Should New Camera Be in Sealed Box?

Started Jun 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
Guidenet Forum Pro • Posts: 15,748
Re: Should New Camera Be in Sealed Box?

MarkInSF wrote:

Guidenet wrote:

Susan Taylor wrote:

This question may sound unnecessary and I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask it, but I ordered a new camera and got it today. I was surprised to see the box wasn't sealed with any tape and then found that the menu was already set as well. Putting two and two together, I'm now wondering if I was sent a returned item as something "new." I haven't had a chance yet to try taking any photos as the battery is charging. But the more I think about it, the most frustrated I am. Why would I pay full price (at least for this vendor) and be satisfied with a possibly pre-used and pre-tested but returned camera? I'm seriously having the worst luck in trying to get another camera! If I only had a good camera store locally (like we used to have), I wouldn't have to resort to online ordering and taking this kind of chance!

Boxes generally are not sealed these days, and maybe the menu is set by the vender. Who knows, but I feel the same way you do. The problem is there are a lot of Run Cully types around us who use the 30 day refund offered by so many online stores as a way to try before they buy not as a protection against faulty merchandise. Some people on these forums buy two or three cameras to compare before sending back all but one or sometimes all of them. Some buy just to say they got a new release first and then claim it didn't meet their needs. Look at the amateur blog writer Ken Rockwell who buys almost everything made by two brands and just took on a third. He messes with them, takes pictures, then sends them all back.

I occasionally order via NPS and my local store some fairly more exotic item as I did with my Nikon 300 f/2.8 VR and some other more expensive items. I always request security tape be sealed over the box or the shipping box not be opened or I will order another and the store can consider that one a demo. When my D3S came in a few years ago, an in store customer wanted to look at one and mine in the back room was all there was. The salesman, not mine but knowing how I felt, still went back and opened mine up and let this greasy fingered twit play with my camera. I happened to come in while this was going one. I told them to put it on the shelf and order me another. This time please do what I request or I'll never buy another here. The owner and my salesman were furious at the salesman. I never saw him again, but I don't now if it was because of this.

The only way to put a stop to this nonsense is to charge a restocking fee unless the camera has a real internal defect. No scrapes or bumps allowed. That restocking fee should equal the amount of discount the average person would expect on a 30 day used camera. I think 15% is about right. Let the abusers consider that. Otherwise the online stores should offer rental to anyone who does this more than once. That's the real fair way to try before you buy rather than making others pay for your play.

Most of us don't do this, but a few here and elsewhere do. You can tell who they are because they're usually quick to defend it and quick to attack those who don't like the practice. LOL Watch. It doesn't matter. Everyone has to take a stand on what they believe is moral and ethical. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

Take care.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

I don't remember the last time I returned something. I do the research before I buy. If it isn't perfect, it's probably close enough I can live with it.

People from retailers have reasonably enough said that the problem with restocking fees is that the people who want to return goods still do it, claiming some kind of internal fault. It becomes extremely difficult for the store to figure out if there really is some kind of obscure, intermittent, internal problem or not. Complex electronics do sometimes have those problems, and they can be hard to find. The store is stuck looking for a problem that may be made-up. Even now, without charging a restocking fee, people still claim there's something wrong, wasting the store's time and money. Just so they won't look like they have a good reason for returning the item.

Ken Rockwell is a pathetic loser. Don't read him. Please.

I understand people will lie about some internal intermittent issue. I would attempt to duplicate the issue. If I could not, I'd tell the person to return it under warranty for repair. I'd help by paying the freight. I might also offer and exchange for the same camera.

Better yet, the customer comes back in claiming some obscure intermittent issue. Say, "Ohhh.. I think I know what that is. That's an extremely rare firmware lockup." I'll be right back. Go in the back room and have a cup of coffee. Come back front and tell him you were able to replicate the issue so you updated the software patch. It should never have that issue again. Simple fix. First one you've ever seen but the factory rep had mentioned to keep an eye out for it. With the original firmware, the system might have those intermittent lock ups when someone tried to rotate the lens the wrong direction when removing it from the bayonet mount.

LOL that'll fix em. If they come back with something new. You fix it again.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

 Guidenet's gear list:Guidenet's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D800 +31 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow