
Reflections of a "Book Pirate" - alexleavitt
http://doalchemy.org/2011/12/reflections-of-a-book-pirate/
======
patio11
Businesses with microscopic margins and high fraud losses (hello, eBay /
Amazon Marketplace / etc vendors) sometimes get a little peevish about it. It
is less commentary about you than commentary about the ten thieves they dealt
with this week whose visible actions were indistinguishable from your own.

That said, I get to deal with the occasional "OK, now that our event is over I
don't need this anymore, how do I get a refund" email. I eat all the costs on
those and don't argue because there is no profit in arguing, but one can
understand if I don't have those folks in my Favorite Customers Hall of Fame.
You bought a book from a mom-and-pop business, got exactly what you were
promised, and then -- because it was convenient -- reversed the transaction
and stuck them with all costs. You're a textbook pathological customer. Do you
understand why people might not want to work with you?

[Edit: Oh, the economics of the "dispose of it how you want" are fairly
straightforward. It simply isn't worth restocking/shipping/admin overhead to
take the item back. We had a similar canned line at the office supply store I
worked at: if you complained your paper was "Made out of trees!!!" and that
prevented you from using it, I would tell you to "Donate it to a local charity
or otherwise dispose of it in any way convenient to you." Same thing with BCC
disks: they're cheaper to print than to ship and if you hypothetically sent
one back to the factory they would just destroy it and charge me for wasting
their time.]

~~~
tomjen3
I can understand why it might be cheaper to not to restock it, but doesn't it
provide an incentive to the customer to keep the item?

~~~
patio11
Customers are generally unaware of the policy prior to making the decision to
return it and, if it provides adverse incentives, that is a "cost of doing
business." I won't give you numbers for ex-employers, but returns for BCC were
less than .9% of sales last year. Even if every last one was fraudulent, whee,
it cost me less than hamburgers and milkshakes at one particular restaurant in
Mountain View that I happened to be at a lot. (Steak something, on Castro
Street. Two thumbs up.)

~~~
kqr2
Sounds like you are referring to the SteakOut:

<http://www.steakout.us/>

------
phaus
I think that the vendor should have kept his cool, but he was probably pissed
that someone expected him to eat $8 worth of shipping to return a book he was
only trying to get $6 from. What is especially frustrating is that the
customer got exactly what they wanted, in the advertised condition, yet still
returned it.

If this wasn't bad enough, the author also brings up the time that they asked
for a refund from a 16 cent book.

I also try to save money however I can, but the person who wrote this article
is exceptionally unreasonable.

~~~
tibbon
Yet, in my mind it becomes part of being on the Amazon.com storefront.
Customers have the expectation (and aren't told any differently by Amazon)
that they'll be able to treat purchases just like any other on Amazon.

On Amazon if I get something (a shirt) and when I get it I realize that I
simply don't really like it, I can return it and they are more than happy to
take the return. Same with Zappos or other companies that are generally
excellent with returns from customers. But the reason they are cool with it,
is because there is a large chance you'll deal with them again. A small loss
in trade of happiness for likely future purchases.

But being one of the thousands of vendors on Amazon, I'm guessing you don't
have this outlook. I personally can't remember the name of a single Amazon
vendor I've bought from. I only buy from them if there's either no other
options, or if they are offerring significantly cheaper (even when factoring
in Prime shipping, which few of them do) than Amazon themselves.

Another thing it brings up is why these companies sell books for 16 cents, or
even less to begin with. Clearly, that can't be a way to make for successful
business, so like sellers on eBay tried many years ago (and still some today)
they are trying to make up for it on shipping fees, in order to beat out
competition and likely to avoid giving Amazon a cut.

