04-12-2005, 08:10 AM
Hi, Lochnar,
[quote=LochnarITB,Apr 7 2005, 03:26 AM]
It amazes me to see the Frankenstein's Monster that Best Buy has become. Best Buy started as a few Sound of Music stores here in the Twin Cities in Minnesota. They started as small stores selling stereo systems and doing car stereo installations. In my early twenties, I spent many hours in the stores. My best friend was an assistant manager of a couple different stores and we often did "component testing" after hours....
the Roseville (St. Paul, MN suburb) store that got blown away. "
Yeah, I was living in St. Paul at what I think was about that time (1979/80?), and bought a couple of stereo components from them (I think it might have been from that Roseville store). In fact, I still have both of those components, even though neither are yet functional; the Akai cassette deck is probably dead for good, but I suspect the Kenwood integrated amplifier could still be fixed, if I had the money). Both served me long and well, and I just can't bear to throw them away. :(
Besides, the Akai was such a distinctive styling , I've sometimes wondered if it wouldn't bring something on e-Bay (it was the best deck Akai made for about a three-year period, when most models were changed every 6-10 months).
Anyway, when I first started hearing about Best Buy after moving to Michigan, I thought, "Hmmm, wasn't that the name of that small store I shopped at in the Twin Cities? Still, can't be the same, it must be coincidence..."
But over the years, the more I heard, I eventually became convinced there was a connection. Thanks for further verification.
Lately, Best Buy got in the local news when a customer bought a digital camera there and when he got home, found the box was empty. When he went back to BB, they said they would check their inventory to see if an extra camera was listed; it wasn't, so they refused to either give the man his money back or give him a new camera, claiming the box was sealed when it left the store, so they had no way to know if he was telling the truth or not (but implying he probably wasn't).
Now, even the guy who bought the camera and contacted the local newspaper admitted that it was an ambiguous situation; he said if he was the BB manager,he wasn't sure he would have acted any differently. Still, he was out $500 or so, and it hurt.
Reader reaction was mixed but most people thought BB was out of line. One reader sent in a news item from another part of the USA, where a BB store did give a customer a new camera in exactly the same situation!
I remember in my first retail job (a Radio Shack franchise store, in the mid '70's), how shocked I was when a regular customer who came almost weekly to buy parts, tried to scam me. He gave me a ten, and after I gave him his change back, he started to put it in his wallet, then did a double-take and said, "Wait a minute, I gave you a twenty." Now in this case, I KNEW he had given me a ten, so I told him that, no it was a ten dollar bill. He continued to protest, saying he knew there was a twenty in his wallet when he came in, so the manager who had been standing nearby, but out of sight of the customer, came over and sided with me, saying he had seen that it was a ten. At this point the customer said he must have been mistaken, pocketed his change, and left.
Now, I've been in the situation where I got change back, put it in my billfold and realized there was less money there than I expected, but usually, when I thought about it, I could remember where the "missing" money went to. I just didn't get the feeling that this customer was telling the truth (aside from remembering clearly that it was a ten), I guess he wasn't a good enough actor to pull off the scam completely.
Here's what a local business consultant wrote a couple of weeks after the BB camera flap got play:
"Customers: Return policies shouldn't have priority over common sense
COMMENTARY
By Scott Stolz
For the Lansing State Journal
Advertisement
On March 28, John Schneider wrote a follow-up column about a Best Buy customer who bought a digital camera. When the customer opened the box, he found all of the pieces except the camera. Best Buy denied him a refund on the grounds that there was no proof that the camera was not in the box when it left the store.
On the same day, the cover story in Business Weekly was titled "Fending Off the Dreaded Serial Returnees." The article noted that "retail return fraud - returning items for a full refund after they had been used - reached about $16 billion in 2002..."
I was struck by how these two stories epitomize a problem that companies face today. How does a company protect itself from the 1 to 2 percent who are perfectly willing to take advantage of the company without installing policies that alienate the 98 to 99 percent who want to do business with it?
Increasingly, companies have chosen to deal with these issues by tightening up their return policies. It is not surprising that honest customers can get annoyed with these new procedures. The Best Buy customer was understandably upset that Best Buy denied his refund.
On the other hand, Best Buy's policy is understandable. It would not be difficult to remove a camera from the box and claim that a refund was due because the box was empty.
So how should a company set out to protect itself against fraud and theft without putting undue restrictions on its good customers? The answer is, "it depends."
