Home Depot politics
 

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:03:03 +0000, Vox Humana wrote:

....but if there is some new stringent return policy at HD, that is yet
another reason to shop elsewhere.

The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.

Home Depot politics
 

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:03:03 +0000, Vox Humana wrote:

....but if there is some new stringent return policy at HD, that is yet
another reason to shop elsewhere.

The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.

Home Depot politics
 

"Joe Sandlin" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:03:03 +0000, Vox Humana wrote:

....but if there is some new stringent return policy at HD, that is yet
another reason to shop elsewhere.

The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.


I have no problem with that. They should have explained the new policy
instead of trying to put some spin on it that provided no information.

Home Depot politics
 

"Joe Sandlin" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:03:03 +0000, Vox Humana wrote:

....but if there is some new stringent return policy at HD, that is yet
another reason to shop elsewhere.

The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.


I have no problem with that. They should have explained the new policy
instead of trying to put some spin on it that provided no information.

Home Depot politics
 

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:31:44 +0000, Wishy13764 wrote:

I suppose 'same sex' marriage is the cause of over 50% divorce rate?

Same sex is the problem with my marraige. It's the SAME SEX over and over
and over...... :)

Home Depot politics
 

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:31:44 +0000, Wishy13764 wrote:

I suppose 'same sex' marriage is the cause of over 50% divorce rate?

Same sex is the problem with my marraige. It's the SAME SEX over and over
and over...... :)

Home Depot politics
 

From: "Joe Sandlin"


The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.


As with any policy, there will always be someone who figures out how to abuse
it, or circumvent it.

I saw a woman try to retun a 1/2 dead flat of annuals. It was very early in the
season and we had a frost. She had planted them and dug them back up
post-mortum.

They wouldn't allow the return, because the flat was sold as a flat, not the
few individual plants she wanted credit for. I was glad HD stuck to their guns,
but, if I were a lawyer, I'd claim they did at the time, have banners all over
proclaiming "Satisfaction Guranteed or your money back." No conditions, no "*"
followed by fine print.

Taken to the letter, if I were to purchase a lawn mower and become dissatisfied
3 years into use, i *should* be able to return it, no?

Home Depot politics
 

From: "Joe Sandlin"


The problem that these stores have is not with someone buying extra nuts
and bolts and returning what's not used, but with equipment. I know a guy
who's very proud of the fact that every fall he "buys" a ladder from
Lowes, cleans out his gutters, then returns the ladder. No worries about
cost, storage, etc. I have heard that HD (and others) are modifying
their return policies to try to put a stop to that kind of abuse. Hard to
fault them for that.


As with any policy, there will always be someone who figures out how to abuse
it, or circumvent it.

I saw a woman try to retun a 1/2 dead flat of annuals. It was very early in the
season and we had a frost. She had planted them and dug them back up
post-mortum.

They wouldn't allow the return, because the flat was sold as a flat, not the
few individual plants she wanted credit for. I was glad HD stuck to their guns,
but, if I were a lawyer, I'd claim they did at the time, have banners all over
proclaiming "Satisfaction Guranteed or your money back." No conditions, no "*"
followed by fine print.

Taken to the letter, if I were to purchase a lawn mower and become dissatisfied
3 years into use, i *should* be able to return it, no?

Home Depot politics
 

Subject: Home Depot politics
From: Bill R
Date: 7/27/2004 10:47 AM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Zemedelec wrote:
Maybe this is much too off topic

zemedelec


It is and it shouldn't be posted here. There are dozens and
dozens of political groups. Post your views in one of them.

I don't see why it shouldn't be posted here.

Politics, especially environmental policies, have some relevance.

While I don't personally care which party Home Despot supports, I don't see any
reason people should not be allowed to talk about it.

-

theoneflasehaddock

Home Depot politics
 

Subject: Home Depot politics
From: Bill R
Date: 7/27/2004 10:47 AM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Zemedelec wrote:
Maybe this is much too off topic

zemedelec


It is and it shouldn't be posted here. There are dozens and
dozens of political groups. Post your views in one of them.

I don't see why it shouldn't be posted here.

Politics, especially environmental policies, have some relevance.

While I don't personally care which party Home Despot supports, I don't see any
reason people should not be allowed to talk about it.

-

theoneflasehaddock

Home Depot politics
 

Subject: Home Depot politics
From: Bill R
Date: 7/27/2004 10:47 AM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Zemedelec wrote:
Maybe this is much too off topic

zemedelec


It is and it shouldn't be posted here. There are dozens and
dozens of political groups. Post your views in one of them.

I don't see why it shouldn't be posted here.

Politics, especially environmental policies, have some relevance.

While I don't personally care which party Home Despot supports, I don't see any
reason people should not be allowed to talk about it.

