Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is it morally acceptable to abuse a generous returns policy?

laptech said:
What you mention is the ploy used by social media people who review products to gain views and subscribers to their channel. They purchase an item with no intent of keeping it, make an unboxing video and review video then return the item under the companies return policy. Such a practice has been going on for years and companies are aware of this but find it difficult to stop because they know what ever they try to introduce to prevent such things from happening will ultimatelly affect their genuine customers. (i remember reading about this in a tabloid news paper many years ago, seeing this thread just reminded me of it)
Click to expand...
A lot of this is “free” marketing. Especially when it comes to popular you tubers and only really helps Apple at the end of the day.
 
Sanpete said:
A lot of crime doesn't have any very substantial direct impact on individuals, such as shoplifting from a large chain store, or embezzling $.10 each from ten million bank clients. What happens if we don't discourage it, though?

I don't think I've suggested trying to solve anything alone. As with electing leaders (arguments that sound like like yours are used against voting), and solving large problems like climate change, many must each do their part. Which includes encouraging helpful behavior and discouraging harmful behavior.
Click to expand...

Mass scale crime is still a direct choice made by individuals, while climate change is a global accident with no one in particular to blame.

The idea that we can fix climate change ‘if we each do our part’ is a fantasy. Please, please, please let this idea go. We will never get the 100% global compliance we need voluntarily. Starting from a position of hoping that all 7.8 billion people in the world will chip in is wasting valuable time that we just don’t have. This is in so many ways an all-or-nothing situation. Green choices are what we need people to make, yes, but it will all count for nothing unless we all pay our dues.

I’ve never intended to advocate for ignoring climate change, so I’m sorry if it came off that way. I’ve only meant to convey that our small, individual, green choices won’t add up for our good in the end like so many assume.

Circling back to apple, their goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2030 includes provisions for a generous returns policy, so again, no you don’t need to feel bad about returning something. I assume they will even be carbon negative soon after that date.
 
Jakewilk said:
while climate change is a global accident with no one in particular to blame.
Click to expand...
Depends what you mean. To blame for it happening in the first place? Perhaps not.

To blame for current inaction? I can think of a few.

But with regard to the OP's initial question, we'd need a definition of "abuse". I'd say buying with ZERO intent of keeping is to be frowned upon. Buying with a mindset of "I suspect this won't tick my boxes but I want to check" - that's what the policy is for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C-Dubs
agent mac said:
but isn’t it missing the point that Apple can afford it? Ultimately the costs of this policy are passed onto the customers. So people abusing the policy mean other customers end up paying more than they would otherwise?
Click to expand...
That's a false way of looking at it...

Apple charges the price the market will bear for their products and as shown by their margins they don't leave money on the table. If Apple were lower return costs they'd just pad their profits more. There is no way to assume that lower costs for Apple would be passed onto consumers...

An iPhone 13 Pro costs like $300 to build and they sell it for $1K+. They aren't losing money at all.

I'd spend less energy worrying about saving money for Apple and more energy worrying about saving money for yourself. There is nothing morally or otherwise wrong with using return policies, period.
 
agent mac said:
I know that Apple have a very generous no questions asked returns policy. But I would imagine that there is a significant cost to this for Apple ( which is obviouly then passed onto us, as customers ). After all, they can’t just put stuff back on the shelf like a book from a book store. There‘s an economic cost, and there’s an environmental cost, but there’s also a moral cost in that it seems many people are gaming this generous policy by buying machines they know they don’t need, in order to ‘test’ stuff out. This means people keenly waiting for a machine have to wait longer.
What do other people on here think of this? For me it seems in poor taste; the policy is there for people who genuinely find that the machine they bought just doesn’t suit their needs. And yet some folk on here almost talk about buying two and returning one with glee. Is it the worst of human nature, the unacceptable face of consumerism set against the pleas of restraint at COP 26? Or am I just getting old and fusty?

As background, I’m looking to buy one of the new laptops and so I’ve been researching my purchase to see what I need, don’t need, may want etc. I’ve measured out screen sizes on my desktop to compare,and been into the local computer stores to see various current apple models. I’ve read various reviews and spent probably too much time watching various YouTubers of no proven expertise all trotting out identikit rundowns. I feel like I've done my research now and I’d be pretty certain that when I make my purchase I’m making it seriously.

So, what do others think?
Click to expand...

I just effort to make the best choices in products after research and consideration and then after purchase if it doesn't suit my expectations I don't hesitate to use the return policy. I don't intentionally buy products I doubt will work for me and I certainly don't buy products knowing I'll return it etc. to me that is morally questionable and not how I choose to live my life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
LogicalApex said:
That's a false way of looking at it...