While a policy is necessary, it cannot be viewed as the end-all solution. You have to look at each situation independently and ask yourself if the policy works in this case.
This approach means someone must be empowered to apply common sense to these situations even if that leads them to an action contrary to the company's policy and procedure. Unfortunately, common sense often takes a back seat to "that's our policy."
Scott Stolz is owner of Baseball Academy of
Mid-Michigan. His e-mail address is commonsenseservice@comcast.net"
Well, nothing profound; rather wishy-washy from some points of view, but at least he does point out that common sense should trump a rigid adherence to policy.
As far as the situation DeeBye brings up, common sense was clearly lacking <shudder> "There but for the grace of God..."
By the way, how many knew that there is currently a new proposal by the Bush administration to require US/American citizens to have to show a Passport when re-entering the USA after visiting Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, the Caribbean, and Panama? The article in the Lansing State Journal I read wasn't clear if this is an actual bill already introduced into Congress or just an intention to produce such.
[After writing most of the following, it occurred to me: This link should get you to the bit I read: http://lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/...=73204813867349 ] -- at least for a couple/few more days; apparently the LSJ only keeps articles on their website for 7 days; after that they get moved to a fee-for-service archive.
Personally, I think this is a terrible idea, even if there is some logic to it. I wonder how many residents of USA/Canada border states who regularly visit our Northern neighbor even have Passports? I suspect very few. One of my brothers and his sons are avid sportsmen, and occasionally go up to Sask. to fish. I think the only one in my immediate family to have a Passport is my oldest brother, who was in the Peace Corps back in the '60's (and he may not have kept it current; it's never occurred to me to ask him about it).
Rep. Bart Stupak's statement "the changes likely would not hurt commerce or tourism" strikes me as fatuous. "Likely" -- on this basis we are going to make a change that will require potentially tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of US citizens, to get a passport for the first time? How many truck drivers crossing from the US into Canada and back again do you think have passports?
Of course, spurring a couple of hundred thousand or more potential travelers to get new passports (at $100+ each), I guess, is one way to help balance the budget [-- oops, pardon me, my cynicism is showing].
I'm getting incoherent, past time to head for bed. 'Nite, all.
Regards,
Dako-ta
[quote=LochnarITB,Apr 7 2005, 03:26 AM]
It amazes me to see the Frankenstein's Monster that Best Buy has become. Best Buy started as a few Sound of Music stores here in the Twin Cities in Minnesota. They started as small stores selling stereo systems and doing car stereo installations. In my early twenties, I spent many hours in the stores. My best friend was an assistant manager of a couple different stores and we often did "component testing" after hours....
the Roseville (St. Paul, MN suburb) store that got blown away. "
Yeah, I was living in St. Paul at what I think was about that time (1979/80?), and bought a couple of stereo components from them (I think it might have been from that Roseville store). In fact, I still have both of those components, even though neither are yet functional; the Akai cassette deck is probably dead for good, but I suspect the Kenwood integrated amplifier could still be fixed, if I had the money). Both served me long and well, and I just can't bear to throw them away. :(
Besides, the Akai was such a distinctive styling , I've sometimes wondered if it wouldn't bring something on e-Bay (it was the best deck Akai made for about a three-year period, when most models were changed every 6-10 months).
Anyway, when I first started hearing about Best Buy after moving to Michigan, I thought, "Hmmm, wasn't that the name of that small store I shopped at in the Twin Cities? Still, can't be the same, it must be coincidence..."
But over the years, the more I heard, I eventually became convinced there was a connection. Thanks for further verification.
Lately, Best Buy got in the local news when a customer bought a digital camera there and when he got home, found the box was empty. When he went back to BB, they said they would check their inventory to see if an extra camera was listed; it wasn't, so they refused to either give the man his money back or give him a new camera, claiming the box was sealed when it left the store, so they had no way to know if he was telling the truth or not (but implying he probably wasn't).
Now, even the guy who bought the camera and contacted the local newspaper admitted that it was an ambiguous situation; he said if he was the BB manager,he wasn't sure he would have acted any differently. Still, he was out $500 or so, and it hurt.
Reader reaction was mixed but most people thought BB was out of line. One reader sent in a news item from another part of the USA, where a BB store did give a customer a new camera in exactly the same situation!
