I'm going to buy every camera, play with them for a bit, and return all of them!

DtEW

Veteran Member
Messages
2,759
Solutions
2
Reaction score
1,875
Obviously I'm not, but apparently a lot of people do, under the thin pretense of "evaluating a camera".

Therefore I'm beginning to think that the combination of:

1) A reasonable re-stocking fee proportional to an open-box discount (~15%?)...

2) The presence of open-box offerings passing the savings of the value loss onto consumers willing to deal with open-box products, and...

3) A vow to designate returns as open-box regardless of the returners' claims. (Yes, I realize that this creates the perverse incentive to open the box regardless. The better solution is to have retailer apply a good seal that evidences being broken... but that takes some investment.)

...Is a desirable thing to look for in a camera retailer.

This is so that these "camera evaluator" returns don't have to be absorbed by the retailer to be passed on as higher prices for everyone, or worse... unscrupulous retailers aren't forced to pass open-box cameras onto unwitting consumers.

What do you all think?
 
Obviously I'm not, but apparently a lot of people do, under the thin pretense of "evaluating a camera".

Therefore I'm beginning to think that the combination of:

1) A reasonable re-stocking fee proportional to an open-box discount (~15%?)...

2) The presence of open-box offerings passing the savings of the value loss onto consumers willing to deal with open-box products, and...

3) A vow to designate returns as open-box regardless of the returners' claims. (Yes, I realize that this creates the perverse incentive to open the box regardless. The better solution is to have retailer apply a good seal that evidences being broken... but that takes some investment.)

...Is a desirable thing to look for in a camera retailer.

This is so that these "camera evaluator" returns don't have to be absorbed by the retailer to be passed on as higher prices for everyone, or worse... unscrupulous retailers aren't forced to pass open-box cameras onto unwitting consumers.

What do you all think?
I doubt that the vast majority of buyers simply "rent" cameras to the extent that prices are being so adversely affected as to require sever return penalties.

In any case, the reason that bricks-and-mortar retailers exist is because they provide buyers a unique service that on-line discounters can't, and that's the ability to try out the camera before you buy. That service costs money, and is one reason why camera stores charge a bit more. The fact that that premium is not great is one indication that this "renting" is not a big problem (that and competitive pressures). The better, more full service shops will also offer rental programs to give prospective buyers more opportunity to test an item properly. My local shop, for example, offers many of its camera kits on rental, even providing significantly discounted rental rates over a weekend, which it extends to 3 days. That gives you a healthy time in which to explore the camera without compromising the retailer's new stock.

That being said, a retailer is a retailer, and part of the retail biz is the expectation of returns. With such expensive, significant purchases as an interchangeable-lens camera, something other than an immediate restocking charge is preferable. One possibility is a shutter count limitation before a restocking charge is imposed. Certainly, 100 or so clicks is nothing for a camera that will last 100K. However, 1000 clicks on a "new" camera is not, and those items should be marked as used. The trick is to balance carrot and stick.
 
The entire camera industry thanks you for thinking of them. Nobody else on planet earth has ever thought of this. We are all grateful to have you.
 
...countries whose marketing and retailing models include liberal return policies. It's good business, attracts customers, increases much-needed cash flow and traffic, and abuse is negligible.

This is part of a reply I made to a comment about liberal return policies made earlier. We get threads on this every once in a while.

I'm not sure that there are "hidden costs," at least when regarding B&M stores. I worked part-time for years at stores, including a major technology store in Houston. We had the occasional abuse, but policies such as a 7 day return policy for notebooks, took care of such occasions. In another situation, one man who had a networking company bought dozens of books and returned all of them over a period of about a year. Finally, we took him aside, showed him his return record, and apologized that we hadn't been able to satisfy his needs. The man was embarrassed, apologized, and was a good customer after that. Some you can't control, like the local politician who bought several computers to network his campaign office, lost the election, and returned the computers. However, we just knocked 10% off the computers and they were quickly gone. In our situation, we didn't lose money on returns - they have their own customers.

