Originally Posted by Steve S
The idea that BB might deliberately stick someone with a defective product per joehonest's last post indicates a lack of understanding of how retail works in the real world.
I'm going to agree with you there. That theory is way off in lalaland.
The debate here is between two viewpoints:
1) BBY is losing money to return fraud. and wants to reduce it.
2) Customers want consistent and predictable return policies.
These two viewpoints are not in contradiction. However, BBY's implementation creates a contradiction. BBY does not anywhere explicitly spell out the new rules. In fact, it seems that the rules themselves are "hidden" in some sort of computer algorithm that The Retail Equation applies on a per customer basis after the point of purchase.
BBY could eliminate all the uncertainty that their new policy creates by one simple change - instead of denying ALL returns for a 90 day period, they could just deny all returns of any purchases made during
that 90 day period. That would eliminate the risk of buying multiple items, returning a couple and then finding out that you can't return any more of them.
Funny how those most opposed to some control on return abuse are the first to complain about the high prices caused by that abuse.
Putting contradictory words in other people's mouths is a classic argumentative fallacy. Don't do that.
No customer in the history of the world has welcomed higher prices.
Anybody getting burned has probably been burning retailers for quite some time.
That's easy to believe when one thinks the world is divided into good guys and bad guys and bad things only happen to bad guys. In my experience, the people who think like that have had a sheltered life.Edited by JerryW - 11/18/12 at 8:12pm