ADifferentKyle

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

The fairness of the comparison doesn’t really matter because we’re talking about buyer expectations… My point was more akin to the one made in the article - regardless of she store methods, they’ve helped create the expectation and habit for the buyer.

ADifferentKyle

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

You’re right; the money is meant to make people think twice about the purchase. Like many people in the article, I would buy whatever with the intent of just returning whatever I didn’t need. The extra cost made me reconsider that option. It had a lasting impact on my online buying habits, even though it’s not available to me anymore and hasn’t been in some time (another commenter helped me recall this was jet.com, which was bought out ages ago).

ADifferentKyle

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

I think this was it! Thank you, that was bugging me.

ADifferentKyle

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

I think you’re right - the ones offering the cheapest and most convenient option will naturally be the best choice for the most amount of people.

Not to be that guy, but I do think there’s an element of privilege in shopping any other way. I’d gladly pay a bit more for the comfort of not participating in the throwaway culture we’re building, but how many people can really say that? I have time and money that a lot of people simply don’t have.

But I do think there are a lot of people in my situation and would do something similar. We might not bring down the amazons of the world, but a place for us can still exist.

ADifferentKyle

il y a 3 ansdiscuss

I see a few comments going both ways here - punish the returners, etc., but I don’t think punishment is really the right concept. When places like Zappos encourage people to buy extra just to return the excess, you can’t blame people for getting used to online shopping this way.

That said, I do agree with the general idea that serial returners should bear some of the additional costs (just not via punishment). I can’t recall the retailer, but I remember buying something from a brand that had the option of “free returns,” which, if selected, would add a small percentage onto the overall price. If you didn’t select it, returns would be even higher out-of-pocket. I think the idea was that not everyone who selected the option would actually return items, but having the option was a premium lots of folks would pay for.

ADifferentKyle

il y a 5 ansdiscuss

Yes! Just in the last couple of weeks, just the most bizarre spam getting through.