We learned, as have retailers like WalMart, Target, etc., that when someone returns something, they usually go back into the store to spend more money. And there are customers who only look at returned merchandise; they would come in once or twice a week and check out the returns trying to find a good deal. I became one of them. The last technology items I bought at a Best Buy were returns or discontinued demos. In one instance, when I was trying to find a hot Sony dSLR that everyone was out of, the sales person checked his computer, found a returned one in a different state, called that store to ask about the condition, and then had it shipped to the local store so I could buy it, at a discount, but also with enough profit left for the store's efforts. Many people here have a negative opinion about Best Buy, but that experience led me to return to that store quite often. Returned items still retain their warranties and return privileges, so they are a safe buy. A few manufacturers required or encouraged that returns be sent to them so that they could be checked out and sold as refurbished or to replace defective units. However, we rarely did this as we found it was far more profitable (and less work) just to mark them down a little and sell them again. Returns never were around long. Last summer, a B&H salesman told me the same thing, describing customers who come in regularly to check out returns and used items...he even referenced that GH2 bodies usually went out the same day they came in. None of this is scientific, but he obviously had the same opinion of the policy as I am describing here.

As another person wrote, some stores encourage returns. It's just good customer service and marketing, and builds customer loyalty. And, it seems to be spreading. I have lived in Beijing for ten years, although have just moved to Korea. When I first went there, they had the same kind of draconian no-return policy (and I'm including "No Return if Opened" in that) as found in many countries. It made me scared to buy anything, and I rarely return anything. For one thing, it's just a hassle, and no one wants to give the impression that they made a mistake. Well, over the last decade, with the influence of American marketing and management, and with the arrival of stores such as WalMart, Carrefour, Apple, and others, that has changed. Now, many of the bigger chains have adopted the idea, and seem to be somewhat proud of it. When I bought an iPad at an Apple reseller in BJ a few months ago, I knew what I wanted and had no intention of returning it (like most people), but the sales woman went out of her way to explain I had two weeks to return it "no questions asked" and even circled the return period on the receipt. Very good customer relations training. As I said, I just moved to Seoul. There is a big store called eMart nearby. I bought some, what I thought were, bicycle goggles there. I realized, when I got home, they were ski goggles because they had limited ventilation. Of course, I had opened the box. Why they were in the bicycle section I don't know, but it was a stupid mistake on my part. I took them back and they returned my money without even looking at the goggles. With plenty of smiles. I turned around, went back into the store and bought the proper ones, and a few other things I hadn't planned on getting. No one has lost, and I left with a good feeling about the place. Some stores have actually extended their return privilege time period, and Costco used to have an unlimited return period (which changed; I'm not sure what it is now), which their staff went out of their way to point out to me when I bought a watch there. This kind of good marketing makes an impression on people, which can pay off later.

Tesco operates a similar large store here called Home Plus. It's the second biggest retail chain in the country. I don't know what their return policy is in the UK, but here it is decidedly American. I returned two shelving units without any questions being asked - they didn't even look at the boxes. Again, I walked back into the store and bought two more, bigger and more expensive ones. The next time I went to that counter, it was to apply for one of their frequent shopper cards. Who loses?

I can't prove that there are no "hidden costs," but my experience has indicated that it is a very good policy and beneficial to everyone. I'm sure that some MBA candidates have written dissertations on this and perhaps I'll try to find one.

Lastly, I should point out that I travel a lot every year because of work, spending about 3 weeks in the UK, a month in the US, and also go to Hong Kong, and some other places quite often. I have never found lower prices than those in the US. The model seems to work. If the above-mentioned Tesco Home Plus had the same return policy as another poster mentioned exists in the UK, I'd be shopping only at eMart.

