Is this Barnes & Noble crazy or am I?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bengangmo
  • Start date Start date
Little Nemo said:
You may be right on that. I'll have to check the receipt. But in either event, it's been less than fourteen days anyway.If this policy exists, the store employees I spoke with are apparently unaware of it. They all agreed I could get a refund if I wanted one.The guy I was speaking to said he was calling his manager and I talked to the guy who showed up. That happened three times. Maybe they were just calling in other people who had the same title. Heck, maybe they called in a clerk from another department. I assumed they were calling in somebody at the next level because that's what they said they were doing. But I didn't ask for ID.Can't think of any important details I've left out. Would you like the location of the store or the names of the DVD's?
.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think you were played by a pack of bored clerks amusing themselves at your expense.
 
Here's my take on it and the only possible valid explanation I can think of.
B&N gets a bunch of criterion dvds to sell. Dozens of titles.
At first they sell them at full price. The popular and high demand ones sell first at full price. Once those are gone B&N now has some "second tier" (for lack of a better term) criterion titles that aren't moving. To move these they run a buy-two-get-one sale on them. They sell a bunch of them and what's left over are the "third tier" titles that nobody really wants. In a last ditch effort to move these they run a 50% off sale on them.
So now they have someone who bought some "second tier" titles during the previous sale wanting to get the new sale price of what the hard-to-move titles are going for.
Now the only way I can think if this was really what happened is if these titles were unavailable when you returned to the store. You'd have to supply that info.

It'd be similar to a farmer selling apples on day one for $1 an apple. People come and buy the nicest most perfect select ones first. On day two he has to drop the price to 50 cents since they've been pretty well picked over. By day three the price goes down to 25 cents cause all that's left are the bruised ones nobody wants and he has to price them to move. A customer returns who bought yesterdays apples and wants to rebuy them for 25 cents a pop.
 
I don't think we have B&N in Canada (at least I've never been in one) and I'm sort of glad because if this is their policy, it's absurd.

Probably every store I shop at does a price difference refund within the return period. If a store has no return period (i.e. some small clothing shops will only allow exchanges) then not so much.

I can't really imagine a CSR arguing the point, actually. Totally nuts!

And, uh, yah, EP, you're a gem. Don't you go changing.
 
Hampshire said:
Here's my take on it and the only possible valid explanation I can think of.
B&N gets a bunch of criterion dvds to sell. Dozens of titles.
At first they sell them at full price. The popular and high demand ones sell first at full price. Once those are gone B&N now has some "second tier" (for lack of a better term) criterion titles that aren't moving. To move these they run a buy-two-get-one sale on them. They sell a bunch of them and what's left over are the "third tier" titles that nobody really wants. In a last ditch effort to move these they run a 50% off sale on them.
So now they have someone who bought some "second tier" titles during the previous sale wanting to get the new sale price of what the hard-to-move titles are going for.
Now the only way I can think if this was really what happened is if these titles were unavailable when you returned to the store. You'd have to supply that info.
Click to expand...
There's another option. Their DVD dealer for these movies is selling them to B&N at a discounted price of 1/3rd off (or whatever it works out to so they can sell them for 1/3rd off). These movies are B2G1. Later, said dealer sells more movies to B&N for half off and they run the new sale. So you wanting to get the refund is costing them money if they wind up selling them below cost. However, with the small amount of people that will ask for a refund compared to how many they sell, I'd be surprised if they would have a problem with it.
There could also be a similar issue if their dealer works on a consignment basis and their inventory system can't handle it easily. Again, I would assume the manager would have a way of making it happen.
It'd be similar to a farmer selling apples on day one for $1 an apple. People come and buy the nicest most perfect select ones first. On day two he has to drop the price to 50 cents since they've been pretty well picked over. By day three the price goes down to 25 cents cause all that's left are the bruised ones nobody wants and he has to price them to move. A customer returns who bought yesterdays apples and wants to rebuy them for 25 cents a pop.
Click to expand...
At my store, from time to time (once a month or so) we'll have a pallet of bananas ripen waaay to fast so we'll sell them very cheap (10 pound bag for $1) just to get rid of them. We constantly have people asking if we have any over ripe bananas that they can buy at that price. I'll always remember the person who asked that question and upon hearing that we didn't have any asked us, in all seriousness, if we could put 10 pounds in a bag for him and then he could come back in a few days when they're over ripe and buy them for $1. Ummm, no.
 
