MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Boox Max 2 - poor quality and problem with returns to ereader-store.de

marcosscriven · 01-04-2018, 12:52 AM

>From what I understand, Booxtor has already paid the cost of shipping it there. Because the device has now been opened and used, he might also have to take a hit if he were to resell it.

He paid to send it, not to return it.

>Open box items usually sell for less than brand new models. Offering to refund the purchase price on a unit which does not seem to be defective is already more than generous in my opinion.

You have made your opinion clear, whilst also throwing in some insults.

> Some big stores have no questions return policies. I know some people who will take advantage of such policies, ordering several items fully intending to only keep one, after they have tested them out.

Well, I've ordered only one large ereader here, and that's the Max 2. I was 'fully intending' to keep it. However, no doubt you'll assume I'm lying, and that I like to club baby seals for good measure.

> The profit margins of such large companies often allow them to implement such policies. However, even Amazon has been known to suspend the accounts of those with unusually high return rates.

Again, you are imply I am returning at 'unusually high rates', when that is not true.

> I have seldom had to return an item because I usually invest the time in checking it out beforehand.

Translation, yet again you're accusing me of being dumb here.

>However, it has been my experience that many stores will ask the customer to pay for the cost of return shipping unless the item is defective. Some will also charge restocking fees when you return a non-defective item. That seems quite fair to me.

I tend to avoid retailers that are happy to put the onus of a poor product entirely on the customer. You however seem to believe in unmitigated capitalism, where there's no need at all for customers to be protected, and businesses to do completely as they wish.

> The issues which the OP has raised seem rather frivolous. It seems that the OP is grasping at straws to find something wrong because the OP did not invest sufficient time in checking out what such devices are and are not capable of.

Again with the derogation. Thanks.

> I would be very curious to know how much effort the OP put into researching this device before purchasing it.

Again, the implication I'm at fault.

01-04-2018, 12:52 AM	#44
marcosscriven Enthusiast Posts: 39 Karma: 5348 Join Date: Jan 2018 Device: Boox Max 2	>From what I understand, Booxtor has already paid the cost of shipping it there. Because the device has now been opened and used, he might also have to take a hit if he were to resell it. He paid to send it, not to return it. >Open box items usually sell for less than brand new models. Offering to refund the purchase price on a unit which does not seem to be defective is already more than generous in my opinion. You have made your opinion clear, whilst also throwing in some insults. > Some big stores have no questions return policies. I know some people who will take advantage of such policies, ordering several items fully intending to only keep one, after they have tested them out. Well, I've ordered only one large ereader here, and that's the Max 2. I was 'fully intending' to keep it. However, no doubt you'll assume I'm lying, and that I like to club baby seals for good measure. > The profit margins of such large companies often allow them to implement such policies. However, even Amazon has been known to suspend the accounts of those with unusually high return rates. Again, you are imply I am returning at 'unusually high rates', when that is not true. > I have seldom had to return an item because I usually invest the time in checking it out beforehand. Translation, yet again you're accusing me of being dumb here. >However, it has been my experience that many stores will ask the customer to pay for the cost of return shipping unless the item is defective. Some will also charge restocking fees when you return a non-defective item. That seems quite fair to me. I tend to avoid retailers that are happy to put the onus of a poor product entirely on the customer. You however seem to believe in unmitigated capitalism, where there's no need at all for customers to be protected, and businesses to do completely as they wish. > The issues which the OP has raised seem rather frivolous. It seems that the OP is grasping at straws to find something wrong because the OP did not invest sufficient time in checking out what such devices are and are not capable of. Again with the derogation. Thanks. > I would be very curious to know how much effort the OP put into researching this device before purchasing it. Again, the implication I'm at fault. Last edited by marcosscriven; 01-04-2018 at 01:50 AM.