I have read numerous threads on this over the years and I've always noticed that the people who criticized a liberal return policy as something that leads to unethical behavior or is somehow negative come from countries that don't have a tradition of that policy and clearly don't understand the competitive advantages of such a policy. By the way, no one in this thread has written those views, but I have encountered them quite often in the past. On the other hand, how many times have we read compliments about Amazon's handling of returns, even covering shipping in some cases? Quite often. No amount of advertising can buy that kind of praise. Well worth any "hidden costs," if any.

--

"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber
 
Last edited:
The entire camera industry thanks you for thinking of them. Nobody else on planet earth has ever thought of this. We are all grateful to have you.
You have done more to reveal your own predilections than you would have ever did in responsible debate. Your kind of thought processes are entirely why I am proposing this personally-actionable thing (choosing my retailers).

What you are missing is that you can have all those liberal-return-policy retailers. And I will choose my responsible-return-policy retailers. You seem to think those policies have no costs... so feel free to continue with your beliefs/delusions, until reality hits you in the face.
 
Stop being American :)

If the business has that policy of allowing consumers to road test then it is their own fault.

For me i like the savings of a refurbished product so don't mind if there a few people out there that like to evaluate. If everyone starts abusing then it will become a problem and these policies will be pulled back.
 
I live in the US and am a member of Costco. Trust me when I say I understand liberal return policies. I have known people (it'd be a stretch to call them friends) who abuse said policies to ridiculousness. I have seen such policies actually change or become limited from such abuses. I can name names and companies, but I will refrain.

The situation that is making all this relevent to me now is that I have a pre-order out for a camera that is receiving a lot of popular attention. It is anticipated that there might be shortages in the outset.

I am also reading in threads elsewhere (in markets where this camera is already in the process of being released) where people buy it, play with it (due to its one particularly outstanding attribute), then return it.

Given the idea that there will be launch shortages, I can foresee that some poor schlub is going to find out that he received a camera with a few hundred shutter clicks on it, but has to face the decision to return this used camera (and not have a new one to replace it until the next shipment, effectively losing his place in line), or just accept it as-is. The latter is very likely.

An unscrupulous retailer will do just that, because when found out, they can simply explain the situation as a shipping mistake. At worst they can offer to credit the guy some money. They risk very little for this illegal activity, and can potentially take no losses for offering this policy. The cost is borne by somebody else.

I think there is this strange idea that my thoughts are borne out of care about the business side of things. I don't care about the welfare of businesses, because I know that businesses will generally take care of that themselves. And therefore I know that all costs will be borne by the consumer, lest the business becomes unprofitable, in which case they will not last.

My proposition is about fair and transparent distribution of costs among consumers, that people who are actually responsible for the loss-in-value of product going from "new" to "open box" should bear that cost, and those who are informed and willing to risk "open box" can do so and reap the savings of that loss-in-value.

As it currently stands with liberal return policies, there is a perverse incentive (or at least no disincentive) to incur that loss-in-value for somebody else, whether that be spread throughout the cost of doing business, or that on that poor schlub who gets caught between a rock and a hard spot.
 
Last edited:
The entire camera industry thanks you for thinking of them. Nobody else on planet earth has ever thought of this. We are all grateful to have you.
You have done more to reveal your own predilections than you would have ever did in responsible debate. Your kind of thought processes are entirely why I am proposing this personally-actionable thing (choosing my retailers).

What you are missing is that you can have all those liberal-return-policy retailers. And I will choose my responsible-return-policy retailers. You seem to think those policies have no costs... so feel free to continue with your beliefs/delusions, until reality hits you in the face.
I am making fun of your thread and ridiculous idea that you have to come up with a return policy referendum for retailers, mind you, without being asked too. I am sure they will thank you in spirit for your hard work.

I said nothing about my stance on returns. So way to go on and on, yelling at clouds about your own made up ideas of my mindset. I may in fact hate people returning camera stuff after they 'try' it. Doesn't make your topic and ideas any less stupid.

And what you are missing is that I don't sell camera's, so I could give a rats azz who you choose as a retailer.

$100 says you are retired and just sitting around bored as sheit today.
 
