What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Best Buy can kiss my fanny good-bye (1 Viewer)

So if I bring in my receipt I can get my money back and go spend it wherever I wish, but if someone chooses to shop at Target for me and I bring in a (gift) receipt I am stuck spending that money at Target? :wacko:
Click to expand...
what's wrong with that?
 
Ethics tells you not to enter into a transaction where no value is lost by the party with whom you are doing business if they are willing to do so? That's a pretty skewed version of ethics.If you tell a store owner you would be happy to give them some cookies for their fruit and they gladly accept and if both the fruit and the cookies have approximately the same value, then how is it unethical to conduct that transaction?
Click to expand...
When you know you can get the customer service counter to do it because they are afraid to lose your business, then you are pushing the ethics of the transacation.
 
They are just trying to make Bob look unethical because it helps their stance here. This is the same mentality that went into the hounding of Chemical Beagle over the Pier1 thread.I too have returned unopened CD's to a store (Fred Meyer) that I received as a gift and exchanged the CDs for something else. No receipt. Fred Meyer could have told me to get lost or prove that the CD was purchased there, but they didn't. They said "Yeah, we'll take that in exchange".
Click to expand...
just so we're clearethics = what you can get away with?
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the direction American society is heading.
 
Ethics was referring to using Christas Cookies at the grocery store to exchange for fruit, not the DVD issue. If you don't see the difference of going through the vendor process at the store to get them to sell your Christmas Cookies and going to the customer servce counter to demanding that they immediately exchange your Christmas Cookies for fruit because they can just sell your Christmas Cookies, then it is obvious where your ethics lie.
Click to expand...
Well demanding that they accept your cookies for fruit may be ridiculous but I still don't think it's unethical. Asking if they would accept your cookies for fruit is definitely not unethical. They have every right to accept or refuse depending on how they think that transaction would affect their business.
 
If you don't see the difference of going through the vendor process at the store to get them to sell your Christmas Cookies and going to the customer servce counter to demanding that they immediately exchange your Christmas Cookies for fruit because they can just sell your Christmas Cookies, then it is obvious where your ethics lie.
Click to expand...
I definitely see a difference. If the store has empowered some employee to make that call, though, then what is unethical about conducting a transaction with which that store apparently has no problem?A: "I'll give you 2 sheep for your cow."B: "OK"A: "No, no. That would be unethical. The practice of the day is to use money instead of bartering."B: "No worry. My boss wants to please his customers. He knows he can sell the sheep for as much as his cow."A: "No, truly it must be unethical to conduct such a transaction."Two weeks later...B: "Great. Now I have to go out of business because I couldn't sell this #### cow, all the while Melvin kept asking for a sheep."
 
They are just trying to make Bob look unethical because it helps their stance here.  This is the same mentality that went into the hounding of Chemical Beagle over the Pier1 thread.I too have returned unopened CD's to a store (Fred Meyer) that I received as a gift and exchanged the CDs for something else.  No receipt.  Fred Meyer could have told me to get lost or prove that the CD was purchased there, but they didn't.  They said "Yeah, we'll take that in exchange".
Click to expand...
just so we're clearethics = what you can get away with?
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the direction American society is heading.
Click to expand...
you're being obtuse on purpose. it was Fred Meyer's decision to either take the CD or not. The decision rested on their shoulders and they gladly accepted.Ethics has nothing to do with the transaction above and you know that.
 
I definitely see a difference. If the store has empowered some employee to make that call, though, then what is unethical about conducting a transaction with which that store apparently has no problem?A: "I'll give you 2 sheep for your cow."B: "OK"A: "No, no. That would be unethical. The practice of the day is to use money instead of bartering."B: "No worry. My boss wants to please his customers. He knows he can sell the sheep for as much as his cow."A: "No, truly it must be unethical to conduct such a transaction."Two weeks later...B: "Great. Now I have to go out of business because I couldn't sell this #### cow, all the while Melvin kept asking for a sheep."
Click to expand...
great example....very realistic
 
And this is the customer's fault that the employee is stupid and/or ignorant of company promotions? They need to either not take the item back, flag it in their system as a promotional item, or inspect it before re-stocking it to make sure they are selling what they are supposed to be selling.
Click to expand...
:wall: Gee, what have we been talking about? Retail stores are beginning to deny returns without receipts just as you suggest that they do. Flagging it in the system as a promotional item doesn't work unless the 18 y/o kid KNOWS what every single the promotion the store is running. That'll never happen for $8 an hour. For all he knows the package the customer is returning is the promotional product. Inspecting it fails for the same reason. It's not until it is restocked that it can be seen that it is different, and now it's too late to do anything about it. They are stuck with a product that they don't sell. It's gets thrown in the mark down bin, net loss for the business.
 
