Troll over

Rick Blair wrote:Wonder if REI would process a return on that egg?

It depends on what the egg was marketed for.

Leo Paik wrote: They have to, otherwise they won't survive.

Something like the top 200 richest CEOs in America have more money than the bottom 100 million combined. And consider those CEOs only get a miniscule fraction of their corporate profits. Pretty sure it's safe to say most large corporations can take a pretty serious beating before getting anywhere even close to the red zone.

20 kN wrote: Something like the top 200 richest CEOs in America have more money than the bottom 100 million combined. And consider those CEOs only get a miniscule fraction of their corporate profits. Pretty sure it's safe to say most large corporations can take a pretty serious beating before getting anywhere even close to the red zone.

Companies servicing the outdoor industry are not large corporations and yes, they can and do lose money: (large corporations can also lose money)

BD financials

Does anybody have access to a graph of areas where the losses occur at REI and their percentages? Also, what types of sales/rentals make most money for them? I used to average $2,000 a year of purchases at REI. I stopped shopping there because they were giving me a hard time about returns and exchanges. Most of my gear now is either traded in or purchased at the local gear shops. I rarely return or exchange gear anymore mostly because the employees at the local shops are much more helpful and than at REI.

A guy on another Rei rant thread said that Rei's unlimited policy went away because they had soccer moms returning clothes their offspring outgrew or got holes. Word got out in the stepford wives world about Rent Every Item.

Dirtbags of any outdoor discipline are fraction of Rei's returns every year compared to moms that want this years Patagucci on their proginy.

jeff lebowski wrote: Companies servicing the outdoor industry are not large corporations and yes, they can and do lose money: (large corporations can also lose money)

Of course there are some large companies that can and do go under. That has been true since before any of us were born. But most large companies that have survived the economy thus fourth have a really close relationship with Benjamin Franklin. I wonder how much of a hit Exxon could take? Wal-Mart? GE?

Regardless, even with REI's flexible return policy, I dont find shopping there to be a wise investment. It's not hard to save at least 20% on gear elsewhere, and I find the cost of not saving 20% is higher than any loss I would incur by not having a flexible return policy. But that's probably because I dont return stuff unless it's broken in the box or I never used it.

I am very curious to know where REI takes it's losses. Big corporations have a way of writing things off and jump through loop holes. I would also like to know how much they spent on advertisement last year, promoting their greatest return policy.

P.S. From personal experience I know how easy it is go get suckered into buying things on sale in stores like REI. When you are new at the sport you are relying on what the sales people tell you about the product. I always figured, if I'm spending all that money and it does not work for me I can bring it back and exchange it for something that might work. I suppose it was a bad timing with all the soccer moms returning their kids gear. I assume the poor knowledge base of their sales people is contributed to poor employee retention.
Now that I learned to do my research, I don't go to REI just because they pissed me off. Supporting local gear shops gives me a much fuzzier feeling too.

20 kN wrote: Of course there are some large companies that can and do go under. That has been true since before any of us were born. But most large companies that have survived the economy thus fourth have a really close relationship with Benjamin Franklin. I wonder how much of a hit Exxon could take? Wal-Mart? GE?

The bean counters only tolerate so much of a hit though before they start shutting things down, Wal Mart pulled out of Germany after losing around $100m a year for 8 years and took a $1bn hit.

Just personal speculation I'm sure returns didn't kill their bottom line, but obviously shrinkage (not Seinfeld) does add up.

IMO it's when people start bragging on the internet about how easy it is to rip off a company that's when the beancounters get motivated.

Locker wrote:^^^ You quit whining too you big baby and go eat another five pounds of M&M's!

I see this is an old thread, but I couldn't resist when I realized that was Locker.

Locker is just mad because Clay found Lockers pic on the nets and used it as his thumbnail, he probably wouldn't have said anything, but he's also apparently Jelouse Clay can afford more M&M's...

Derek Wright wrote: ^^^ You quit whining too you big baby and go eat another five pounds of M&M's! I see this is an old thread, but I couldn't resist when I realized that was Locker. Locker is just mad because Clay found Lockers pic on the nets and used it as his thumbnail, he probably wouldn't have said anything, but he's also apparently Jelouse Clay can afford more M&M's...

Wow.

This is so bad.   1/10?

Yeah....... so, you climbed epinephrine but couldn't tell that such a dainty pack was gonna get destroyed. The thing is meant to be a portable lunch sack for backpacking.

Then you expect a co-op to eat dirt on said item.

My advice: buy OR next time. They make shit that's indestructible for its purpose, and if it isn't they'll replace it. They do astronomical amounts of business with the military through unlimited contracts for military grade gloves and shit. They can and do afford making gear that's super bombproof. OR rocks. Also, patagucci. Always patagucci.

LMFAO!! Mistake number 1 was taking a pack on epinepherine. Mistake number 2 was grinding your pack into the wall while chimneying...wtf did you think would happen??. Mistake number 3 was complaining about it on MP. If you came in to REI with a tattered rats nest of a pack I would tell you to farce off as well!

REI is changing their culture.

REI's policy was never put into place so that things that have been destroyed could be returned. Their policy is part of a vision that existed to ensure that adventurers and outdoorists could have the quality of gear and reaources that they need.

There is part of the culture surrounding REI that is pretty.... disgraceful. People trash gear, take advantage of the warranty, and fill warehouses with gear that is a.) no longer economically viable and b.) must be liquidated. The whole thing is antithetical to the vision of ecological responsibility that is part of the vision that REI projects.

So basically, people are taking advantage of their policy, losing respect for them, and at the same time perpetuating a type of theft.

I hope to see REI continue to refuse returns of legitimately destroyed gear. You'd owned that pack since before the policy change...

If climbing gear could be returned, it wouldn't be a profitable department.

Josh Allred wrote: I had to google trolling to see what the heck everyone is talking about.

It took google to figure it out?!?

If you can not tell if the stuff your buying is junk, your in the wrong sport.

I agree, trying to return that pack is sheisty, anyone familair with epinephrine knows that was bound to happen.  However, I do not agree that REI is such a victim of their own return policy.  Their retail mark-up is egregious, furthermore companies like Sports Chalet and Sports Authority went out business last year and REI's earning increased.  So boo-hoo, REI is doing just fine with or without this guy and his cheap back pack and even cheaper moral of trying to get his money back.  

Forever Outside wrote:

Their [REI's] retail mark-up is egregious,...

What is it? Or what do you think it is?

Since this is back from the dead, I'll add this (not better than the video I posted upthread a couple years ago though) bit of advice.

There are only two actually worthy "summit packs"

The first is the BD Bullet 16. My wife has the older version of this. Thick material, heavy zippers, and easily adjustable if both members in a group are different sizes. I hope the new version is equally burly.

The other is the little Metolius haul bag. I just checked their website and it may no longer be available. It's the size of a large purse, and heavy vinyl. It's a little stiffer and sweatier than the BD but can't be destroyed.

Everything else has been designed with the outrageous notion that lightweight is better. When racing a bike up Mont Ventoux this may be true, when hauling your water, lunch, lights, and raingear for 2, a few extra ounces might mean keeping all your gear or dumping it.

Marc801 wrote: