An under-examined cause of inflation: unconditional returns (hexbear.net)

submitted 7 months ago by Redbolshevik2@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It turns out that accommodating spoiled aristocrats who order shit they don't need from halfway across the Earth on a whim has a cost, and let me tell you: that cost isn't coming out of the executives' salaries!

Every time you return something, you are adding data to a spreadsheet that returns the value of "fuck you."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 10 points 7 months ago

i think this is underbaked, no-conditions returns means they don't have employees investigating/litigating legitimacy, i figure it only exists as a policy if someone figured the wages against the loses favored the company.

[-] TraschcanOfIdeology@hexbear.net 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's always a risk assessment. If the cost of preventing something might go wrong exceeds the expected value of what it's going to cost me to prevent it from happening, might as well let it happen in the small % of cases it happens and eat the loss.

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 2 points 7 months ago

now if they could make it a crime to disingenuously return things and have cops (public treasury) deal with it, lord knows you'd need a doctor's note to return a malfunctioning vibrator, but there's more pressing aspects of the profitability crisis they'd rather be bribing politicians over right now