Apple charges the price the market will bear for their products and as shown by their margins they don't leave money on the table. If Apple were lower return costs they'd just pad their profits more. There is no way to assume that lower costs for Apple would be passed onto consumers...

An iPhone 13 Pro costs like $300 to build and they sell it for $1K+. They aren't losing money at all.

I'd spend less energy worrying about saving money for Apple and more energy worrying about saving money for yourself. There is nothing morally or otherwise wrong with using return policies, period.
Click to expand...
This is not true, the margin on an iPhone is only 20-30%.
 
I don't feel that it is. Costco has had a generous return policies and I know people that buy a laptop, camera or something else to take on a vacation and then return it when they get back. I'm sure that Costco has built in the cost of this sort of thing. They also give you free samples and they generally let you come back for more if you want them.

Apple wants you to be a satisfied customer and to build a long-term relationship. And if you buy the wrong thing, they want to try to sell you the right thing. Or even nothing at all - you may decide that you're better off with Windows or Chrome.
 
I'd disagree that returning things "in excess" is just a money thing; it's a environmental thing too. These items don't just get thrown back on the shelf; Apple doesn't work that way (it would cheapen the brand). So they need to be refurbished. At the very least, you're using resources to ship it back.

The return policy is there so if you buy something and it doesn't fit your use case, you are covered. It's not there for you to just try every toy and return it two weeks later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko and CarlJ
C-Dubs said:
I'd disagree that returning things "in excess" is just a money thing; it's a environmental thing too. These items don't just get thrown back on the shelf; Apple doesn't work that way (it would cheapen the brand). So they need to be refurbished. At the very least, you're using resources to ship it back.

The return policy is there so if you buy something and it doesn't fit your use case, you are covered. It's not there for you to just try every toy and return it two weeks later.
Click to expand...

Retailers have systems to prevent abuse including refusing your business in the future.
 
agent mac said:
I know that Apple have a very generous no questions asked returns policy. But I would imagine that there is a significant cost to this for Apple ( which is obviouly then passed onto us, as customers ). After all, they can’t just put stuff back on the shelf like a book from a book store. There‘s an economic cost, and there’s an environmental cost, but there’s also a moral cost in that it seems many people are gaming this generous policy by buying machines they know they don’t need, in order to ‘test’ stuff out. This means people keenly waiting for a machine have to wait longer.
What do other people on here think of this? For me it seems in poor taste; the policy is there for people who genuinely find that the machine they bought just doesn’t suit their needs. And yet some folk on here almost talk about buying two and returning one with glee. Is it the worst of human nature, the unacceptable face of consumerism set against the pleas of restraint at COP 26? Or am I just getting old and fusty?

As background, I’m looking to buy one of the new laptops and so I’ve been researching my purchase to see what I need, don’t need, may want etc. I’ve measured out screen sizes on my desktop to compare,and been into the local computer stores to see various current apple models. I’ve read various reviews and spent probably too much time watching various YouTubers of no proven expertise all trotting out identikit rundowns. I feel like I've done my research now and I’d be pretty certain that when I make my purchase I’m making it seriously.

So, what do others think?
Click to expand...
Thank you for bringing this up, and as you can see from the other replies, some are more aware of the impact of their actions and some not and some just don't give a ****. In my opinion, the most important is that you yourself feel good about the action you take, I don't think it feels good when you 'abuse' a system. If you feel like you do need the 14 days to think about something and return, please do so. If not, as you said for instance for those YouTubers as an example, I would also feel unpleasant to knowingly do things that feel like one is 'abusing' the system.

The way you describe your purchase process, I don't think the 'majority' does it like that.... so I can see how it can be frustrating to feel like you need to wait because hordes of others are ordering multiple devices and return them later. However, I would assume that most people don't do that, and as you see in another comment, some countries don't offer these return policies (no apple store, has to go through other retailers). I hope you are making the right choices in life and try to do better, it's a rare quality among us.

p.s. from a business perspective, it is a bit of a 'no brainer'. I think some countries have consumer laws that require online retailers to have return policies (because of many problems in the past with people getting things that are not 'as advertised' etc). Then, there can be an easy business case to be made that having a return policy makes people less vigilant to buy, so more buyers. Then, Apple also re-use the returns for warranty or service repairs (rather than using new ones). You often don't see iPhones as refurbished phone on apple.com, I guess they all are being used to replace other people's 'broken' phone under warranty/apple care. Afterwards, if that all doesn't apply, then they offer it at a 'discount' at the refurbished store, which actually benefits us. (refurbished 88 days average)
 
dogslobber said:
Then why are you here? Check the title of the thread.
Click to expand...
You're completely out of substantive ideas, I see.

ignatius345 said:
Corporations exist as big machines to turn resources into money. You can be sure Apple has calculated exactly the cost/benefit ratio of their return policy and will adjust it accordingly if it no longer works in their favor.
Click to expand...
Yup, and that's reflected in the price everyone pays. Fewer returns would make for a different calculation that would allow for the money that covers returns to be used for a better product at the same price.

This isn't about whether returns harm Apple, but the cost to consumers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
Jakewilk said:
The idea that we can fix climate change ‘if we each do our part’ is a fantasy. Please, please, please let this idea go. We will never get the 100% global compliance we need voluntarily. Starting from a position of hoping that all 7.8 billion people in the world will chip in is wasting valuable time that we just don’t have. This is in so many ways an all-or-nothing situation. Green choices are what we need people to make, yes, but it will all count for nothing unless we all pay our dues.

I’ve never intended to advocate for ignoring climate change, so I’m sorry if it came off that way. I’ve only meant to convey that our small, individual, green choices won’t add up for our good in the end like so many assume.

Circling back to apple, their goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2030 includes provisions for a generous returns policy, so again, no you don’t need to feel bad about returning something. I assume they will even be carbon negative soon after that date.
Click to expand...
The idea that we can fix climate change if we don't each do our part is a fantasy.

Whatever Apple's goal includes, it's a simple fact that returns are more costly to the environment. Parts are thrown away or must be recycled, itself with environmental costs, simply for having been returned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arobert3434
Sanpete said:
You're completely out of substantive ideas, I see.


Yup, and that's reflected in the price everyone pays. Fewer returns would make for a different calculation that would allow for the money that covers returns to be used for a better product at the same price.

This isn't about whether returns harm Apple, but the cost to consumers.
Click to expand...

The number of variables to consider would be too difficult without the data and a strong marketing department. Costs to consumers might even go down with a generous return policy.
 
Sanpete said:
The idea that we can fix climate change if we don't each do our part is a fantasy.

Whatever Apple's goal includes, it's a simple fact that returns are more costly to the environment. Parts are thrown away or must be recycled, itself with environmental costs, simply for having been returned.
Click to expand...
I agree, but “our part” needs to come in heavy taxes and pricier luxuries… not volunteerism and wishful thinking
 
  • Angry
Reactions: arobert3434
Sanpete said:
You misread it. The then part of an if-then only applies when the if part is true. Is it? Does everyone think as the person I was referring to thinks? (No. Thankfully.)


I didn't mention morality, only the consequences of behavior, and I've pointed out some apparently self-contradictory views. If you disagree with something I've actually said, please share.
Click to expand...

this guy here playing word games.

the man was pointing out you did in fact say that society falls apart if people all act that way. and you responded to a person who you thought was acting that way. hence me saying "q the morality thought police who'll tell you that your kind is the reason society is falling apart".

c'mon now. i may have failed some classes but i can still look things up a few posts back.
 
IllIllIll said:
If this really was a large scale problem for Apple, they'd change their policy.
Click to expand...

multiple threads happening here -

1. morality of buying multiple mbps and returning one (cause you robbing others of getting one).
2. morality of returning cause you are needlessly aiding and abetting in climate change.
3. supply and demand. price apple charges is what apple can get away with and still be profitable even w/ all the inefficiencies in the system.

all 3 or more being conflated. #1 i can see ppl being upset cause it aint fair. #2 im too dumb to really know. but i hear not eating meat helps more than returning a mbp. #3 public company. i am a shareholder. apple will take action when it hurts their bottom line.
 
Last edited:
AFK said:
multiple threads happening here -

1. morality of buying multiple mbps and returning one (cause you robbing others of getting one).
2. morality of returning cause you are needlessly aiding and abetting in climate change.
3. supply and demand. price apple charges is what apple can get away with and still be profitable even w/ all the inefficiencies in the system.

all 3 or more being conflated. #1 i can see ppl being upset cause it aint fair. #2 im too dumb to really know. but i hear not eating meat helps more than returning a mbp. #3 public company. i am a shareholder. apple will take action when it hurts their bottom line.
Click to expand...

They aren't necessarily inefficiencies.

You may have a generous return policy that makes a customer for life and then need to expend less effort in getting additional customers. Word-of-mouth spread can result in exponential sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AFK
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back