-

theoneflasehaddock

Same Sex Marriages, (was: Home Depot politics)
 

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:52:35 GMT, "Vox Humana" wrote:

(snip)
I agree completely. I found it interesting that Gov. Romney suggested that
the government get out of the marriage business and simply issues civil
union certificates to everyone, leaving "marriage" to religious
institutions. This is probably the only time I will ever agree with him. I
do think that would be the very best solution. As you point out, religious
sects are not required to marry everyone who shows up with a license. Most
churches decide who they will marry and what those people have to do to
qualify for marriage in that church. Orthodox Jews don't recognize
marriages between Jews and gentiles, nor are priestly lines of orthodox Jews
able to marry converts. In doing some research on this subject, I found
that there is a movement in the fundamentalist Christian world that also
thinks the state should remove itself from the marriage business. They
reason that marriages are an institution of the church and the state has no
right requiring that people get a license before being able to receive a
holy sacrament.

Madalyn Murray O'Hair used to call those licenses "Sex Licenses", since that was
all they really allowed you to do that you couldn't do before. You could live
together without being married and it wasn't a problem, and you could eat
together, and you could pretty much do everything else together, as long as you
didn't have sex, so all you needed the license for was to have sex. ;)

Same Sex Marriages, (was: Home Depot politics)
 

On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 14:52:35 GMT, "Vox Humana" wrote:

(snip)
I agree completely. I found it interesting that Gov. Romney suggested that
the government get out of the marriage business and simply issues civil
union certificates to everyone, leaving "marriage" to religious
institutions. This is probably the only time I will ever agree with him. I
do think that would be the very best solution. As you point out, religious
sects are not required to marry everyone who shows up with a license. Most
churches decide who they will marry and what those people have to do to
qualify for marriage in that church. Orthodox Jews don't recognize
marriages between Jews and gentiles, nor are priestly lines of orthodox Jews
able to marry converts. In doing some research on this subject, I found
that there is a movement in the fundamentalist Christian world that also
thinks the state should remove itself from the marriage business. They
reason that marriages are an institution of the church and the state has no
right requiring that people get a license before being able to receive a
holy sacrament.

Madalyn Murray O'Hair used to call those licenses "Sex Licenses", since that was
all they really allowed you to do that you couldn't do before. You could live
together without being married and it wasn't a problem, and you could eat
together, and you could pretty much do everything else together, as long as you
didn't have sex, so all you needed the license for was to have sex. ;)

Home Depot politics
 

HA HA Budys Here wrote:
As with any policy, there will always be someone who figures out how
to abuse
it, or circumvent it.

I saw a woman try to retun a 1/2 dead flat of annuals. It was very
early in the
season and we had a frost. She had planted them and dug them back up
post-mortum.

They wouldn't allow the return, because the flat was sold as a flat,
not the
few individual plants she wanted credit for. I was glad HD stuck to
their guns,
but, if I were a lawyer, I'd claim they did at the time, have banners
all over
proclaiming "Satisfaction Guranteed or your money back." No
conditions, no "*"
followed by fine print.

Taken to the letter, if I were to purchase a lawn mower and become
dissatisfied
3 years into use, i *should* be able to return it, no?


It's very true that no matter how many restrictions you put on your
return policy, eventually someone will find ways to abuse it. The trick
is to find a policy that you can use as a selling point, without loosing
more than you're gaining with it.

A certain technology company offers paid support at $xx an incident, or
you can buy annual contracts for $xxx-$xxx, depending on how much you
want covered. The per-incident charge can't be reversed if they fix the
problem, but they provide a 30-day full refund for the annual contracts,
even if you've made a call to tech support every day.

There are lots of advantages to the 30-day return policy. Most people
who call weren't even aware that these programs were available, and
haven't had a chance to evaluate whether the price is worth it. But they
have an immediate problem they need solved. The return policy gives them
the chance to make what could be considered an impulse buy, but they now
get a 30-day cooling-off period.

Of course you already know what happens. People call in and buy annual
contracts to avoid paying an charge for the single incident.

When the company rolled-out the return policy, they knew some people
would do that. The policy wasn't created by idiots. But the numbers they
ran said that the additional sales of annual contracts they could make
because of the policy outweighed the amount of revenue lost to people
who find the loophole.

Retail stores that have the "no questions asked" return policies know
that they're going to spend more giving money to people who should have
been asked to justify their returns, but they believe that they are
making additional sales because of the policy.

This is especially good for hardware items. Some people will still
return that extra nut and bolt they grabbed, but many people won't. And,
more importantly, given the choice of going someplace that'll take back
the excess bought, and someplace that all sales are final, people will
go to the place with the better return policy -- especially people like
contractors who can be repeat customers.

