Would this be wrong/unethical? - Page 9

WWMD - What Would Manouche Do?
Then do the opposite.

Actually, you are commiting fraud in the amount of the retail purchase price of the shoes.

You are defrauding the retail store of the purchase price of the shoes by representing that you are returning the same pair of shoes that you purchased, when in fact you are returning a different pair.

BTW-fraud is a crime.

Yeah...But is it unethical or wrong to commit a crime?

Huh? Is It?

What say you?

I too once had two pair of shoes
Four in all and needed only two
But ethics were moot as
I wore one on each hand and each foot.

On the contrary, I'm more inclined to think he's the type that likes to read up on books like '7 Habits....', 'Millionaire Next Door', etc... and writes down terms like 'paradigm shifts', 'tipping points' so he could use them to try to impress somewhat intelligent people.

Really? I thought maybe he's the type that is intelligent enough to be able to continue a discussion instead of resulting to personal attacks because they cannot understand the situation.
I've never read those books, perhaps you can enlighten me as you seem to be fully read up on them.

What gave away my age? was it that I still retain manners learned? Do those become unneeded as I grow older and get more experienced?


Just because someone is able to dress nicely, does not mean they have style. Just because you are able to fill your closet with nice clothes, they will not mask and make up for your deficiencies as a person.

I personally would not do what the op has proposed. Many others would not either judging from the poll. Yet there are people who will, and companies will have to realize that. Companies have to realize there's competition in a free-market. And if they can't compete they'll go out of business. They can also always have the right to refuse service to people who abuse policies.

Besides the obvious prick/unethical factor here... how could you possibly receive belgraves from malaysia fast enough to return them to a store within the alotted return period?

Really? The OP asked this Your replies are these So aside from your quite obvious disdain to large corporate retailers, what part of "intelligent", "continue", and "discussion" and "understand the situation" have I missed from you? Oh and better yet, your answer to the OP's question finally came out: Of course, after implying that since the evil corporate brick-n-mortar devil retailer is overcharging to finance the corporate jet then its perfectly alright to do it since they don't have the right to exist if they can't cut it in a price war with a small niche shop in Kuala Lumpur.

OP, you are asking if it is alright to commit fraud.

It is not alright. You might as well be a thief, you thief. If I caught you pulling this kind of thing in my shop (hypothetical, I don't own a shop), I would have you arrested and prosecute the shit out of you.

This is like someone asking if it's okay if someone else sleeps with your girlfriend, but then they suggest it's okay because they'll tell you they really just slept with your next door neighbour.

You're right, yawn; you were attacked personally and without justification. I think you drew fire, not because of what you said, but because of the snarky, dismissive, winner-take-all manner in which you delivered the message. Regardless, you didn't deserve to be attacked on a personal basis. Apologies are in order.

Companies do realize this, but customers have to realize it, too. You're making this more one-sided than it really is. As you said, it's a free market. But you're ignoring the fact that buyers have just as much responsibility as sellers.

Some companies sell only goods; other companies sell goods and provide services. Responsible shoppers will support, with currency, the goods and services they value. Irresponsible shoppers will always seize the lower price and then be surprised and upset when services they've come to expect are no longer available.

I think someone who holds your opinion on this matter has not carefully considered what "services" really means. A local retailer provides more services just than a sales staff and free alterations. Picture an assortment of slacks and sweaters spread out on a display table for your close examination. That's a service -- one that you won't get online. So is the fitting room and the privilege of trying on dozens of garments before making a selection. I really like those services and I don't want them to go away. The only way to prevent that is to shop responsibly and vote for those services with my dollars.

Again, there's nothing wrong with saving money by making purchases from online discounters. But it is unethical and irresponsible to use the retailer's services and then make all your purchases online. The very reason you're getting a better price online is that you're not getting any services there. It is hypocritical to expect to have it both ways.

Times are tough for retailers. Have you tried just asking for a price match?

OP needs to take a break from this forum and the mind-poison it spreads, making him think that going to an interview in KCs will somehow negatively affect him, or even dumber that going in wearing C&Js will serve positive in his favor.

Surely the OP's mind is poisoned by the fog of forum. This forum would reccomend Aldens for the interview, no? And they are higher in Kuala Lampur, I'm given to understand.
In short, young man, get thee to an Alden shop!

Does the phrase "short against the box" come to mind for anyone?