Little Nemo said:
She wanted to get a discount because you erroneously undercharged her?

I can see why store employees become suspicious of customers.
Click to expand...

Yup,

Some grocery stores offer some extra discount if they make a mistake, or they used to. That's the kind of thing she was asking about, but holy shit. It's a computer not a can of tuna. You asked , you were politely told no. Then you think a threat of returning it will work. Bring it on you foolish woman.
 
That's not what I asked you is it? It's interesting that you seem to be avoiding the details of my question. Oversite or intentional?
Click to expand...
Definitely not intentional. I thought I had answered the question which is why I didn't understand why you asked it again. So apparently I'm misunderstanding the question. Let me try again.
So, as far as you know, there was no "no refunds" stipulation for the buy two get 1 free sale? You weren't aware of it when you made the purchase, and nobody mentioned it when you asked to return them?
Click to expand...
As far as I know, there was no special refund policy over the sales item. I wasn't aware of any at the time I purchased the items. When I returned the items, the fact that they had been bought during a sale that was over was mentioned during the conversation (I raised the issue myself). But there was no indication that this fact affected the refund.

Have I answered your question or am I still not seeing what it is you are asking?
 
spark240 said:
This practice has indeed become more common here. I too find it strange. We see it often in ads for travel booking services (plane tickets, hotel rooms), where people are assured by various means that somebody else won't be able to get a better price--if the price drops, the difference will be refunded, sometimes automatically without further action on the first customer's part.

It is as if we saw shopping as a competitive sport between ourselves and other shoppers. The important thing is not the actual price paid (we were happy with that, to make the purchase in the first place) but where we stand relative to other buyers. If somebody else gets a better deal, by god we want it too. Even retroactively.

I wonder how far out this feeling is now expected to extend. Suppose the product goes on "sale" six weeks later rather than one. Should we still feel like losers (or whatever it is), that other people are now getting a better price? Where is the line? How does it make sense to draw this line of expectations at any arbitrary point, other than the moment of the transaction that we chose to make in the first place?
Click to expand...

They try to draw the line, imo, at a point in time that is either within the product's return period, or within a time where most people wouldn't have gotten substantive use and enjoyment from the product. Opened it up and 5 days later it's on super sale? Yeah, we can help you out. Open it up, and 90 days later it's on super sale? Sorry. You got your economic value out of it.

I don't see it as coddling buyer-versus-buyer competition so much as them striving to make you feel that they will do right by you, so that you return to the store for your next round of purchases.

I remember reading some undercover writer's experience at wal-mart, and their overriding concern and message to their new hires was that Wal-Mart did not want to do *anything*, I mean *anything* to upset a customer. Because they knew that from the first day that someone walked through their doors, if they kept shopping there, they would drop a quarter of a million bucks in their stores in their lifetimes.

The reason they do this vis-a-vis other sites, however, is completely different. It's because they need to convince you that their search engine will yield you the best rates possible.
 
Was there anything printed on the back of the receipt?



(My aunt hates trying on clothes, so what she'll do is buy them, take them home and try them on and then return the ones that don't fit. :rolleyes:)
 
Little Nemo said:
Definitely not intentional. I thought I had answered the question which is why I didn't understand why you asked it again. So apparently I'm misunderstanding the question. Let me try again.As far as I know, there was no special refund policy over the sales item. I wasn't aware of any at the time I purchased the items. When I returned the items, the fact that they had been bought during a sale that was over was mentioned during the conversation (I raised the issue myself). But there was no indication that this fact affected the refund.

Have I answered your question or am I still not seeing what it is you are asking?
Click to expand...