You guys are crackin' me up!! :lol:

Look people...when it comes to dealing with customers, it's all about PERCEPTION...

Whether the store is wrong or not...what matters is how the store is PERCEIVED by the customer....and as the saying goes..."the customer is always right".....that is, in the same sense that the referee is "always right"....He may be wrong in his call but it's HIS perception of the play that draws his whistle.

The goal of every retail employee should be to send the customer out of their store feeling like they DIDN'T get ripped off. If he feels ripped off (whether he was or not), the retail store failed.

I understand the the store must draw the line somewhere and taking back merchandise COULD present a problem when accepting stolen merchandise..but I'll tell ya.....The store can never go wrong when it comes to "in-store credit".

The store ends up with merchandise that can either be re-sold or returned for an RA, they have a customer walking around in their store with PROBABLY more money in his pocket than the store credit he was just given....AND most importantly, that customer feels as if the store took care of his problem....and when a customer feels that way...he will, more than likely come back again.

 
You guys are crackin' me up!! :lol:

Look people...when it comes to dealing with customers, it's all about PERCEPTION...

Whether the store is wrong or not...what matters is how the store is PERCEIVED by the customer....and as the saying goes..."the customer is always right".....that is, in the same sense that the referee is "always right"....He may be wrong in his call but it's HIS perception of the play that draws his whistle.

The goal of every retail employee should be to send the customer out of their store feeling like they DIDN'T get ripped off. If he feels ripped off (whether he was or not), the retail store failed.

I understand the the store must draw the line somewhere and taking back merchandise COULD present a problem when accepting stolen merchandise..but I'll tell ya.....The store can never go wrong when it comes to "in-store credit".

The store ends up with merchandise that can either be re-sold or returned for an RA, they have a customer walking around in their store with PROBABLY more money in his pocket than the store credit he was just given....AND most importantly, that customer feels as if the store took care of his problem....and when a customer feels that way...he will, more than likely come back again.
Click to expand...
Ding, ding, ding. :thumbup:
 
So if I bring in my receipt I can get my money back and go spend it wherever I wish, but if someone chooses to shop at Target for me and I bring in a (gift) receipt I am stuck spending that money at Target? :wacko:
Click to expand...
Not only that, but if you return it with a gift receipt you get store credit for the lowest price the item has sold at in the last 30 days (same as Best Buy). My main point is, if GM chooses not to shop at Best Buy, thats his perogative but I would strongly suggest he check out the return policy for whatever store he chooses to do business with instead. Its likely to be just as restrictive if not more so. Target is a good example. They used to have one of the loosest return policies of any major chain, now they're one of the most restrictive.
 
It's hard to find good help these days. They should really train their employees better.
Click to expand...
And this is the bottom line of the matter. No store can find good help to run the customer service counter for $8 an hour. As such, the policies of all these stores will be very similar over a broad amount of time. There may be moments when one store is very liberal, but eventually when the bottom line is being effected by all the loss generated by the oversights being generated by the customer service desk, they conform to all the rest. It's not the stores causing the customer service problem, it's society's belief that someone else should be responsible for everything. As such honest people have to jump through the hoops that are there to catch the unreasonable.
 
You guys are crackin' me up!! :lol:

Look people...when it comes to dealing with customers, it's all about PERCEPTION...

Whether the store is wrong or not...what matters is how the store is PERCEIVED by the customer....and as the saying goes..."the customer is always right".....that is, in the same sense that the referee is "always right"....He may be wrong in his call but it's HIS perception of the play that draws his whistle.

The goal of every retail employee should be to send the customer out of their store feeling like they DIDN'T get ripped off. If he feels ripped off (whether he was or not), the retail store failed.

I understand the the store must draw the line somewhere and taking back merchandise COULD present a problem when accepting stolen merchandise..but I'll tell ya.....The store can never go wrong when it comes to "in-store credit".

The store ends up with merchandise that can either be re-sold or returned for an RA, they have a customer walking around in their store with PROBABLY more money in his pocket than the store credit he was just given....AND most importantly, that customer feels as if the store took care of his problem....and when a customer feels that way...he will, more than likely come back again.
Click to expand...
:thumbup:
 
You mean to tell me they accepted goods/services that they didn't initially pay for? (Fraud)
Click to expand...
no, they paid for it......or didn't you notice that it came through the return desk.
 
