the argument that because Walmart may be unethical and criminal in their own right somehow validates theft and / or unethical behaviour in their stores seems weird to me.
Not weird to me at all. Big companies who screw over people every single minute of every single day can go eff themselves and I hope they get scammed into bankruptcy.
And pylon comparing Flames gimp's situation to the OP is garbage. I was out helping Flames gimp when that stuff was going on and that was a pretty big stress in his life and to throw that in there is a low blow especially coming from a self admitted thief in pylon. I don't care if you were a kid or 14 years old. Pylon you stole a canoe and threw it into the middle of a lake. When did you magically get your morals pylon? Because I have never stolen a thing in my life. Insurance frauding the company who screwed me out of my injuries? Hell yes and will continue to do that to the same company as long as I live.
I am sure Hemi-Cuda is going to tell Walmart the sale prices he purchased the movies for so that he doesn't get too much store credit, so everyone should give him a break.
Hard to judge when I would suggest almost everyone in this thread has downloaded media illegally.
I think you'd be surprised. This was more true back before the music industry caught up to the ease of downloading music. I used to steal music all the time back in the napster days.
Teenager -check
Had no money - check
Was blown away that I could grab a single song for free in 5 minutes online - check
legal alternative was to have enough money, go to record store, pay for entire album, put album in CD player, listen to that one song -check
I think back then most people did it because of a combination of these three things
a) it was convenient
b) no legal alternative online
c) it was free
Now that 2 of those three have been eliminated as illegal-only options, way more people are going the legal route. Honestly, when I ask around about this, it seems I know way more people that are hooked up with an iTunes or similar account than people who are bragging about the latest illegal downloading website.
The Following User Says Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Downloading mp3's was considered fair use in Canada up until Harper. In fact blank media was taxed as a method of supporting artists losing income from copying. Even post that bill you are stealing potential revenue rather than actual dollars so to me while unethical it is the least unethical type of theft.
Return fraud is a lot closer to credit card fraud(not identity theft). You steal someones credit card, rack up a bunch of bills, the person reports the card stolen, the credit card company reimburses them, and only the big bad corporation looses money. So is it okay to steal credit cards?
It is definately not comparable to B&E or DUIs.
My biggest issue is that scammers have led to REI and Backcountry.com return policies being restricted. I assume Walmart evalutes the cost / benefit of their return policy regularly and will make adjustments when the good will gained is no longer offset by the cost of the policy. Its people who support this fraud that ruin good returns for the rest of us. It really bugs me that the attitude is if you can get away with it and arent harming a real individual directly its okay.
Not weird to me at all. Big companies who screw over people every single minute of every single day can go eff themselves and I hope they get scammed into bankruptcy.
And pylon comparing Flames gimp's situation to the OP is garbage. I was out helping Flames gimp when that stuff was going on and that was a pretty big stress in his life and to throw that in there is a low blow especially coming from a self admitted thief in pylon. I don't care if you were a kid or 14 years old. Pylon you stole a canoe and threw it into the middle of a lake. When did you magically get your morals pylon? Because I have never stolen a thing in my life. Insurance frauding the company who screwed me out of my injuries? Hell yes and will continue to do that to the same company as long as I live.
There is a big difference between an adult and a ######ed teenager stealing a canoe in 1987. But yes, I stole a canoe in 1987 when I was 13. And I may add that I never once said I was lily white, I have done a lot of stupid things in my life.
And you really have nerve chiming in when you have openly admitted to committing a federal crime in insurance fraud, just recently. God I hope you get caught, and convicted. I really hope someone follows up with this. Because it is the very definition of stealing. You are actually stealing from everyone, because twits like you, cause everyones rates to go up.
Last edited by pylon; 12-11-2013 at 11:52 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pylon For This Useful Post:
When you think about it, accepting any returns are bad for the bottom line of a business. They already have the money and have taken the item out of inventory. Processing a legitimate return takes the same time and effort as processing an illegitimate one.
