where I have been trying to order a pair of Teva sandals (I live far away from standard stores for purchasing brand name items, and often don't do it except for shoes, beds, office chairs, etc), and I got the size that compared to 28 CM. Too big. Go down a size. Still too big. 25 CM in Teva is officially 28 CM everywhere else. Why the inconsistency?
        • shaftway 4y ago
          There's a stark difference between waist size and foot size. There's not a lot you can do to change the size of your feet, but diet and exercise affect your waist. I used to wear a 36 or 38 waist pants. I've managed to get that down to a 30, but I'm back up to a 32. I've also been buying Levi's jeans with some elastic in them, so maybe I've gone back up more, but I'm willing to lie to myself and say I'm still a 32.
    • 4y ago
• SkinTaco 4y ago
  > You are paying extra for everything since the cost of return losses is built into the price - you are paying "return insurance" whether you need it or not. I've heard this before but it always confuses me. Stores always charge the amount such that (price per widget)*(expected number of widgets sold) is maximized. Put another way - If stores somehow managed to eliminated returns with no other side effects, would you expect the price to drop?
  • SahAssar 4y ago
    If the theory of capitalism holds then a lowered price of doing business combined with competition should lead to lower prices. I don't believe that the world operates under such a system, but in theory it works that way.
    • lotsofpulp 4y ago
      Then why did all the mom and pop shops go out of business when Kmart and Walmart and Dollar General came around around? Retail is a near perfect example of multiple sellers competing for multiple buyers resulting in razor thin profit margins, which means the buyers are getting what they want at the lowest prices possible. Retail business do not earn 2-4% profit margins because they want to, they earn them because their customers will go to the store next door if they try to take 5%+.
      • bombcar 4y ago
        Moms and pops died more from low hours and low selection than low prices I suspect, though some of it no doubt is national price equalization.
        • lotsofpulp 4y ago
          That is all part of the equation customers are using to decide who to buy from. Price is not just the currency exchanged, but convenience, warranty, trust, etc. The point is competition does cause each other to up their offerings and/or lower prices to maintain market share.
• deckard1 4y ago
  > Why not just sell discounted "non-returnable" versions They do. It's called a final sale. Clothing retailers do this frequently. Some are more strict on this than others. Bonobos, for example, often advertises as final but will accept returns (YMMV basis). What I'm curious about is sizing. Buy three pairs of the same size pants from Banana Republic and you'll get three pairs that fit differently. Their deviation is sometimes extreme. Same with Levis and others. You would think, in an online shopping world, that this would be the lowest of hanging fruit. I can't believe the cost of QA is greater than the costs of returns and reputational harm. Shopping online for clothes is just madness, and it's common to buy multiple items of the same size (or next size S and M) just to be able to return the ones that don't fit. Sometimes you may fit in S and an M from the same brand. Just different SKU/factory/batch. It's a total crapshoot.
  • lliamander 4y ago
    I've been burned by that as well. I pretty much only by clothes on final sale if I have a high degree of confidence I will like the result (feel, fit, color, etc) and even then I've been disappointed by the variability in quality. BTW, Mr. Porter has a fantastic return process. They include the return label and invoice in the box. Some of their stuff is expensive, but I'm much more comfortable trying their products out because it's so easy to return.
  • seoaeu 4y ago
    My understanding is that the problem isn’t QA but rather that manufacturing to a tight tolerances costs more. Specifically because you can stack a bunch of sheets of fabric and cut them all at once, provided you are willing to accept slight differences in the measurements on each.
    • bombcar 4y ago
      Or even that it’s the same factory. The big stores/companies have factories around the world producing and that can lead to lots of variation. Some high end tailored clothes even sells you the entire bolt of cloth in case you want to match it later, because everything the same the bolts will vary slightly over time. This is also why so much clothes now is stretchy.
• munificent 4y ago
  > America's "everything is returnable" culture is a bit odd, obviously intended to encourage mindless consumption I don't see how allowing consumers to get first-hand experience with a product before being forced to stick with it causes their consumption to be "mindless". It allows them to make choices that are more informed.
  • HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
    It encourages mindless consumption because it lowers the level of commitment needed. Not sure if you really want it, or should be buying it? ... No need to overthink it - just buy it anyway and return it if you change your mind. Surely you don't think stores have these policies for your benefit - to allow you to be a more informed consumer?! They have these policies because it results in them selling more stuff, because they are lowering the level of commitment needed for consumers to buy.
    • j-bos 4y ago
      Fair enough, but that's behavior I expect and want from a retailer. Otherwise I'd need a showroom and test version of every product.
    • munificent 4y ago
      You are trying so hard to be cynical about capitalism and America here, which I get, but the narrative you're aiming for just doesn't hold together. > It encourages mindless consumption because it lowers the level of commitment needed. Not sure if you really want it, or should be buying it? How is having more information about a product from first-hand experience somehow more mindless than buying a thing sight unseen? > return it if you change your mind. Yes, exactly. You can use your mind to decide if you want the product. That's the opposite of mindless. > Surely you don't think stores have these policies for your benefit - to allow you to be a more informed consumer?! I know this might seem totally crazy to you but, yes, in most transactions both the buyer and seller end up satisfied. That's why people buy and sell things. When I sell a thing, it's worth less to me than it is to the buyer. When I buy a thing, it's worth more to me than it is to the seller. Obviously, buyers and sellers are trying to get the best preferential deal for themselves, but it is not a zero-sum game. You are currently surrounded by products most of which you probably purchased. Surely you don't believe you got actively fucked over on every single one of those do you? > They have these policies because it results in them selling more stuff, because they are lowering the level of commitment needed for consumers to buy. Yes. And to the degree that having things can benefit anyone's life, that is good for consumers too. Sure, we could also just not buy stuff. Sit on a bare patch of dirt. But sometimes stuff makes our life better. I bought a synthesizer recently. It's really hard to predict if a musical instrument will gel with you, since it's complex, interactive, and the sounds that resonate with someone are deeply personal. Also, they're often quite expensive. Sometimes you can try one in a store, but even that doesn't always help since it can be difficult to really explore the sounds in a crowded shop. I was OK with ordering it online because I knew if it didn't work for me, I could return it. The alternative would have been not buying it. It was too expensive to commit to being stuck with it without any first-hand experience. And, sure, I could definitely get by without it. It's not like I need it to live. But in this case, it turns out that I like it. It's enriched my life to have it, and I wouldn't if the store didn't allow returns. I benefitted from that policy.
• lliamander 4y ago
  > Why not just sell discounted "non-returnable" versions of products, the same as you can buy discounted non-refundable airline tickets? Online retailers often do just that. You may see a retailer have a section called "final sale" or "last call" for discounted, non-returnable merchandise. Others simply offload the merchandise onto EBay. I have bought things that way, but often I have regretted it. In general it is hard to evaluate online goods before purchase, and if something ends up on "final sale" it probably wasn't selling well to begin with for a good reason.
• icelancer 4y ago
  > America's "everything is returnable" culture is a bit odd... Not sure how this is unique to America. EU countries have much stronger "return" laws and consumer protection laws that theoretically encourage even more of what you're implying.
  • jlangenauer 4y ago
    There's a difference between strong consumer rights for things like products being faulty, or not being as described. But there is no EU consumer right to simply return an item because you've decided you don't like it, or no longer want it, which are open to abuse.
    • adrianmsmith 4y ago
      If you bought your product online in the EU, you absolutely have a right to return it within 14 days without having to state a reason. https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua... > If you bought a product or a service online ... you also have the right to cancel and return your order within 14 days, for any reason and without a justification.
  • HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
    Not sure how things may have changed since, but when I left the UK (now live in US) in the 80's, this norm did certainly not exist, and was quite shocking to me to see in the US. I do remember the cringe factor in hearing that my mother had once convinced (against normal policy) a UK retailer to take back some clothing item she had simply changed her mind on! It'd be like ordering a steak at a restaurant then sending it back because "I changed my mind - I'd like the chicken". As others have noted, there's a difference between consumer protection laws supporting return of faulty goods, and this ability to return stuff because you no longer want it (and may have even used it!).
• tgsovlerkhgsel 4y ago
  > Why not just sell discounted "non-returnable" versions of products, the same as you can buy discounted non-refundable airline tickets? Because the feeling of security the return policy gives customers makes it much more likely that they'll buy something. Most of the time, people buy things because they want them, so they won't return them even if they can. From a customer's perspective, having the return option is preferable to not having the return option. From a store's perspective, 150 customers buying the product and 5 of them returning it is likely preferable to 100 customers buying the product and 0 returning it. Additionally, forcing people to make an additional decision (whether to buy return insurance) is a great way to cause analysis paralysis and sell 50 instead of 150.
  • HarHarVeryFunny 4y ago
    I suspect you're right on all points, but if the 150/5 vs 100/0 logic is correct, they I wonder why this isn't the norm in other countries? I think part of it is also that retail mark-ups are typically huge, so the loss on a few returns, even if thrown in the trash, vs the extra profit on a few more sales, skews heavily towards encouraging the extra sales. Still, as someone who never returns non-defective stuff, it'd be nice not to have to subsidize those that do!