6 ms·

When LL Bean started, 90% of his boots were returned, and the purchases refunded - which gave Bean the opportunity to analyze how the boots had failed, redesig

When LL Bean started, 90% of his boots were returned, and the purchases refunded - which gave Bean the opportunity to analyze how the boots had failed, redesign them, and send new boots to his dissatisfied customers. Apparent MVP failure becomes better engineering becomes marketing and research. Find out what your users/customers want. sources: posted on the store wall in Freeport, and https://www.ecmag.com/section/your-business/lessons-learned-leon-leonwood-bean https://www.ecmag.com/section/your-business/lessons-learned-...

ghaff 4y ago
A number of retailers--REI is another--have pulled back considerably from essentially no questions asked return policies. I've wondered to what degree it is generally more poorly-made goods given that most come from the same Asian factories anyway and to what degree it is a generational shift where more people (though there's always been a subset) will just take advantage of any system they can.
- blfr 4y ago
  Not just a generational change but a move to lower trust society.
- acdha 4y ago
  I think the internet has a lot of credit here: there were always scammers but you wouldn’t have had an outdoors magazine publish a column suggesting that you buy something you can’t afford, use it for your trip, and return it because that’s cheaper than renting. That was disturbingly common online prior to REI changing their policies – and you’d see people suggesting it for big items like kayaks or expedition-sized tents, where selling it at the used gear sale was a substantial haircut. One downside to sharing information easily is that attacks not only get better faster but also that it can hit the “everyone’s doing it!” norm where people start shifting how they feel about it.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    >“everyone’s doing it!” norm where people start shifting how they feel about it. Yeah. A lot of people won't do something that they think is sort of scummy if they only know one person who does it--and he's sort of an asshole. But when there's a whole subreddit devoted to the behavior, they may start to think they're the sucker if they don't do what "everyone else" is doing. And unfortunately with outdoor gear, I've definitely had fairly expensive outdoor gear fail catastrophically after a few years even though it had only been gently used a handful of times. That said, I suspect LL Bean and REI still have some flexibility. I did just have Patagonia credit me for a somewhat older jacket that had completely delaminated--of course their normal prices are so high I'm not sure I'll even use the credit.
    - acdha 4y ago
      > But when there's a whole subreddit devoted to the behavior, they may start to think they're the sucker if they don't do what "everyone else" is doing. That matched what I saw, too - I’m thinking especially of people like a few grad students I vaguely knew who treated it as a way to “upgrade” from their personal equipment for big trips. They wouldn’t have stolen something worth that much but the loss to REI is invisible.
  - mc32 4y ago
    I could not agree more. I know people who can afford REI (DINKs) and despite that feel they had the “right” to try and then return items. Yes, some of this was built in to the price but not to the extent people stretched it. Nordstroms, I guess when it was not a middling retailer, had similar policies. But people have lost their moral bearings and it’s all about them, like there is no tomorrow. It’s little different than looting. Looters sometimes loot immediately needed goods, but often it’s jewelry, TVs, electronics and sneakers. These chronic abusers of return policies are in the same moral category. Very few people give a shit and care about themselves or society. It’s all a free-for-all, with few exceptions.
  - mjevans 4y ago
    A nice alternative would be a return policy where there was a no questions, BUT small fee (20-25% of the cost)? For returns without defects but obvious use. The above policy should be _combined_ with an equipment rental that is substantially cheaper but expects similar condition returns. Particularly for apartment renters, the ability to not need to store a large bulky item used 2-3 times in their lifetime would be an upgrade.
- antisthenes 4y ago
  > and to what degree it is a generational shift where more people (though there's always been a subset) will just take advantage of any system they can. When you're being squeezed by every system, and housing/life goals become increasingly unattainable and wages stagnate - you better be sure that people will try to exploit every system they can. Can't really even blame them for it, except for some egregious circumstances.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    That sounds like rationalizing crappy behavior.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - muro 4y ago
    Life being difficult doesn't give one the right to cheat their way to make it easier.

ghaff 4y ago

A number of retailers--REI is another--have pulled back considerably from essentially no questions asked return policies. I've wondered to what degree it is generally more poorly-made goods given that most come from the same Asian factories anyway and to what degree it is a generational shift where more people (though there's always been a subset) will just take advantage of any system they can.

blfr 4y ago
Not just a generational change but a move to lower trust society.
acdha 4y ago
I think the internet has a lot of credit here: there were always scammers but you wouldn’t have had an outdoors magazine publish a column suggesting that you buy something you can’t afford, use it for your trip, and return it because that’s cheaper than renting. That was disturbingly common online prior to REI changing their policies – and you’d see people suggesting it for big items like kayaks or expedition-sized tents, where selling it at the used gear sale was a substantial haircut. One downside to sharing information easily is that attacks not only get better faster but also that it can hit the “everyone’s doing it!” norm where people start shifting how they feel about it.
- ghaff 4y ago
  >“everyone’s doing it!” norm where people start shifting how they feel about it. Yeah. A lot of people won't do something that they think is sort of scummy if they only know one person who does it--and he's sort of an asshole. But when there's a whole subreddit devoted to the behavior, they may start to think they're the sucker if they don't do what "everyone else" is doing. And unfortunately with outdoor gear, I've definitely had fairly expensive outdoor gear fail catastrophically after a few years even though it had only been gently used a handful of times. That said, I suspect LL Bean and REI still have some flexibility. I did just have Patagonia credit me for a somewhat older jacket that had completely delaminated--of course their normal prices are so high I'm not sure I'll even use the credit.
  - acdha 4y ago
    > But when there's a whole subreddit devoted to the behavior, they may start to think they're the sucker if they don't do what "everyone else" is doing. That matched what I saw, too - I’m thinking especially of people like a few grad students I vaguely knew who treated it as a way to “upgrade” from their personal equipment for big trips. They wouldn’t have stolen something worth that much but the loss to REI is invisible.
- mc32 4y ago
  I could not agree more. I know people who can afford REI (DINKs) and despite that feel they had the “right” to try and then return items. Yes, some of this was built in to the price but not to the extent people stretched it. Nordstroms, I guess when it was not a middling retailer, had similar policies. But people have lost their moral bearings and it’s all about them, like there is no tomorrow. It’s little different than looting. Looters sometimes loot immediately needed goods, but often it’s jewelry, TVs, electronics and sneakers. These chronic abusers of return policies are in the same moral category. Very few people give a shit and care about themselves or society. It’s all a free-for-all, with few exceptions.
- mjevans 4y ago
  A nice alternative would be a return policy where there was a no questions, BUT small fee (20-25% of the cost)? For returns without defects but obvious use. The above policy should be _combined_ with an equipment rental that is substantially cheaper but expects similar condition returns. Particularly for apartment renters, the ability to not need to store a large bulky item used 2-3 times in their lifetime would be an upgrade.
antisthenes 4y ago
> and to what degree it is a generational shift where more people (though there's always been a subset) will just take advantage of any system they can. When you're being squeezed by every system, and housing/life goals become increasingly unattainable and wages stagnate - you better be sure that people will try to exploit every system they can. Can't really even blame them for it, except for some egregious circumstances.
- ghaff 4y ago
  That sounds like rationalizing crappy behavior.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- muro 4y ago
  Life being difficult doesn't give one the right to cheat their way to make it easier.