B&H returns: shipping costs *not* refunded?

[dan_south]

I buy gear at B&H as well as a handful of other highly regarded, dependable retailers. I don't spend money for "coasting"

on a reputation. I spend it on service, quality, reliability, honesty, and selection. I find all of the above at B&H and have for

over a decade.

[Stock-Photos]

<p>Another Plus 1 for B&H.</p>

[andylynn]

I've always had good experiences with B&H. It's on my short list of go-to suppliers. I'm confident that if I were to receive

an item from them that's actually defective I would get a return without issues.

 

I had something similar happen last year only with Adorama. I bought a lens that, though not defective, didn't meet my

expectations. I should have been more careful but it was a pretty new product that wasn't available locally yet. I don't

recall exactly what I ended up spending but I'm pretty sure I paid the shipping charges, and didn't mind because it was

mostly my own fault.

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Amazon rarely makes a profit these days</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They also rarely pay tax... at least, in the UK</p>

<p>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22549434</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>Amazon rarely makes a profit these days and it's small when they do. This is a good description of Amazon's business by Matthew Iglesias, a <strong>notable business analyst</strong>:</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Although Matthew Yglesias is a well educated individual he has no degree in economics, business, nor mathematics. Neither has he ever done anything remotely close to running a business or managing a portfolio. A huge chunk of his resume consists of blogging. I like one of his <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/21/why_is_cocaine_metric_we_buy_ounces_of_marijuana_but_grams_of_blow.html">latest blog posts</a> showing the results of his twitter survey asking why cocaine is sold in metric units. People are getting investment advice from this guy? He is not a "notable business analyst." I'm sure Mark Twain wrote a lot of amusing, insightful, and memorable things about business but you would go broke if you followed his investing patterns.</p>

<p>I read Mr. Yglesias"analysis" of Amazon and it was quite thin. He mentions half the $274 million loss was due to the Living Social acquisition. Okay. That's a noncore business and a one time loss. That is absolutely one of the best losses to have. He doesn't even bother digging in to find out what comprises the other half of the $274 million loss. As I stated before a chunk of that is opening new fulfillment centers. In business there are losses and then there are losses. I would much rather have a $274 million loss because of a bad acquisition and opening fulfillment centers than have a $10 million loss because my core business can't turn a profit.</p>

<p>Amazon isn't twitter or facebook. They actual sell stuff to a large swath of society. They also have multiple subscription products. I am not a professional business analyst but what I posted in this thread echoes the comments of a former Amazon employee.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm convinced Amazon could easily turn a quarterly profit now. Many times in its history, it could have been content to stop investing in new product lines, new fulfillment centers, new countries. The fixed cost base would flatten out, its sales would continue growing for some period of time and then flatten out, and it would harvest some annuity of profits. Even the first year I joined Amazon in 1997, when it was just a domestic book business, it could have been content to rest on its laurels.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Amazon could turn off the switch at any moment and stop acquisitions and building out distribution centers and go net income positive very quickly. There is no reason to do that though.</p>

<p>Interestingly Yglesias in another article/blog post questions why Amazon turns in a loss and doesn't go down as much as Apple which is immensely profitable. What he doesn't realize is Apple could be argued to be fully priced. Also Apple doesn't sell a myraid of products to a large swath of society. It sells exactly two products. The iphone and ipad. That's it. When the gig is up at Apple they are going to crater hard. Amazon is just a plain vanilla retailer selling the "necessities" of life everybody.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Amazon makes very little money to no money in any given quarter, regardless of your personal opinion of Yglesias.</p>

[jeff_sudduth]

<blockquote>

<p>Amazon makes very little money to no money in any given quarter, regardless of your personal opinion of Yglesias.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You need to break out net income, cash flow, EBITDA, etc. A nebulous (and false) statement that they make "no money" is not business analysis. Neither are Yglesias' half baked statements. And that isn't an opinion that is a fact. In fact <a href="http://www.eugenewei.com/blog/2013/10/25/amazon-and-the-profitless-business-model-narrative">the article I linked to</a> even addresses this sort of simplistic erroneous statement.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Besides, <strong>we were most obsessed with free cash flow</strong>. <strong>Most armchair analysts love to dissect gross margin and net income because those are simpler to understand and easier to compute</strong> from public financial statements, but there are many problems with just looking at gross margin that any analyst worth their paycheck should understand.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's just business 101. I learned this as a teenager in college. Yglesias may have gone to Harvard and did well studying poetry or whatever but he never learned how to analyze a financial statement. I am not saying Amazon is a great investment or it's stock price is justified. But to say they couldn't become profitable overnight if they ceased acquisitions and opening fulfillment centers is a bold statement when the person writing the blog post doesn't appear to have done even the most rudimentary financial statement analysis.</p>

