I used to take advantage of Amazon's return policy by deliberately buying 3 sizes of the same item (1 below and 1 above my expected size) because clothing manufacturers are not consistent with their sizing. I can then try them all at home to choose best size and return the other 2 that don't fit. I did this for pants, shoes, etc. This really seemed great because I hate going to the store and changing clothes in fitting rooms.
However, I stopped doing this many years ago because I found out that some online retailers like Amazon do not restock the returned items for re-sale and instead, throw it away so it eventually ends up in a landfill. In those cases, the sellers just eat the cost of unsold goods that got thrown out.
It seemed illogical to throw away perfectly good clothes that are still NEW but somebody explained that Amazon does this because they're paranoid about bodily fluids etc tainting the returns. So to play it safe, they just throw away the returns.
I have no more insider knowledge of how Amazon operates than you do, but judging on the amount of items I’ve received that were clearly used (stains, other people’s hairs, dust, dirt…) but sold as new I’m fairly certain they’ll resell everything that gets returns without even looking at the items.
Also Zappos was clearly founded on the idea of ordering 3 pairs of shoes and keeping the one that fits. They say the returns go back for sale unless used and then go to charity/reuse, but happy to see other sources you have. I think a lot of that Zappos dna went into Amazon's policies.
The food and groceries I already knew about. However, Amazon throwing out returned clothes was a surprise because I've seen clothing retailers like Macy's just put the returned items right back on the rack for re-sale. When you go to a shore store, they don't throw out every pair of shoes that customers tried on and didn't buy. So I just thought Amazon just did the same thing at their warehouse. I've also returned car wax to an OReilly's Auto store and I watched the clerk just put the bottle right back on the shelf for the next customer to buy.
It was disconcerting to find out I was adding to the landfill just because I returned clothes to Amazon. Nowadays, I don't order clothes from them unless I'm 100% sure I won't be returning it.
This was essentially false, and FUD spread by the anti-Amazon crowd.
You will observe official Amazon Resale listings for many items, which is precisely Amazon restocking the returned items. For goods of any signficant value, it is bizarre to suggest that Amazon wouldn't be reselling them. Like, it's ludicrous to suggest they're tossing a $50 shirt instead of reselling it, as long as the return is in resale condition.
What Amazon sends to landfills is when items (mostly third-party seller items) aren't selling and the seller doesn't want to keep paying for warehousing or to have them shipped elsewhere so Amazon sends them to landfills. Because nobody is buying the items, there's no demand for them. Not everything sells.
Wherever you got the idea that they're paranoid about body fluids, that's somebody who doesn't know what they're talking about. People make up all sorts of things. That's why that have a small army of people inspecting returns.
To clarify, I'm already aware Amazon re-sells returns. I often buy "Used Like New" electronics from Amazon Resale which are obviously customer returns that Amazon re-boxed. However, the category of clothes is different where it customer returns are often thrown out.
>What Amazon sends to landfills is when items (mostly third-party seller items) aren't selling and the seller doesn't want to keep paying for warehousing or to have them shipped elsewhere so Amazon sends them to landfills.
No, that's not the full story. What's also happening is that a seller has different options for Amazon's reverse logistics and they have different costs.
E.g. pay $1.50 for Amazon to inspect and resell or pay a lower $0.52 to throw it away. A lot of sellers just pay 1/3rd less and let Amazon throw it out.
That possibility of me inadvertently adding to landfills is enough to stop me from buying 3 sizes and returning 2. Maybe in some circumstances the other 2 returned items won't be thrown out -- but I can't know for sure so I won't do it. I'll continue to buy clothes from Amazon but only do so when I'm 100% sure I'm going to keep it no matter what.
Deep link to a video comment about online returned clothes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66qOop6J8Q8&t=2m56s
Because it's not about $1.50 for inspection vs $0.52 to throw it out.
It's about -$1.50 + $8 profit = $6.50 gain for inspection vs. -$0.52 + $0 profit = $0.52 loss for throwing it out.
You're missing the entire resale price on the return. Companies aren't leaving money on the table. They are looking to maximize profit and minimize losses. In most places, sending resellable stock to the landfill isn't doing that.
However, there is an obvious incentive to minimize these no-return refunds and require users to print labels and go through the motion of returning items that won't be restocked.
It discourages fraud: people abusing the no-return refund as a way of getting free stuff!
The no-return refund has to be a kind of perk for the customer who rarely returns anything or whatever.
I would say that it would be astonishing if Amazon pretending to accept returns and then throwing away is a thing that absolutely does not happen, and honestly cannot blame them for it. We are a throw-away-stuff society, and Amazon is not outside of that society.
What Amazon does with returns doesn't have anything to do with what kind of "society" you think we are.
What it does with returns is determined by the profit motive.
And in most cases, the more profitable thing to do is to resell returned merchandise. Yes, return inspections cost money, but usually less money than what is gained by reselling the item.
Returned merchandise has value, and businesses don't make profit by throwing value away when they can make money with it or reduce losses with it instead.
I genuinely don't understand all the people who think it's more cost-effective for Amazon to send a $50 shirt to the dumpster rather than resell it. That's not how anything works.
> It's more cost-effective for Amazon to send a $50 shirt to the dumpster rather than resell it.
It's not a $50 shirt. It's like a $5 shirt to them, which some sucker is willing to pay $50 for. Used, it becomes a $10 shirt.
A dumpster can be found right in the neck of the woods of where the returning customer lives, whereas it may have to travel far and pass through more processing if it goes to another customer elsewhere.
It needs to be inspected, repacked.
There is a risk in every returned item. Sometimes people return a perfectly good item. But sometimes it's because there is something wrong with the item, such that the next buyer is also likely to return it, even if they get it cheaper.
Basically returned items are entirely outside of the profit-optimized delivery path. They incur costs and risks, at a reduced revenue.
I'd never return an item which matches the description and isn't damaged.
If it isn't damaged in any way but does not match the description, that's a problem; if it is sold with the same description, the next customer will also see that it doesn't match. A new listing has to be created for that product. Not gonna happen, or not in the processing time frame of that particular return.