I remember in my first retail job (a Radio Shack franchise store, in the mid '70's), how shocked I was when a regular customer who came almost weekly to buy parts, tried to scam me. He gave me a ten, and after I gave him his change back, he started to put it in his wallet, then did a double-take and said, "Wait a minute, I gave you a twenty." Now in this case, I KNEW he had given me a ten, so I told him that, no it was a ten dollar bill. He continued to protest, saying he knew there was a twenty in his wallet when he came in, so the manager who had been standing nearby, but out of sight of the customer, came over and sided with me, saying he had seen that it was a ten. At this point the customer said he must have been mistaken, pocketed his change, and left.
Now, I've been in the situation where I got change back, put it in my billfold and realized there was less money there than I expected, but usually, when I thought about it, I could remember where the "missing" money went to. I just didn't get the feeling that this customer was telling the truth (aside from remembering clearly that it was a ten), I guess he wasn't a good enough actor to pull off the scam completely.
Here's what a local business consultant wrote a couple of weeks after the BB camera flap got play:
"Customers: Return policies shouldn't have priority over common sense
COMMENTARY
By Scott Stolz
For the Lansing State Journal
Advertisement
On March 28, John Schneider wrote a follow-up column about a Best Buy customer who bought a digital camera. When the customer opened the box, he found all of the pieces except the camera. Best Buy denied him a refund on the grounds that there was no proof that the camera was not in the box when it left the store.
On the same day, the cover story in Business Weekly was titled "Fending Off the Dreaded Serial Returnees." The article noted that "retail return fraud - returning items for a full refund after they had been used - reached about $16 billion in 2002..."
I was struck by how these two stories epitomize a problem that companies face today. How does a company protect itself from the 1 to 2 percent who are perfectly willing to take advantage of the company without installing policies that alienate the 98 to 99 percent who want to do business with it?
Increasingly, companies have chosen to deal with these issues by tightening up their return policies. It is not surprising that honest customers can get annoyed with these new procedures. The Best Buy customer was understandably upset that Best Buy denied his refund.
On the other hand, Best Buy's policy is understandable. It would not be difficult to remove a camera from the box and claim that a refund was due because the box was empty.
So how should a company set out to protect itself against fraud and theft without putting undue restrictions on its good customers? The answer is, "it depends."
While a policy is necessary, it cannot be viewed as the end-all solution. You have to look at each situation independently and ask yourself if the policy works in this case.
This approach means someone must be empowered to apply common sense to these situations even if that leads them to an action contrary to the company's policy and procedure. Unfortunately, common sense often takes a back seat to "that's our policy."
Scott Stolz is owner of Baseball Academy of
Mid-Michigan. His e-mail address is commonsenseservice@comcast.net"
Well, nothing profound; rather wishy-washy from some points of view, but at least he does point out that common sense should trump a rigid adherence to policy.
As far as the situation DeeBye brings up, common sense was clearly lacking <shudder> "There but for the grace of God..."
By the way, how many knew that there is currently a new proposal by the Bush administration to require US/American citizens to have to show a Passport when re-entering the USA after visiting Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, the Caribbean, and Panama? The article in the Lansing State Journal I read wasn't clear if this is an actual bill already introduced into Congress or just an intention to produce such.
[After writing most of the following, it occurred to me: This link should get you to the bit I read: http://lsj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/...=73204813867349 ] -- at least for a couple/few more days; apparently the LSJ only keeps articles on their website for 7 days; after that they get moved to a fee-for-service archive.
Personally, I think this is a terrible idea, even if there is some logic to it. I wonder how many residents of USA/Canada border states who regularly visit our Northern neighbor even have Passports? I suspect very few. One of my brothers and his sons are avid sportsmen, and occasionally go up to Sask. to fish. I think the only one in my immediate family to have a Passport is my oldest brother, who was in the Peace Corps back in the '60's (and he may not have kept it current; it's never occurred to me to ask him about it).
Rep. Bart Stupak's statement "the changes likely would not hurt commerce or tourism" strikes me as fatuous. "Likely" -- on this basis we are going to make a change that will require potentially tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of US citizens, to get a passport for the first time? How many truck drivers crossing from the US into Canada and back again do you think have passports?
Of course, spurring a couple of hundred thousand or more potential travelers to get new passports (at $100+ each), I guess, is one way to help balance the budget [-- oops, pardon me, my cynicism is showing].
I'm getting incoherent, past time to head for bed. 'Nite, all.
Regards,
Dako-ta