[agitater]

If you buy something from a brick & mortar store, you have to spend time, burn fuel, put a bit of wear & tear on your car,

or spend the time and bus fare to return an item you don't like. So where does anyone come up with the idea that the

shipping cost should not be borne by the customer who is returning an online purchase? Consumers have always borne

that cost!

 

And what does a $10K order have to do with anything? How does anyone make a leap from "I just spent $10K" to "I

shouldn't have to pay the shipping cost of a return." It doesn't make sense. Some people want the best of all worlds -

superb online selection that no brick & mortar store can match, no responsibility for the cost of returns, no obvious

purchase shipping cost in the first place, etc., etc. They want a perfectly cost-free online shopping experience. It's

nonsense IMO - a pipe dream. Removing oneself from the advantages of brick & mortar store shopping is still a problem,

and complaining about having to pay a company to ship a return after an online purchase isn't going to alter the fact that

shipping companies work for money.

 

Online retailers have absolutely no responsibility to shoulder the cost of consumer indecision or changes of heart.

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>Would anything out there photog related compare to Amazon's return policy?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is the bottom line for me. Whether or not Amazon or anyone else is seen to be "obligated" to offer free returns, Amazon is doing it--at least so far for me. I have exercised my "Changed my mind" option with Amazon a number of times--no further explanation needed.</p>

<p>Saying this is really to take nothing away from B&H. If I want something, I still go to B&H first. I also read the customer reviews at B&H first. I also know that I will probably buy the accessories at B&H. Yes, I trust and respect B&H more than anyone out there. Yet, yet, before I buy, I check Amazon to see what the total price is going to be. Amazon does not always have the best price, if indeed they even have the item in stock. (B&H almost always does.)</p>

<p>Still, if Amazon has the best price, I will buy there. I have had no problems with either company, but, more often than not, Amazon gives me the better overall price, and I wind up buying there.</p>

<p>In addition, Amazon has given me a discount off further purchases each time I have bought something substantial (such as my D800E). How much total? I haven't figured out the formula, and I haven't asked. I just look at the item cost and shipping when I make my decision whether to purchase at Amazon or B&H.</p>

<p>Is there anything wrong with that?</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>Not at all. It's a competitive world. Companies have changed their policies based on what the competition is doing. Macys provides free shipping returns and you can return for any reason. They're doing that because their competitors are doing it. WHen B&H gets to the point that they feel they have to change their policy, they will, I'm sure. They have to figure out how each way effects their bottom line. I'm sure they already have. Your post may help them change their policy. You know they're reading it as all other posts. Unlike other stores, our comments here probably have a bigger effect then with other products.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I have had several bad experiences with refurbished Nikon lenses in the last couple of years, purchased from B&H and Adorama. Those lenses were not properly refurbished and still had defects, some subtle and some very serious. Both companies sent me shipping labels to send those defective lenses back on their expense.</p>

[henryp]

<blockquote>

<p>I have had several bad experiences with refurbished Nikon lenses in the last couple of years, purchased from B&H and Adorama</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am always sorry to learn a customer is dissatisfied with a product purchased from us. FWIW refurbished Nikon cameras & lenses are refurbished by Nikon USA, not the retailer.</p>

<p>Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Henry, I had assumed that most people here understand refurbished Nikon lenses purchased from the likes are Adorama and B&H are refurbished by Nikon USA, not retailer.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, while I have had great experiences with new Nikon products for over three decades, all 3 out of 3 refurbished Nikon USA lenses I have dealt with in the last 2+ years had problems. While statistically it was a small sample, the 100% failure rate is very annoying to me.</p>