People returning using and ladders could be a problem. The guy who
cleans out his gutters, and brings it back is a sale lost. But the guy
who bought a 14' ladder, got home, got the job halfway done, and
realized he needed an 18' ladder instead is different. A store credit,
allowing the guy to buy that 18' ladder, might be a good solution, but
what if the store doesn't have 18' ladders? Who's going to decide which
customer has a valid reason for returning something, and which doesn't?
What criteria will they use? How much will it cost to train people to
apply the standards fairly and consistently? How many sales will be lost
because potential customers won't buy because the return policy isn't
liberal enough? How many customers will walk out the door scared away by
an angry customer complaining (loudly) that the store won't take a
return?

Sometimes the bottom line is served best by having an outrageously
liberal return policy that is obviously abusable. Sometimes the bottom
line is served best with a "no returns" policy. The bigger the company,
the more they've likely pondered the return policy, and it's big-picture
effects. And it is the big picture that counts whether you're Sears,
Home Depot, or Joe's Dollar Store. You can't focus on that guy who just
left the store with a refund he didn't deserve.

--
Warren H.

==========
Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my
employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife.
Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is
coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this
response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to go outside now.
Blatant Plug: Books for the Pacific Northwest gardener:
http://www.holzemville.com/mall/nwgarden/index.html

Home Depot politics
 

HA HA Budys Here wrote:
As with any policy, there will always be someone who figures out how
to abuse
it, or circumvent it.

I saw a woman try to retun a 1/2 dead flat of annuals. It was very
early in the
season and we had a frost. She had planted them and dug them back up
post-mortum.

They wouldn't allow the return, because the flat was sold as a flat,
not the
few individual plants she wanted credit for. I was glad HD stuck to
their guns,
but, if I were a lawyer, I'd claim they did at the time, have banners
all over
proclaiming "Satisfaction Guranteed or your money back." No
conditions, no "*"
followed by fine print.

Taken to the letter, if I were to purchase a lawn mower and become
dissatisfied
3 years into use, i *should* be able to return it, no?


It's very true that no matter how many restrictions you put on your
return policy, eventually someone will find ways to abuse it. The trick
is to find a policy that you can use as a selling point, without loosing
more than you're gaining with it.

A certain technology company offers paid support at $xx an incident, or
you can buy annual contracts for $xxx-$xxx, depending on how much you
want covered. The per-incident charge can't be reversed if they fix the
problem, but they provide a 30-day full refund for the annual contracts,
even if you've made a call to tech support every day.

There are lots of advantages to the 30-day return policy. Most people
who call weren't even aware that these programs were available, and
haven't had a chance to evaluate whether the price is worth it. But they
have an immediate problem they need solved. The return policy gives them
the chance to make what could be considered an impulse buy, but they now
get a 30-day cooling-off period.

Of course you already know what happens. People call in and buy annual
contracts to avoid paying an charge for the single incident.

When the company rolled-out the return policy, they knew some people
would do that. The policy wasn't created by idiots. But the numbers they
ran said that the additional sales of annual contracts they could make
because of the policy outweighed the amount of revenue lost to people
who find the loophole.

Retail stores that have the "no questions asked" return policies know
that they're going to spend more giving money to people who should have
been asked to justify their returns, but they believe that they are
making additional sales because of the policy.

This is especially good for hardware items. Some people will still
return that extra nut and bolt they grabbed, but many people won't. And,
more importantly, given the choice of going someplace that'll take back
the excess bought, and someplace that all sales are final, people will
go to the place with the better return policy -- especially people like
contractors who can be repeat customers.

People returning using and ladders could be a problem. The guy who
cleans out his gutters, and brings it back is a sale lost. But the guy
who bought a 14' ladder, got home, got the job halfway done, and
realized he needed an 18' ladder instead is different. A store credit,
allowing the guy to buy that 18' ladder, might be a good solution, but
what if the store doesn't have 18' ladders? Who's going to decide which
customer has a valid reason for returning something, and which doesn't?
What criteria will they use? How much will it cost to train people to
apply the standards fairly and consistently? How many sales will be lost
because potential customers won't buy because the return policy isn't
liberal enough? How many customers will walk out the door scared away by
an angry customer complaining (loudly) that the store won't take a
return?

Sometimes the bottom line is served best by having an outrageously
liberal return policy that is obviously abusable. Sometimes the bottom
line is served best with a "no returns" policy. The bigger the company,
the more they've likely pondered the return policy, and it's big-picture
effects. And it is the big picture that counts whether you're Sears,
Home Depot, or Joe's Dollar Store. You can't focus on that guy who just
left the store with a refund he didn't deserve.

--
Warren H.

==========
Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my
employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife.
Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is
coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this
response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants
to go outside now.
Blatant Plug: Books for the Pacific Northwest gardener:
http://www.holzemville.com/mall/nwgarden/index.html