I definitely see a difference. If the store has empowered some employee to make that call, though, then what is unethical about conducting a transaction with which that store apparently has no problem?A: "I'll give you 2 sheep for your cow."B: "OK"A: "No, no. That would be unethical. The practice of the day is to use money instead of bartering."B: "No worry. My boss wants to please his customers. He knows he can sell the sheep for as much as his cow."A: "No, truly it must be unethical to conduct such a transaction."Two weeks later...B: "Great. Now I have to go out of business because I couldn't sell this #### cow, all the while Melvin kept asking for a sheep."
Click to expand...
And that all depends on the first IF statement. "If the store has empowered some employee to make that call". The store has a policy that defines what is empowered to their employees. The manager's ability to accept your cookies is not because of what has been empowered to him, but his responsibility to "put out fires". The ethics involved is your motivation to start "a fire" to see if the manager will give you fruit for your cookies.
 
They are just trying to make Bob look unethical because it helps their stance here.  This is the same mentality that went into the hounding of Chemical Beagle over the Pier1 thread.I too have returned unopened CD's to a store (Fred Meyer) that I received as a gift and exchanged the CDs for something else.  No receipt.  Fred Meyer could have told me to get lost or prove that the CD was purchased there, but they didn't.  They said "Yeah, we'll take that in exchange".
Click to expand...
just so we're clearethics = what you can get away with?
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the direction American society is heading.
Click to expand...
you're being obtuse on purpose. it was Fred Meyer's decision to either take the CD or not. The decision rested on their shoulders and they gladly accepted.Ethics has nothing to do with the transaction above and you know that.
Click to expand...
Again, the ethics response was in regards to Christmas Cookies for fruit, not DVDs.
 
Ethics was referring to using Christas Cookies at the grocery store to exchange for fruit, not the DVD issue. If you don't see the difference of going through the vendor process at the store to get them to sell your Christmas Cookies and going to the customer servce counter to demanding that they immediately exchange your Christmas Cookies for fruit because they can just sell your Christmas Cookies, then it is obvious where your ethics lie.
Click to expand...
I didn't read all of this, but one thing I know for sure is NO FRUIT IS GOING TO TOUCH MY COOKIES!btw melly o\/\/ned by the poop eater.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
General,Did you ever write that letter?
Click to expand...
no.i'm in the wrong. period. i know that.do I like it? no. Does it bother me that the same DVD will get sold twice for $19.99? absolutely. Do I think they could have kept a customer happy by taking him at his word and giving him store credit for the full amount? yes.But the fact remains. I didn't have my receipt, so I have no recourse. Writing a letter is only going to continue this episode, and I'd really like it to die.
 
:wall: Gee, what have we been talking about? Retail stores are beginning to deny returns without receipts just as you suggest that they do. Flagging it in the system as a promotional item doesn't work unless the 18 y/o kid KNOWS what every single the promotion the store is running. That'll never happen for $8 an hour. For all he knows the package the customer is returning is the promotional product. Inspecting it fails for the same reason. It's not until it is restocked that it can be seen that it is different, and now it's too late to do anything about it. They are stuck with a product that they don't sell. It's gets thrown in the mark down bin, net loss for the business.
Click to expand...
I see your :wall: and raise you a :wacko: .If all promotional items are flagged in the system why would the kid have to KNOW every promotion? He enters the item, a flag pops up that says "promotional item", he checks the list of promotions. Now the store has 2 choices: reject the item as unacceptable due to the promotion. Or accept it and give a store credit. If they give the credit, 1) they have a happy customer walking around their store with a credit plus whatever money he has in his pocket and 2) they can re-sell the item when the promotion is over or return it to another store for a refund. Either way they will more than get their money back.

 
They are just trying to make Bob look unethical because it helps their stance here.  This is the same mentality that went into the hounding of Chemical Beagle over the Pier1 thread.I too have returned unopened CD's to a store (Fred Meyer) that I received as a gift and exchanged the CDs for something else.  No receipt.  Fred Meyer could have told me to get lost or prove that the CD was purchased there, but they didn't.  They said "Yeah, we'll take that in exchange".
Click to expand...
just so we're clearethics = what you can get away with?
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the direction American society is heading.
Click to expand...
you're being obtuse on purpose. it was Fred Meyer's decision to either take the CD or not. The decision rested on their shoulders and they gladly accepted.Ethics has nothing to do with the transaction above and you know that.
Click to expand...
Again, the ethics response was in regards to Christmas Cookies for fruit, not DVDs.
Click to expand...
Not in this case, Spock. Follow the quotes.
 
