WSJ article: "REI Ends Era of Many Happy Returns"

20 kN wrote: While I agree that capitalism is better than many government structures, and Americans have it pretty well relative to many others in our world, I also believe that America is plagued with a large number of very serious problems that directly stem from capitalism and/ or greed. It annoys me that we live in the richest country in the world, yet an employee who works full time might not even be able to afford basic medical care for his or her family because his capitalist employer doesn’t want to pay a living wedge or provide any worthwhile benefits. That is just silly.

Also, only in America could a thread go from "REI warranty change" to "capitalism has its problems."

What's a "living wedge"?

Ray Pinpillage wrote: Mark hit on why everyone should care. REI places a significant amount of pressure on the retail outdoor industry. When they change or stop their return policy the rest of the market no longer has to compete. In other words, REI is the reason most large climbing retailers have a no questions-asked (or very liberal) return policy.

First, I don't buy the fact that they defacto set policy by being the behemoth everyone has to compete with...that is retail-consultant, MBA school fantastyland BS. There are many ways to compete or points to compete upon..selection, service, atmopshere and on and on. Their return policy NEVER had an influence on me buying something there or elsewhere.

Second, I don't see any of the retailers I frequent who ever followed REI's overly lenient policy in the first place, so no they weren't setting policy by their actions. And third, I don't think any of them should have such a lenient policy, because immature entitled dbags will abuse it. Should be up to the discretion of the retailers, on a case by case basis. So, no, there is absolutely no reason why I should care other than that entitled dbags will finally get their free ride taken away.

David Sahalie wrote: Returning an item that they accept back isn't wrong. It isn't stealing, and we know stealing is wrong because if for no other reason than there are laws against it. Right and wrong doesn't apply here, and to say they do means you are implying your own sense of morality onto others, like the right wing christians telling gays they can't marry where it is legal and stoners in CO that smoking weed is wrong.

Most people consider steeling to be wrong because humans have decided collectively that people should be treated fairly. Taking something from someone just because you can is not fair play. We all know that. We don't need a law to tell us.

And like it or not, the Christians are only enacting their right to free speech. The laws they try to pass are passed democratically. Unless they are forcing you to abide by their rules, they aren't doing anything wrong.

And if private landowners don't want climbers littering and being obnoxious on their property, they shouldn't allow access.

Except that sucks for climbers, which is why we judge people who endanger a policy we want continued. It's rational self interest to judge. Culture and social norms exist because of judgement.

Why else do people queue up in lines? (In some countries they don't.) Why don't I tease fat kids I see on the street? (Sometimes I do.) It's not b/c of a rule or a law. Basically, it's peer pressure. And it's a powerful force.

REI thought social forces would keep "abusive" returns in check. Maybe the policy was altruistic, maybe it was a cold business decision. Regardless, we liked the policy. Now it's gone.

Will S wrote: First, I don't buy the fact that they defacto set policy by being the behemoth everyone has to compete with...that is retail-consultant, MBA school fantastyland BS. There are many ways to compete or points to compete upon..selection, service, atmopshere and on and on. Their return policy NEVER had an influence on me buying something there or elsewhere. Second, I don't see any of the retailers I frequent who ever followed REI's overly lenient policy in the first place, so no they weren't setting policy by their actions. And third, I don't think any of them should have such a lenient policy, because immature entitled dbags will abuse it. Should be up to the discretion of the retailers, on a case by case basis. So, no, there is absolutely no reason why I should care other than that entitled dbags will finally get their free ride taken away.

Ignoring that what I said pertains to undergraduate level micro economics, I don't think you actually understood what I wrote. Either way, I'm glad that you support small climbing businesses because I think they are, and always will be, the backbone of climbing.

Ray Pinpillage wrote: So then you literally flunked out of business. The market changed and you failed to manage your business properly. That's your fault, not REI's. I'll bet you never had a business plan or a market analysis. .

Wrong wrong wrong and wright. I did have a business plan, did have market analysis by investment professionals, and managed my business properly for over 20 years, quite a long time in fact. Telling someone who owned a retail business for 20 years that they don't understand business only makes yourself more transparent: you don't understand retail so you should probably listen and not talk. I put children through college, funded a retirement, and paid for employee houses, cars, vacations; shit, I helped send five kids to college who don't even know my name. In that aspect it was a complete success. On the other hand, I obviously failed in the long run. I just find it really frustrating that now, after one entity corners the market, the parameters that were used to put me out of business have changed. They had more funding, thus more overhead, and thus could take the loss of the returns that were fundamental to their business plan. I did not have the funding, the overhead, and could not compete with their model. I know why I went out of business, do you??

Oh yea, they cut those practices out as soon as the last family retail store went out of business.

It sounds like the conservatives on this site really don't understand business, just how to worship wealth.

hmmmm several pages of moralizing ... and no real information

at least not since OBAMA =P

heres a few actual news article links ...

But REI’s Seattle neighbor, national department-store chain Nordstrom, can relate. Like REI until recently, Nordstrom boasts a no-questions-asked returns policy. According to legend, a customer in the 1970s successfully returned a set of car tires to a Nordstrom’s store in Fairbanks, Alaska. The catch: Nordstrom has never sold tires.

A company spokeswoman says the story is true, explaining that Nordstrom had just taken over the general-store space where the man had originally purchased the tires and felt it was doing the right thing to honor the return.

Like REI once did, Nordstrom, which has 247 department stores in 33 states, will accept any item back from any of its stores for any reason, regardless of when it was purchased.

“If the quality isn’t there, if the garment is falling apart, whatever it is, we’ll take it back,” says spokeswoman Brooke White. “What we’re trying to do is stand behind our merchandise.”


blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/201…

nordstorm of course owns OR


The hope among retailers is that the changes scare off bad customers. This bunch obviously includes criminals: At a National Retail Federation roundtable discussion this past summer—which featured panel members from Bloomingdale’s, by the way—industry players talked about the hot new scam involving returning stolen goods without receipts to stores in exchange for gift cards (which can be sold online for cash). But stores may also want so-called “serial returners” to take their business elsewhere too. An Associated Press report published in August revealed that big retailers such as Home Depot, J.C. Penney, Victoria’s Secret, and Best Buy have been using technology that tracks the “return activity” of shoppers. And if a customer’s return profile indicates he returns too much or too often, he may be banned from returning items for a spell, or simply be asked to leave the store for good.

Not all retailers are following the trend of toughening up return policies, however. L.L. Bean, Orvis, and Bloomingdale’s upscale competitor Nordstrom are sticking with their well-known, exceptionally generous policies. This may benefit them in the coming months. While a store’s return policies affect shopping decisions year-round, they’re especially important during the winter holiday shopping period—which is not only the height of gift-giving, but which, not coincidentally, is the peak time for returns as well.



business.time.com/2013/09/1…

someone mentioned MEC straying true to its roots ...

as much as i like MEC, i wouldnt be sure about that

they are
- only allowing previously approved candidates to run for their board
- lowering prices of gear in canada overall
- they changed their logo as shown below ... a lot of "members" screamed

- they have a rock solid for any reason guarantee which no doubt a few will moralize over ... i was there last week and two sales people told some lady to "buy anything from the clearance rack, if you dont like it just return it, well take care of you"
- they are moving hard into yoga pants, kids clothes and bikes
- when they started getting into bikes, members and small businesses screamed about how they would put them out of business

so there are definitely many people who think MEC is being yuppified

im drop by MEC every few weeks and spend quite a bit there personally

i still support small stores in squamish, namely climb on, escape route and valhalla pure in squamish ... but for stuff where things have a decent chance of failing, like headlamps (notice the MPers in the headlamp thread complaining about failure), i buy from MEC for their warranty ...

;)

Kirby1013 wrote: Really tough guy? Good for you. Miss the part where I write the words "first pair of climbing shoes"... and I'm stupid.

No, I read your post. Beginners blow out shoes, precisely in the location you alluded to. take your lumps and keep at it and you can say you wore out your shoes from use, not bad technique. I've returned stuff that was defective, policy allows that. But if a person is actually using the gear it wouldn't take 6 months to figure out it's defective, unless as you say "it's my first pair". I would never return a pair of shoes I wore a hole in, but that's me.

Keny Glasscock wrote: I've returned stuff that was defective, policy allows that..

You are missing the point, the policy was for any reason you found unsatisfactory, not only with defective items.

Every major company has a defective policy, REI was the only one with a satisfactory policy.

I could not honor satisfaction, only defections, because that was what the companies who's gear I was selling were offering.

Perhaps this is why there is so much confusion as to the policy and how it was used to put others out of business. Terminology is everything in law.

J Q wrote: Wrong wrong wrong and wright. I did have a business plan, did have market analysis by investment professionals, and managed my business properly for over 20 years, quite a long time in fact. Telling someone who owned a retail business for 20 years that they don't understand business only makes yourself more transparent: you don't understand retail so you should probably listen and not talk. I put children through college, funded a retirement, and paid for employee houses, cars, vacations; shit, I helped send five kids to college who don't even know my name. In that aspect it was a complete success. On the other hand, I obviously failed in the long run. I just find it really frustrating that now, after one entity corners the market, the parameters that were used to put me out of business have changed. They had more funding, thus more overhead, and thus could take the loss of the returns that were fundamental to their business plan. I did not have the funding, the overhead, and could not compete with their model. I know why I went out of business, do you?? Oh yea, they cut those practices out as soon as the last family retail store went out of business. It sounds like the conservatives on this site really don't understand business, just how to worship wealth.

I only know what you've posted. REI opened up next door and you couldn't compete. You said your customers cited the return policy for going next door. If that is not the case just say so. Regardless, REI didn't put you under.