At the end of the day, it doesn't really make a difference to Walmart if they process 5 legitimate returns on a product, or 3 legitimate returns and 2 illegitimate ones, they still have to add 5 products back into their inventory. Really, accepting any returns is ultimately just to build goodwill with your customers. That's probably why they have such a liberal policy in the first place.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
At the end of the day, it doesn't really make a difference to Walmart if they process 5 legitimate returns on a product, or 3 legitimate returns and 2 illegitimate ones, they still have to add 5 products back into their inventory. Really, accepting any returns is ultimately just to build goodwill with your customers. That's probably why they have such a liberal policy in the first place.
Um....no.
Your comparison is assuming that 2 of the people who have legitimate returns will for some reason not just because 2 people have illegitimate returns.
Rather, it's the difference between 5 legitimate returns or 5 legitimate and 2 illegitimate returns.
Someone sells me an item it doesn't matter what the price is but say I bought it for $100, whether or not they made profit is up to them. Now I take this item worth $200 to Walmart and get $200 of in-store credit for an item they are going to put back up for sale for $200 the price they paid me. Now assume they sold that item they are now even, but I don't have $200 I have $200 in-store credit that can't be converted to cash in any way but only to purchase goods in their store on items that have profit built into the prices but yet Walmart is a victim here? I will get into this further when I get to work.
The "profit" they make from your next purchase using the store credit is cancelled out when they sell your fraudulently returned item, that they paid retail price for, instead of another item they paid wholesale for. And that's assuming they don't sell it at a reduced price because of a sale or clearance.
Your comparison is assuming that 2 of the people who have legitimate returns will for some reason not just because 2 people have illegitimate returns.
Rather, it's the difference between 5 legitimate returns or 5 legitimate and 2 illegitimate returns.
The former isn't lessened as the latter rises.
Yes, I should have said that assuming they're going to process five returns of an item, it doesn't really matter at that point to Walmart if any or all of the five items were originally purchased at Walmart or not. If they sold 100 units and accepted 5 returns, their bottom line is a total of 95 units moved out.
Really, other than a product that is defective, there's no reason a store needs to accept any returns, and there are a lot of stores that will only do straight exchanges of identical items. Accepting any returns is just about building customer relationships.
Some companies even brag about their liberal return policies. There's a story about Nordstrom in the States, which supposedly has such a liberal return policy that a guy was able to return a set of tires to a Nordstrom store, even though they don't sell tires. The story (which Snopes says is likely not true, or at least heavily exaggerated) says that Nordstrom acquired a small chain of department stores in Alaska and converted them to Nordstrom stores. The original stores had an automotive department, which was closed in the conversion, and the guy had purchased the tires at the old store and his return was accepted at the new store even though it was something they didn't carry.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The "profit" they make from your next purchase using the store credit is cancelled out when they sell your fraudulently returned item, that they paid retail price for, instead of another item they paid wholesale for. And that's assuming they don't sell it at a reduced price because of a sale or clearance.
Maybe Walmart's take is that if they give you a $25 store credit, you'll spend $100 while you are there anyway, and they are happy just getting you in the store shopping. I would never do this. Hell, I don't even like doing legitimate returns, but I am guessing there is profit motive behind Walmart's liberal return policy, and something they've been able to use to their benefit even when people are taking advantage of it.
Also, maybe walmart is getting what they deserve with their checking everyone's carts and receipts policy. Treating your customers like suspected criminals seems to get people to do what they can get away with instead of what they think is right.
Some companies even brag about their liberal return policies. There's a story about Nordstrom in the States, which supposedly has such a liberal return policy that a guy was able to return a set of tires to a Nordstrom store, even though they don't sell tires. The story (which Snopes says is likely not true, or at least heavily exaggerated) says that Nordstrom acquired a small chain of department stores in Alaska and converted them to Nordstrom stores. The original stores had an automotive department, which was closed in the conversion, and the guy had purchased the tires at the old store and his return was accepted at the new store even though it was something they didn't carry.
That same story about the tires makes the rounds in our industry, except it is Home Depot that took them back.