...and I wasn't referring to those firms who resell returned (opened) items as new. I was referring to proper operations, such as B&H, Adorama, Amazon..."The Everything Store" is a good read on how Amazon has been so successful, by the way.

Interesting note: Some time ago B&H instituted a return limitation on camera having over 200 shutter actuations...I think it was 200. Anyway, how they could determine how many times the camera was clicked by the customer, considering that most decent cameras will have 100 or so clicks due to quality control testing at the factory, was beyond me. I read these forums regularly and have never read where anyone has had a return to B&H rejected due to that rule. Don't know if it still exists. I like B&H, by the way, and spend thousands of dollars there each year, almost always having to pay tax because I work overseas and don't have a domestic shipping address that can forward anything. Plus, many of my purchases are spur-of-the-moment, which stores love. Last summer I bought 2 cameras, a lens, flash, batteries, etc., and none of those things were on my list. One was a GH3, another a DP2M.

I think that the only camera item I have returned (ever) was a Sony lens - to B&H the same day I bought it. Despite all of my research, it was disappointing in many ways. I walked back into the store - their return "desk" is outside the normal store - and bought a different lens. With all of the reviews, comments, etc., available online, it's hard to believe it when people are disappointed in something as important as a camera. I even have a little trouble with those who say that they want to find a particular camera model in a B&M shop so they can get a "feel" for it...as if that hasn't already been done on umpteen websites. I don't have a problem with a liberal return policy, but I do have a problem with those who go to the last surviving camera shop in their city to "feel" a camera and then go online to get it to save tax. It's called "showrooming," of course, and some places (Best Buy, for example) claim to like it because it builds traffic, but it still kinda bothers me.
 
Cane wrote
$100 says you are retired and just sitting around bored as sheit today.
Don't know about the OP, but that comment certainly applies to me...you'd win the $100. Making it worse is that I've been up since 4:30 - it's now about 6:00 (AM).
 
Here in the UK we have the Distance Selling Regulations which are enshrined in law. If you buy online you have 7 days from receipt of the goods to inspect, test etc and send back for a full refund if you are not happy.

The thinking being, if you buy online how can you be sure that the goods are fit for purpose until you actually have them. Some things are exempt (digital downloads, software etc) but cameras definitely are not.

Most bricks and mortar retailers have a generous returns policy also but abuse it and they will draw the line somewhere.

That said I imagine most people don't chop and change for the sake of it.
 
Sure, some folks return items over and over, "testing" the products. This is of course an abuse of the system, but I see nothing wrong with returning something (just a single time) not because it has any defect but simply because you don't like it. That seems reasonable and give the consumer more confidence in buying. Is it that hard to do the research and come up with maybe just a couple of models that you like? If the one that you decide on ins't what you expected, return it and buy the other...One of the two seems like it ought to work if the person has done their due diligence and done the research.

As for the "open box discount," don't a lot of places do that anyway... where's the "new idea" in that?
 
I am making fun of your thread and ridiculous idea that you have to come up with a return policy referendum for retailers, mind you, without being asked too. I am sure they will thank you in spirit for your hard work.

I said nothing about my stance on returns. So way to go on and on, yelling at clouds about your own made up ideas of my mindset. I may in fact hate people returning camera stuff after they 'try' it. Doesn't make your topic and ideas any less stupid.

And what you are missing is that I don't sell camera's, so I could give a rats azz who you choose as a retailer.

$100 says you are retired and just sitting around bored as sheit today.
See, there is so much misreading and bad assumptions here it's much easier to let you go on your merry way being a dumba$$.

So off you go, forever ignored. Buhbye.
 
As for the "open box discount," don't a lot of places do that anyway... where's the "new idea" in that?
I think you might have let a now-ignored user's misreading (or outright misrepresentation) color your reading of what I wrote and was trying to express.

See, it is the classic stupid and self-centered forum-ism to say, "hey Canon/Nikon/retailer/whatever, you need to do this and things will be great for everyone!"

