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

Started May 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
Patrick McMahon
Patrick McMahon Senior Member • Posts: 1,284
Re: More than just the sales tax ...

ne beginner wrote:

Patrick McMahon wrote:

I think a quicker and much less convoluted answer would be to have all retailers collect sales tax. It may not seem like it remotely addresses the issue, but I think it would to a degree, and on all goods too.

It would encourage people to buy from their "local" camera store. I say parens local because that can now be pretty far. And develop a relationship of trust.

It would also encourage our brick and mortars that are getting destroyed by patently unfair business practices...

From what I can see, the "local camera stores" are getting beat in price as well. As I understand this, local small camera stores have to go through a distributor or wholesaler, which adds a level the chains can avoid. The the chains can negotiate volume discounts. When manufacturers need a bump in sales, they will go to their large customers and offer a deal, so again the chains and wholesalers can get additional discounts. Chains are typically more efficient, due their scale, in negotiating fixed expenses, like overhead, so they can spread their costs out more, and work off lower margins, than the small local guys.

So, all that said, while tax is a part of it, I believe there are many disadvantages, besides taxes that, added together, contribute to more to the gap.

The beauty is that we have minimum price requirements by the manufacturers. You take away the $200 to $500 price difference that a brick and mortar is forced to bear- you get them back in the ball game. That is huge money! Any store- no matter the product - will tell you that is why internet retailers inflict the pain.

You have a new Nikon DSLR selling for the sale amount of money across the board- you have more brick and mortars and more trust.

The very notion that a D4s would effectively "lose value" because someone simply broke the seal on a box is ridiculous to me. This high precision, tough, flagship camera should be devalued even if it had never been touched after leaving the factory. Remember- the broken seal on program was different, you could NOT return it.

Again, I think my solutions regarding the shopping habits of an individual concerned with this is the fairest. It seems unfair to burden small business with trust issue you have with your online retailer. I think it is far better for the consumer to take the (very easy and uncomplicated) responsibility rather than impose the proposed "regulatory scheme."

And, hey, if we are going to impose some friendly restraints on the little guy, lets make it fun! How about rather than a seal we put a dye pack that can only be de-activated if the 2nd purchaser is provided a "nullifier" which by virtue of it's being provided signals it is a resale. Man I would purchase all second hand gifts and leave out the "nullifier"... "Happy Birthday!" "Oh, you shouldn't have! BOOM!" Or when you return a camera you spray paint it pink so the next person knows it was a return.

I mean- if you are going to kill what little business my local retailer has left, make it creative.

 Patrick McMahon's gear list:Patrick McMahon's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Nikon Df Nikon Z6 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF ED +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow