Class-Action Suit Filed Against Apple

[Chip NoVaMac]

I haven't been shown the evidence, but I also have to wonder how many of the machines were returned to Apple -- and Apple was told they were unopened machines.

We keep getting people coming here and asking how to return the machines they were using, and getting out of a 10% restocking fee is a good reason for some people to lie when they return a machine.

There is also the cases that Apple knew they were getting back opened boxes, if Apple tossed those back into the new bin -- they deserve a slap.

Having spent a good amount of time in "retail", all I can say is that the "customer" will sometimes go to great lengths to hide their true intentions. I have seen instances that customers will "heat gun" the tape off packages and put bricks in the products place, and "reseal" the package.

IMO any mistakes that Apple has made (due to their size and scope), are honest mistakes. Should I have sued Apple when my PB needed a SDD repair, and according to their records that machine was never "sold", meaning that it showed arriving at the Tysons Apple Store, but never was recorded as sold? Despite my receipt and chargecard statement to counter the fact. No, Apple stepped up to the plate and did the right thing. All without my needing to be nasty with them.

Working for a small reseller of camera goods, I can say that we tow a fine line in order to make sure that our customers are protected. And given that we don't have the deep pockets of Apple that is a very fine line that we tow.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

By far, THE longest run-on sentence i have EVER seen. I get part way through and forget what the hell they're talking about.

And from my German language class, i thought I had seen one of the longest sentences.....

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

I've seen far too many instances where a large local retailer
uses poorly paid, poorly trained, poorly stocked and poorly motivated
salespeople and then wonders why sales are suffering.

The floor models are old revision units with new revision
prices and specifications shown on printed info cards.

They openly promote the older units they have in stock without
even mentioning the improvements in the newer models.

Some stores deliberately show the most expensive setup possible
as a means to push p/c sales.

I can see why Apple wanted a better way to promote their products.

Unless you have seen first hand the T&Cs of being an Apple Authorized Reseller, you can not fully understand the pressures that independent resellers are under.

My secondhand view is reinforced by the recent introduction of the new iPods. We had them ordered weeks ago through a distributor that to my knowledge we get products from on a daily basis. We got our shipment the day the new iPods were announced last week. In fact we were double shipped the iPod mini's (we were able to send those back after a "little" discussion from what I heard, and we got an attractive offer on the iPod Mini's that we did keep). To be honest, if they had shipped a week or so earlier, we would most likely be out of luck on price protection or stock balance. For I worked for a government reseller back in the days of the original iMac, and we were limited to something like 1% of our total Apple Mac sales for any returns or stock balances.

So in a case like that what is an independent supposed to do? With at that time of 8 to 12% margins, there was little room to make the older goods attractive. Not that I support lying to a customer, but there is a fine line between lying and full disclosure.

Apple needs to treat their resellers as an equal partner, and that includes price protections and stock balances, before they try to "better promote" their products.

And before some say that Apple Authorized Resellers are crying for no reason. The whole principle of price protection and stock balances to resellers is an age old concept. Sure given the times, it is tighter than it once was. But is something that most manufacturers and distributors still adhere to for the most part. Apple has always done their own thing, and that was OK for when they did not sell directly through the web or through their own stores. We can argue till the cows come home about corporate/government resellers being required at one point to provide customer info on the sales we made. Amazing how many of those ended up buying direct, unless a government contract was required.

 

[~loserman~]

Amazing how many of those ended up buying direct, unless a government contract was required.

Lately many Government buyers do end up buying direct.
Although over certain dollar amounts usually anything above 2500 at least 3 competes must be done.
local resellers almost never win these bids because Local resellers dont have the buying power that large online stores such as CDW, Merisel, Tech Data etc have

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Lately many Government buyers do end up buying direct.
Although over certain dollar amounts usually anything above 2500 at least 3 competes must be done.
local resellers almost never win these bids because Local resellers dont have the buying power that large online stores such as CDW, Merisel, Tech Data etc have

I haven't been in the government end of the computer business for about 5 to 6 years. My Apple experience is about a year or two before that.

I had an "opportunity" to go work for GTSI about 6 years ago. The hassles are just not worth it. Given that much is done by phone or email now, soon the government will be buying IT stuff from some rep in India. If they haven't already.

 

[wdlove]

I go along with Chip NoVaMac. The morale that "the customer is always right can cause trouble. It's only a minority that do the things mentioned above, but they make a major impact. Apple employee's are human and so make mistakes. I think that Apple does very well with customer service to make things wright.