I think so. Unless there was a specifc "no returns" policy concerning that 3 for the price of 2 sale then I stand by my first post. They were wrong and stupid and I'm mystified that any retailer would do that. Either somebody there wanted them , or they git some unreasonable attitude over the fact they had been on when you first bought them.
 
Here's my take on it and the only possible valid explanation I can think of.
B&N gets a bunch of criterion dvds to sell. Dozens of titles.
At first they sell them at full price. The popular and high demand ones sell first at full price. Once those are gone B&N now has some "second tier" (for lack of a better term) criterion titles that aren't moving. To move these they run a buy-two-get-one sale on them. They sell a bunch of them and what's left over are the "third tier" titles that nobody really wants. In a last ditch effort to move these they run a 50% off sale on them.
So now they have someone who bought some "second tier" titles during the previous sale wanting to get the new sale price of what the hard-to-move titles are going for.
Now the only way I can think if this was really what happened is if these titles were unavailable when you returned to the store. You'd have to supply that info.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think it was anything unusual about the supply of DVD's. It's not like it's a local sale - every Barnes and Noble in the country is having the same sales, including their online site.

I think it's just part of their regular cycle of sales. They've had other buy 2, get 1 free sales and other half-off Criterion sales. I think it's just something they do to move stock. And obviously it works - when they have these good sales I buy items I've been looking over. If it wasn't for the sale, I'd have held off. And I'm sure this is true for lots of other people.
 
cosmosdan said:
Now that Nemo has responded I don't think that's what happened either. I have no idea why any retailer would do a legitimate reurn and then refuse to sell something else.
Click to expand...
Maybe they didn't want to get the ashes everywhere.;)
 
There's another option. Their DVD dealer for these movies is selling them to B&N at a discounted price of 1/3rd off (or whatever it works out to so they can sell them for 1/3rd off). These movies are B2G1. Later, said dealer sells more movies to B&N for half off and they run the new sale. So you wanting to get the refund is costing them money if they wind up selling them below cost. However, with the small amount of people that will ask for a refund compared to how many they sell, I'd be surprised if they would have a problem with it.
There could also be a similar issue if their dealer works on a consignment basis and their inventory system can't handle it easily. Again, I would assume the manager would have a way of making it happen.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong on this (hazel-rah could probably help on this one) but as I recall Barnes and Noble owns their distributor. A few years back they bought the world's biggest book distributor, a formerly independent company that sold books, movies, and other products to bookstores like Barnes and Noble, Borders, and other bookstores. So when Barnes and Noble buys movies from its distributor, it's buying them from itself (or at least it's buying them from another division of the same corporation).
 
Little Nemo said:
Overall, the store may find that it gains more from these impulse purchases than it loses from actual returns.
Click to expand...
Sadly, I don't think this is true anymore ( although I suspect it was in the past) I've heard too many people talk about getting that TV ,camera etc and returning it after the event ( and while those same people complain about restocking fees, they would also never pay full price for an open box). They're not really impulse buyers who might keep the item- they have absolutely no intention of keeping it. It's even moved into clothing- now, when I buy a dress the tags are deliberately placed in such a way that the dress cannot be worn with the tags still attached.
 
El Presidente said:
Quite the opposite. If you tried pulling this on me at Barnes & Noble, I'd not only tell you no, but using my charisma I'd charm you into buying 5 more DVDs and a couple of paperweights and have you leaving thinking you got the deal of a lifetime.
Click to expand...

Trolls have charisma?
 
Rumor_Watkins said:
really? causing a delay because the store won't properly enforce a return policy makes me a dick?

is this really your position?
Click to expand...


No, not caring about the fact that others around you are also waiting is what's making you a dick.

Sometimes a wait is inevitable, of course. However, you sound like you deliberately LIKE the fact that you're causing the line to build up, just to piss off the staff. THAT is being a dick. Don't deliberately TRY to make a scene and take up peoples' time on purpose, just for shits and giggles. It's not the staff that's affected, as much as the people waiting behind you.

IF the store is deliberately being a dick, yeah, go for it. But don't be an asshole yourself.

If I'm wrong, I appologize.
 
Back
Top