I don't think Alex is being unreasonable, given that the standards of the
Amazon storefront are such that allow for such. On other storefronts, it would
be less acceptable. I don't think trying to return an item in an eBay auction
for example that is in perfect condition and as-described in acceptable. Yet
on Amazon, it would seem to be an ok thing to do. Just as there are social
norms, there are corporate norms, and being in a storefront like this carries
those norms.

~~~
a3camero
I think buying a shirt is different from buying a book. The author got
_exactly_ what he wanted. He wasn't expecting a different book, or even one
with a slightly different colour, or a different fit.

The real problem is that merchants can't state that they don't accept refunds
in cases where people bought and received what they asked for but they didn't
actually want the think they bought. Kind of a corner case I'd think, but one
that led to the disappointment of both people in this transaction.

~~~
alexleavitt
But I see an interesting parallel between clothing and media, in terms of
"trying them out," if you will. Over the years, Amazon has (at least
anecdotally -- would be interesting to confirm this empirically) adopted a
try-and-return policy on a lot of clothing, taking a hit on the shipping so
that people can retain the "in-store experience" of making sure everything
fits. Why does that necessarily have to be different for books and other
media? Is it just a question of physical weight + price?

~~~
tibbon
I think the difference between Amazon Inc and Amazon Marketplace sellers is
that Amazon knows you'll come back if you're happy. Marketplace sellers will
probably/likely never see you again, happy or not. So Amazon sees it as an
investment in the future, but the Marketplace sellers just see it as a loss.

------
dfxm12
Forget piracy, the blogger also had time to _read_ the book and then try to
sell it back - for full price. That is still, in the words of the seller
"...taking advantage of the system… at my expense."

There is an issue (with Amazon) if there is no "Other" option for the reason
of returning the book, but telling the seller "I no longer want/need this"
book after (reasonably assumed to be) using the book for three weeks seems
disingenuous at best. This implies that you did want the book at one time,
you've gotten all the use you can out of it, and now you want a full refund.

Imagine if you go to the car dealership at the end of the life of your car and
did the same thing...

~~~
alexleavitt
Can you even return a car after you purchase it? That's a poor metaphor.

Sorry, but your response sounded a lot like
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU>

------
blakdawg
Dude gets a book for free, vendor pays out-of-pocket to ship merchandise he
oesn't get paid for, and vendor's reward is snarky comments on social media
because he had the temerity to complain about the situation.

And the book ends up on the shelf next to some expensive new hardbacks. Gotta
get that $6.16 back from the used sellers so it can be spent on the worst deal
in publishing, meant for those buyers who don't mind spending money
unneccessarily.

------
binarysolo
I remember selling some used textbooks on Amazon back in my student days, and
for the ones that needed returning, I remember that having the buyer eat both
send and return shipping charges STRONGLY deters frivolous returns.

"In cases where you are not responsible for the return, the return shipping
costs should be borne by the buyer. Upon receipt, please issue a refund to the
buyer. Learn how to Issue a Refund."

[http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=xm_1...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=xm_1161246_cont_home?nodeId=1161246)

Seems like the seller could have just asked the guy to send it back (at his
own cost) before giving him a PARTIAL refund (book cost sans shipping fees)
and just avoided this all. :)

~~~
alexleavitt
(It'd probably be less than $1 via media mail anyway.)

~~~
binarysolo
The primary cost of return is time, TBH. $1 mail fee + 15 minutes of your time
(at $1/min just to be simple) is not really worth it for a $15 book.

------
tibbon
What a peculiar incident. While its helped expand the inventory of Amazon
considerably, it does seem that their storefront model ends up exposing
consumers to thousands of potentially less than great sellers who, while they
might do the right thing in the end, don't end up acting with the proper
decorum that Amazon themselves would. Yet, I still "feel" like I am trusting
them initially as I would trust Amazon. Yet, I don't know if I really should.

I'm shocked at the tone of the accusations, as they could have just said, "I'm
sorry the book didn't work out for you, it will end up costing us more in
shipping and reinventory costs than its worth, so you can just keep and it and
have a refund". Yet for some reason, I'm not terribly surprised.

Perhaps they have them, but Amazon should perhaps have better guidelines for
communicating with customers for 3rd party vendors?

