Quote:
Originally Posted by Difflugia
I completely fail to understand why you think that's better than the inevitable result of not specifying a limit, which is that customers acting in good faith have their accounts closed for undisclosed reasons.
9.9% is too high? Make it 7% instead of 10%. Is "no good reason" the problem? Specifiy valid reasons for returns.
These aren't pricing models or market segmenting strategies that they're refusing to disclose. They are stating a returns policy, but then enforcing a policy that is at odds with what they claim.
You seem to be saying that Amazon dissembling its policies should not only be considered a legitimate business practice, but is indeed somehow necessary to avoid being defrauded by customers. This baffles me.
|
What if it is just basically a very complicated calculation based on many variables that is too complicated to explain (I'd suspect clothes and items bought just before christmas have a higher return rate that factors into their calculation).
Also, without an "official" figure they can change the algorithm when it suits them, given their usual habit of changing things on a
whim lightning fast business decision a specific policy seems like a bad idea for them.