View Single Post
Old 11-06-2015, 10:10 AM   #155
Difflugia
Testate Amoeba
Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Difflugia ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Difflugia's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,049
Karma: 27300000
Join Date: Sep 2012
Device: Many Android devices, Kindle 2, Toshiba e755 PocketPC
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Then I'm afraid you must continue to be baffled. I've explained why I think it would be a bad idea to set hard limits on the number of returns; you are of course very welcome to hold a different opinion, but at the end of the day the only opinion that matters is Amazon's. They are free to decline to do business with whomsoever they wish, provided that such practises are in accordance with the law.
Your explanation appears to be that if a limit is specificied, people will return that much and no more. I agree, but I'm baffled mainly because I think tha'ts a reason to have the limit. I also think it should be self-evident that more opinions than Amazon's matter when we're discussing whether or not Amazon's conduct is unethical. Finally, I find it ironic (though you apparently don't?) that if business law were as fluid as Amazon's returns policy, then no company would know where to draw the line between competitive practices and illegal ones just as no Amazon customer can now know the exact line between economically sound return decisions and "abusive" ones.
Difflugia is offline   Reply With Quote