I have the luxury of seeing all kinds of operations of different scope. Many have been around 20 years like you. I have seen small businesses go under. Not once was it the competitions fault. I'm sure that hurts but you brought it up.

Ray Pinpillage wrote: I only know what you've posted. REI opened up next door and you couldn't compete. You said your customers cited the return policy for going next door. If that is not the case just say so. Regardless, REI didn't put you under. I have the luxury of seeing all kinds of operations of different scope. Many have been around 20 years like you. I have seen small businesses go under. Not once was it the competitions fault. I'm sure that hurts but you brought it up.

"Not once?" In this age of big box stores and predatory pricing (along with other tactics to destroy smaller and less capitalized competitors), it happens all the time.

NC Rock Climber wrote: "Not once?" In this age of big box stores and predatory pricing (along with other tactics to destroy smaller and less capitalized competitors), it happens all the time.

Unless there is government intervention, competition does not decide if you stay in business (assuming we keep talking about retail sales). The rest is just hyperbole to shift blame.

Ray, you are completely full of shit. I am not going to debate with you because it is not worth it.

NC Rock Climber wrote:Ray, you are completely full of shit. I am not going to debate with you because it is not worth it.

Not a fan of economics?

let me get this straight Ray, you are saying the mom and pop stores that used to dot the landscape of middle America went under because they didn't have a good business plan?

Really? It couldn't have had to do with municipalities giving massive tax breaks and land to Walmart? ...and the massive buying power and tax breaks Walfart gets from the Feds?

Turn off Faux news dude.

I just find it funny that as I read this there is a REI ad in the upper right corner.

I have used and abused the policy and now that is really the only reason I ever shopped there.

This thread has come full circle...I now agree with David (on a few points)

Walmarts aside, any business plan that tries to make money off of climbers is a bad business plan -- Doomed to failure.

That's why TNF, REI, etc etc all eventually leave us in the dirt and move to the soccer Moms, campus wear, and noobs.

Some larger areas can support specialty shops for serious bikers, climbers, kayakers, etc but the demographics and margins are thin.

My only beef is that ass-clownery merely speeds up the trend towards noobery and now I have to order everything online.

By the way, I wouldn't step foot in a Walmart if they were giving away free C4's....

David Sahalie wrote:let me get this straight Ray, you are saying the mom and pop stores that used to dot the landscape of middle America went under because they didn't have a good business plan? Really? It couldn't have had to do with municipalities giving massive tax breaks and land to Walmart? ...and the massive buying power and tax breaks Walfart gets from the Feds? Turn off Faux news dude.

That's government intervention. Government picked the winner. If the playing field is even the customer picks the winner. Without government intervention the market (consumers) decides who stays in business. If I go off of what J Q posted then his customers decided that REI presented a better value for their dollars.

Businesses come and go with or without big-box retail. Strong competition exposes weak businesses. Like I said, I see a lot of businesses. I can think of a bunch that have just been getting by, doing nothing special, for 20 years. If a strong competitor moved in next door they'd be in real trouble.

If you read through this thread there are people who do not believe REI is as strong a competitor others do. I happen to agree; in my state we have some very competitive climbing shops. They do not have unlimited lifetime guaranties but they still offer a better value than REI. They do so by providing superior service, better selection, and better pricing when they can.

I don't like big-box retail (including REI). I've been in Walmart five times this year total. I shop at small retailers every chance I get unless they don't have what I need. I live in a small town, we have a Walmart and other Big-Box but we also have thriving small businesses. I value the small businesses and my community which is why my dollars go to them. However, I also value competition and hate excuses. Either compete or don't but don't blame the guy next door because your customers fired you.

Keny Glasscock wrote: No, I read your post. Beginners blow out shoes, precisely in the location you alluded to. take your lumps and keep at it and you can say you wore out your shoes from use, not bad technique. I've returned stuff that was defective, policy allows that. But if a person is actually using the gear it wouldn't take 6 months to figure out it's defective, unless as you say "it's my first pair". I would never return a pair of shoes I wore a hole in, but that's me.

I gotta defective fitting from an REI employee. Haha.. The amount of time was crazy long because of ignorance of the policy. I went to the Mountaineer for my second pair and despite me saying these are too tight a hundred times. they were right. The TC Pros stretched out and fit great. The way I see it you fit me wrong you owe me the right size. You fit me right and I decide to buy the wrong size.. you owe me a "I told you so" and get the hell outta my shop!

I will however agree that returning those shoes with a hole in them is suspect. I just figured no matter what condition they're the wrong size. Plus I caved to peer pressure!

Locker wrote:"The way I see it you fit me wrong you owe me the right size" Concerning shoes. If you can't already ON YOUR OWN tell if a fucking shoe fits or not, maybe you should have Mom tie them for you next time you go out climbing. I mean what the fuck? What happens? You go to REI and some n00b employee without a clue gives you a size 3 when you wear a size 8 and you go, "OK" ?

Loop swoop and pull? no way! My new Miura VS that I stole from REI are Velcro Baby!