Liberal Return Policies vs. "has my camera been used?": A way to Solve This

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Patrick McMahon
Senior MemberPosts: 1,197Gear list
Like?
Re: OK, I broken seal devalues the product, I agree ...
In reply to ne beginner, 2 months ago

ne beginner wrote:

But at the same time, if done under the right circumstances, how much? Can the fact that the seal can be broken actually increase retailer revenue?

A retailer that wants to market a liberal return policy does so to attract more customers, and increase loyalty. So retailers that allow in-store trial only, would attract customers like yourself. If limited to in-store trial only, these items are not sold and returned, so the retailer is #1. not misrepresenting and therefor has no consumer law liability risk, and #2 can legitimacy sell that product as new because it has not been sold. I would buy from such a retailer, if I trusted that they adhered to their in-store trial only.

I appreciate this and you would clearly...but the fail safe- the seal would be broken... and therefore the trust of others.

How about a re-stocking fee if you return a product? I would pay a erasable fee for that option, if I knew the item I am buying is new and not used. Used defined as sold, returned, and misrepresented as new. First, I would be more careful about just randomly buying and trying, and really do my homework so I only buy and try items I am very serious about. Second, that retailer can offer open box specials at a discount, funded by the restocking fee. You could use those specials to attract customers to the store to see what you have.

BestBuy got rid of their restocking fee because of the beating Amazon put on them.

Patrick McMahon wrote:

As I said earlier any product with a seal is immediately devalued when that seal is broken. It no longer becomes a matter choosing who would purchase it or not. If that brick an mortar has an online presence or ebay account you have devalued their inventory.

B&M's are already the show rooms for Amazon as it is... they will really be laughing themselves to the bank after you effectively devalue their meager competitions inventory! And the irony is that a percentage of the viewer would be ordering from Amazon anyway.

I don't know .. there are so few B&M's left, and Amazon has a liberal return policy already, I doubt that would change. They would have to be honest about reselling returns as new, but plenty of people, such as yourself, would remain customers. Again, it simply allows customers who don't want to be randomly shipped used product to make a decision.

Like I said earlier... not wholly against the concept. But I think of the Df and how many people needed to get it in their hands to say... "Whoa! This is the most ergonomically uncomfortable camera... I don't like it." More than a few did that at counters... Now with the seal we would have to listen to some douche bag say "Go rent it!" When that is clearly uncalled for.

They could still try it in the store. As stated above, breaking the seal does not have to devalue the product.

I also wonder to what degree this is a solution in search of a problem? The times that I have heard of a person getting a previously owned camera has been few, and the retailer was very apologetic sending out a replacement.

I suspect, as have many others, that the recycling of defective returns creates a problem in itself, and increases the changes of getting a defective product because these items are not being removed from the inventory, but rather resold over again. Retailers caught had better be apologetic because they are likely violating consume protection laws.

Maybe at some point we will start a grass roots movement to put a little stamp on the inside flap of a returned box when the next camera/ lens comes out? Not as fun as my "nullifier" (patent pending), but could see the extent your concerns are justified and who the retailers are that can't be trusted.

I appreciate the thought you have put into this and I think it comes down to our opinions on how it would affect the market/ retailers. If I believed, as you do, that it would not adversely affect the B&M, I would support it. Heck- I'll go as far as saying I support it 100% if you make every retailer collect the applicable sales tax. How's that for a compromise.

But as it stands I see it being pro big internet retailer... Wholly my opinion

Weren't the European D4 cameras shipped with a seal, or am I remembering wrong...?

 Patrick McMahon's gear list:Patrick McMahon's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow