or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Thanks, saks!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Thanks, saks!!

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Shhh, so here's the deal: I went to Off Fifth and opened up a Saks card. I received 10% off my first days purchase. On top of that, they had a $100 off every suit deal. So, I picked up an Arnold Brant for $200, another AB for $250, and a Pal Zileri for $500. Taxes were about $80. I ended up returning the Zileri and the second AB (I really loved the Loro Piana pattern in the first one). Well, turns out that Saks credited me for the FULL amount -- as opposed to the 10% off amount. So, I got the suit that I kept for a whopping $107.. I wonder if Neiman Marcus's first day discount operates in the same way. Do I feel bad? Tell me this: Should I?
post #2 of 19
I envy you.
post #3 of 19
Quote:
Do I feel bad?  Tell me this:  Should I?
nope
post #4 of 19
Quote:
Do I feel bad?  Tell me this:  Should I?
I'm not trying to appear Cohen-esque, but I think that your question alone speaks volumes: what you'e done (or in this case, what you haven't done) is unethical. Whether you should feel bad or not is a bit of a different question. Saks clearly made a mistake by refunding you more than you paid. It's comparable to receiving the wrong change from a careless cashier, or picking up a 20 dollar bill you see drop from somebody's wallet. If you noticed it, and you clearly did, you should inform them and return what is rightfully theirs.
post #5 of 19
Thread Starter 
No, no my friend. Saks did NOT make a mistake by refunding me the full amount. It is their very system that is at fault. When I made my purchase, my total was $1000. The receipt said $1000. The deal was that at the end of the day, I would receive, as a "thank you for opening your card," a 10% refund on my purchase. When I went back to the store to return the two things I didn't want (I knew I would return one of the ABs, and the Zileri actually had a snag on the sleeve), I gave them my receipt and they refunded what it said on the receipt. Did I know that this 10% bonus would be mine to keep nonetheless? No, I did not. I had no idea until my bill came to me. Now why is it unethical for me to simply say, "Wow, that was quite a deal."? It was not as if a cashier screwed up -- this was Saks's brass's decision to run their credit operation like that. I have no responsibility to call up Saks and correct them. Now, if I were to exploit my knowledge and have a friend go register for a card, buy $3000 worth of clothes, and then return $2500 of it, such that I would essentially get a free suit just for opening a card, now maybe that would be unethical.
post #6 of 19
If you're saying that Saks has made a conscious decision to sell clothes at 10% off, but allow for people to return them at full value, then we're talking about an incredibly stupid business decision. However, I think that we are talking about a mistake. Frankly, I don't see the difference between your two examples. Just because you were unaware at the time does not lessen your responsibility once you became aware of the mistake. And your distinction between individual and systematic mistakes is irrelevant. It's not your money. But, again, given the defensive vigilance with which you're arguing the point, I suspect you already know this.
post #7 of 19
Thread Starter 
To say that I'm arguing my point with "defensive diligence" is absolutely absurd. I was responding to a previous post. I disagreed with the post, and thus took a position contrary to it. I do, in fact, think that Saks has made a concious business decision to run their credit operation like that. Otherwise, they could have very easily taken the 10% off on the actual receipt. When I signed my receipt, I asked the cashier why the 10% discount wasn't reflected on the receipt. She responded, "We give you the 10% off as a gift, which will be reflected on your credit card bill, not the receipt." I am not differentiating individual and systematic mistakes. I am differentiating "mistakes" from "concious business decisions." Saks is a huge company, and a very rich one at that. They are run by powerful people with extensive education and immense intelligence. I think they are perfectly aware that they have what amounts to an attractive return policy. The reason I posed the question in the first place was because I wondered what those on this board think -- I do not at all feel troubled by situation. It is as it should be, in the eyes of Saks, I believe. The real question -- the more difficult one -- is whether one should then intentionally exploit this return policy by making tremendously large purchases on the first day knowing full well that they would return them. What would you say about the following situation, which I saw occur on Ebay: A seller had started an auction for a very nice item, with the starting price as $1. The seller had unintentionally misspelled the item, such that the item had only 2 hits on it by the end of the auction. This resulted in a winning price that was some $100 lower than it would have been had the seller correctly spelled the item. Should the buyer have informed the seller to correct the misspelling mid-auction?
post #8 of 19
There is a very easy way to determine whether Saks made a mistake, or whether this is the way the discount was intended to be made. Go back to the store and explain the situation to the manager (who will be more knowledgeable about these types of policies.) You win, either way. If Saks made a mistake, you will rest easy knowing that you did an honest thing. Otherwise, you can revel in your bargain and gloat over Petermetro. Ah, glad that my big ol' analytical brain is good for something.
post #9 of 19
Before we go too far into a conversation about ethics let's wait for next months credit cards statement. An admin. in my office did the same thing - she openned an account and then returned a bunch of stuff. Two months later her 10% first day credit was adjusted.
post #10 of 19
Quote:
If you're saying that Saks has made a conscious decision to sell clothes at 10% off, but allow for people to return them at full value, then we're talking about an incredibly stupid business decision.  However, I think that we are talking about a mistake.
I doubt that Saks is bothered about $107; it just seems ridiculous to be that this would be the case. Moreover, (and in saying this, I am by no means degrading you because of your financial status) why are you bothered about such a meager amount, I base what I say on the fact that you are spending $950 on suits, and although this is no large amount for suits, it is enough to suggest that $107 is not that much to you, unless of course you are spending a ridiculous percentage of your income on clothing.
post #11 of 19
Kalra, I think that what is at stake is the principle, not the $107. Honesty is honesty, whether a dollar or a billion pounds be at stake. Of course, a small amount is going to cause less harm, and may therefore impact on the morality of an act or omission. Nevertheless, the actual act or omission is still the primary focus of the discussion.
post #12 of 19
I suppose, and also I guess that it could well be exploited to a greater extent aswell, I would personaly just hand the money to the store.
post #13 of 19
Me too. I couldn't rest easy otherwise. Academia allows me the luxury of being poor and honest.
post #14 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Moreover, (and in saying this, I am by no means degrading you because of your financial status) why are you bothered about such a meager amount, I base what I say on the fact that you are spending $950 on suits, and although this is no large amount for suits, it is enough to suggest that $107 is not that much to you, unless of course you are spending a ridiculous percentage of your income on clothing.
Because that is money that I could put elsewhere. I'm at that age where, no, $100 bucks isn't a lot of money to me objectively, but I still remember well the time when a $6 burger was considered fine dining. I'm financially well-off -- which is to say that I have tremendous earning potential -- but those graduate school loans are starting to come due so every bit helps. And, in the end, don't we all get excited when we find great deals on Ebay, when in fact we are only saving $100 bucks or so from what we would have spent on a store?
post #15 of 19
Again, if this is something that Saks decided to do (I cannot fathom why they would make this decision, but hey, maybe I'm not that smart), then I have no problem whatsoever. In fact, I may go take advantage. I suspect, however, that vc2000 is right - you won't get the full return value. LAGuy, as usual, offers good insight. Regardless, I'm talking about receiving something you shouldn't - not trying to pick on you personally. I apologize if my posts came across as such (and in re-reading them, they certainly did). If this isn't the case in your example, then we're agreeing. If it is, however, then you should take Kalra's path and return the money.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Thanks, saks!!