Canon/Nikon/retailer/whatever could not give a flying funk what I want. I am merely an individual in the peanut gallery. My asserted interests for Canon/Nikon/retailer/whatever will be easily seen through as thinly-veiled interests for myself, which are rarely in the interest of those I am claiming it will be. They know their best interests better than anybody. Therefore I would not bother voicing it.

*****

What I am doing is voicing what I have decided I would use as criteria in the choosing of retailers to support from now on. I am not proposing any "new idea" for any retailer to adopt.

I am not merely talking to the sky, either. I am sharing this train-of-thought and conclusion among us so that those who are also concerned (or become concerned in the future) with the abuse of liberal return policies can see that

1) Others are concerned about it too, and...

2) There is something an individual can do to fight this, which is basically to support retailers with return policies that are reasonable, but in a way that does not incentivize (or have zero disincentive against) return policy abuse. A reasonable restocking fee, that is then passed along back to the consumer in the form of open-box discounts, is therefore a better policy than a no-questions-asked return policy. Companies like Fry's Electronics already do this, as do other tech companies. This is not the norm in the camera world, but I will be looking out for this, which I'm sure will start to come about in the near future.

In the short-term, you may not be able to expect noticeably lower pricing, as the more liberal return policy companies will try to keep up with market pricing. But at some point the losses cannot be sustained, and they will come around.
but I see nothing wrong with returning something (just a single time) not because it has any defect but simply because you don't like it. That seems reasonable and give the consumer more confidence in buying. Is it that hard to do the research and come up with maybe just a couple of models that you like? If the one that you decide on ins't what you expected, return it and buy the other...One of the two seems like it ought to work if the person has done their due diligence and done the research.
There's nothing wrong with that, except that the loss of value from "new" to "open box" needs to be absorbed by somebody. If you feel like you really need to find out from opening up a brand-new item to do this, then hey, feel free to pay for that loss in value by a restocking fee. That's reasonable.

The other way to do this is to simply rent the item first. There are plenty of photographic equipment rental firms out there these days who will be more than glad to rent you already-used equipment. There are some places that will allow you to put the rental fees toward buying a new copy of the item if you decide you really like it. This is what my local camera shop does, and it's very fair.
 
On the one hand when one buys online one is often buying an item that he/she has not had the opportunity to handle and evaluate. It's only natural that sometimes the item will not be what the buyer wants and he/she will return it. On the other hand the buyer should do what research he/she can do before ordering to at least minimize the likelihood that the item will have to be returned. A liberal return policy is not an excuse to try several cameras (or whatever) keep one and return the rest.

This must be somewhat of a problem because some good stores like B&H will now refuse returns from someone they consider a serial returner. There is what is called "showrooming" where one goes into a brick and mortar store, makes a selection, and then orders the item online for less. There are now so few camera stores that many of these showroomers have no place to showroom so they become serial returners. It's ironic that the online dealers who benefitted from showrooming are now the victims of serial returners.

Any system ever devised by man has people who game the system. That seems to be the nature of some people.
 
Obviously I'm not, but apparently a lot of people do, under the thin pretense of "evaluating a camera".

Therefore I'm beginning to think that the combination of:
I think you have a solution that does not have a problem. If returns were at the level you imagine, there would already be steps in place.
 
Here in Australia, if you buy it, it is yours. PERIOD.

There is NO "return because change of mind" policy. Return is only accepted if the item is defective.

Sounds fair to me.
Caveat emptor.
Hardly - prospective customers should do the required due diligence on a purchase and not expect a free ride from retailers to try & return. There is no "buyer beware" in this, and there shouldn't be a sense of entitlement to a try & return process as well.
How politically incorrect can you get?
It's not about being politically correct, which has its major play in certain political arenas and office environments. This is about cost to businesses and how it is eventually passed on to customers.


Cheers,
Doug
 
There was recently a buyer whining on here that B&H rescinded the buyer's right to return any item after returning 6 items or so within a year. Even a B&H employee gave him the smack-down in these forums for it!
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top