You mean to tell me they accepted goods/services that they didn't initially pay for? (Fraud)
Click to expand...
No, they paid for it by giving the customer who gave it to them credit. THEY WERE DEFRAUDED into believing during the return that it was a product that they sell.
 
I didn't read all of this, but one thing I know for sure is NO FRUIT IS GOING TO TOUCH MY COOKIES!btw melly o\/\/ned by the poop eater.
Click to expand...
don't you have some contacts to fittoo bad medical school didn't work out for you.
 
Oh, I see. Kind of the same way I paid for my item by giving them 2 items in exchange.
Click to expand...
Eeek! It's LOGIC! Run Away! Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!Bob if you keep up this dialogue you're going to feel like this guy :wall: by the end of the day.
 
Oh, I see. Kind of the same way I paid for my item by giving them 2 items in exchange.
Click to expand...
well, if you had bought them there (Target), yes, that would be okay. You bought them there, right?
 
I see your :wall: and raise you a :wacko: .

If all promotional items are flagged in the system why would the kid have to KNOW every promotion? He enters the item, a flag pops up that says "promotional item", he checks the list of promotions. Now the store has 2 choices: reject the item as unacceptable due to the promotion. Or accept it and give a store credit. If they give the credit, 1) they have a happy customer walking around their store with a credit plus whatever money he has in his pocket and 2) they can re-sell the item when the promotion is over or return it to another store for a refund. Either way they will more than get their money back.
Click to expand...
Because when the kid is bringing in the item with no receipt he has to search for the item in the system. "RollerCoaster Tycoon 2 - Promo" is found. The customer has "RollerCoadster Tycoon 2" on the desk. How does the kid know that it's not the product they sell. He brings it in under that SKU. Or the UPC brings up the promo item because the promo is contained in the as part of the shrink wrap and not the software box itself. Why would the kid think this would be any different than what the promo item is? The UPC's match.

 
well, if you had bought them there (Target), yes, that would be okay. You bought them there, right?
Click to expand...
Cheese and rice, Mel, are you just being an #### today or what? He didn't yell and scream or threaten them. He offered 2 DVD's (of unknown origin to the store) for 1 DVD. THEY ACCEPTED. If they are selling a widget for $15 and I walk in and offer $14 and they sell it to me, was I unethical for offering less than they wanted?
 
I just wanted to add that I loved this thread.The first time, when it was GRID at Blockbuster.
Click to expand...
:thumbup: Exactly, especially since grid pulls off being sanctamonius (sp) much better than GM does.
 
Cheese and rice, Mel, are you just being an #### today or what? He didn't yell and scream or threaten them. He offered 2 DVD's (of unknown origin to the store) for 1 DVD. THEY ACCEPTED. If they are selling a widget for $15 and I walk in and offer $14 and they sell it to me, was I unethical for offering less than they wanted?
Click to expand...
Look, I'm not trying to say "be honest and pure or you'll go to hell"I'm saying that what you can get away with <> ethical business practice.If we lived in a barter society, then have at it.Since he took the labels off, he was clearly intending to mislead Target into believing he bought them there. The fact that some 17 year old kid didn't care enough to press the issue doesn't make it right. Good for him, #### him....I really don't care.I'll argue for the side of honesty, since it's the way it should be, and since I'm bored today.
 
well, if you had bought them there (Target), yes, that would be okay. You bought them there, right?
Click to expand...
That's not germane to the statement I made. I'm saying that the item Circuit City is now selling wasn't purchased by them, and they had enough information to know that when they conducted the transaction. Based on the rationale you applied to my transaction, that constitutes fraud.
 
That's not germane to the statement I made. I'm saying that the item Circuit City is now selling wasn't purchased by them, and they had enough information to know that when they conducted the transaction. Based on the rationale you applied to my transaction, that constitutes fraud.
Click to expand...
and I'm saying they paid for those items in credit given. They can then sell them for a profit. It's what stores do. They paid for something, now they'll attempt to sell them, probably at a loss, to minimize the overall loss.what's your point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Max Power
Most Embarrassing Thing Someone in Your Family Does?
2 3
Replies
108
Views
3K
Zow
Zow
scorchy
Any banking guys that can offer solutions to a vexing issue?
Replies
31
Views
539
Mrs. Rannous
Mrs. Rannous
STEADYMOBBIN 22
Elderly dog - anybody give their pets CBD?
Replies
24
Views
472
belljr
belljr

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top