Bad experience with Sierra Trading Post

[Ahab]

Originally Posted by deaddog

I'm surprised at the vehemence of many of the responses (particularly in the other thread). I'll make only two points in response:

1. I consider "abusers" of a return policy such as STP's to be those people who actually use/wear an item and then seek a return. Note that STP permits this. I don't consider prompt returns of unused/unworn items to be an abuse, particularly when a significant percentage are even unopened (for example, order the medium and the large, try on the large, it fits, don't bother opening the medium). Obviously, most of you disagree.

2. I'd estimate that at least half (by $ value) of my purchases (including stuff ultimately returned) was of outdoor gear (that is, non-SF wear). Gore-tex is very expensive.
This may be true but has no bearing on what THEY believe. From your responses I am not seeing any acceptance that other people may think differently or have different agendas. It does not mean you are wrong it just means that they may have a different agenda than you.

 

[VKK3450]

Keep in mind that online retailers are trying to strike a fine balance here.

Good retailers know that the incidence of returns may be higher online than in B&M, particularly in apparel (due to sizing issues). They will build that additional cost into their model, but know that in some ways it is offset by the cost advantages of online over B&M (prime retail space, staff costs, shrinkage, etc).

Things like free return postage and extended return periods as mentioned above also impact the model.

To blanketly say that the return policy is there for customer confidence and is not to be used (outside of VIP programs) is not really correct. Different retailers expect different things from return policies and should build them / price accordingly.

STP will presumably have done some level of analysis, figuring out acquisition costs, lifetime value, etc and set some sort of boundries.

K

 

[Nicola]

Did the OP ever mentioned how much he returned? Over what time frame? etc.

 

[grimslade]

Originally Posted by Nicola

Did the OP ever mentioned how much he returned? Over what time frame? etc.

Does it matter? It was clearly too much--by their standards. It's their policy, and they're free to defend it for the rest of their customers by cutting off those they perceive as abusers. /thread.

 

[Nicola]

Sure it matters.

If he's complaining about returning hundreds of items over a short period then the company is clearly right.

If he's complaining about returning 1 item a year then it's a totally different issue.

 

[deaddog]

STP is, of course, free to set its own business policies, including limiting its return policy. And, its obvious that it is "good business" to keep returns to a minimum.

But, I find it ironic that a business that prides itself (and markets itself) on the idea of an unlimited satisfaction guarantee and unlimited return policy (other than 6 months cash; thereafter gift card) will refuse to do business with you solely on the basis that you actually use this guarantee/policy. Hence, at least one purpose of my post (in additon to simply bitching about it) was to advise you guys that the STP return policy is not as advertised. It may be good business, and its certainly STP's right -- but, it contains hidden limitations.

Bottom line, I like STP and I am not discouraging anybody from buying from STP. Just understand that if you utilize the return policy in strict accordance with its stated terms they may choose to exercise their right to refuse to do business with you.

 

[Ahab]

Originally Posted by deaddog

STP is, of course, free to set its own business policies, including limiting its return policy. And, its obvious that it is "good business" to keep returns to a minimum.

But, I find it ironic that a business that prides itself (and markets itself) on the idea of an unlimited satisfaction guarantee and unlimited return policy (other than 6 months cash; thereafter gift card) will refuse to do business with you solely on the basis that you actually abuse this guarantee/policy. Hence, at least one purpose of my post (in additon to simply bitching about it) was to advise you guys that the STP return policy is not as advertised. It may be good business, and its certainly STP's right -- but, it contains hidden limitations.

Bottom line, I like STP and I am not discouraging anybody from buying from STP. Just understand that if you utilize the return policy in strict accordance with its stated terms they may choose to exercise their right to refuse to do business with you.
FTFY

 

[raphaelargus]

For what it is worth, Amazon.com has also gone through quite a few rounds of "firing" their worst customers.

As to what I think, I can understand the thought process behind why retailers might want to do this, but I don't understand the execution (sometimes). Instead of an abrupt canceling of a customer's account, you'd think a better way to handle it would be to give a warning first. Let your customer know what you expect reasonable behavior to be, and if they continue to violate that then don't accept their business any longer.

I actually also do not think any savings from firing bad customers are passed on to other consumers, which I think many people believe on this thread. These companies are just trying to maximize profit, NOT increase customer savings.

There is a line between normal and excessive returns, but many people defending the companies seem to be oblivious to the fact that sizing between companies and even lines within the same company do not fit the same way, and it often changes from season to season in my experience. If you are a clothing retailer people WILL return things or they won't buy from you.

What you people are defending is akin to saying you're okay with prevented from shopping in a brick and mortar store for trying on too many garments. Part of the online clothing shopping experience has to include an easy return process, since the "fitting room" process now takes place at home.

 

[Loose On The Lead]

Originally Posted by deaddog

But, I find it ironic that a business that prides itself (and markets itself) on the idea of an unlimited satisfaction guarantee and unlimited return policy (other than 6 months cash; thereafter gift card) will refuse to do business with you solely on the basis that you actually use this guarantee/policy.
STP is being fundamentally dishonest, of course. There is no debating that. The company makes a specific statement regarding its policy, and then violates that statement. Yes, we understand why it's happening, and yes, STP is free to do as it pleases, barring an unlikely court ruling to the contrary. But what is the value of a specific policy statement if it doesn't represent the company's actual policy?

Our society has become more tolerant of corporate dishonesty. I don't know that what STP is doing would have been considered acceptable by most people, say, 30 years ago. Personally, I'd like to see a return to the old ways.

To those defending STP...if the company violated its stated privacy policy and sold your information to other firms, would you be as forgiving? I mean, it's the same thing, right? Companies want to be as profitable as possible. If your response is that this would be a different sort or degree of dishonesty...okay, as long as you're acknowledging that both cases represent dishonesty of one form or another. My own view is that lying shouldn't be tolerated in a specific company statement at all.

 

[DocHolliday]

^It's a matter of reasonable expectations. You could buy something from Sierra Trading Post, wear it to rags, then return it after spilling pasta sauce all over it. But most people, realizing that this is not the point of the guarantee and having reasonable expectations for the transaction, do not attempt to abuse STP that way. If you did something like that, STP, I imagine, would refund your money. But who would argue it was outside their right to stop doing business with you? STP's policy is that you can return any item you buy, but there's no obligation on their part to sell you additional stuff.

 

[Loose On The Lead]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

STP's policy is that you can return any item you buy, but there's no obligation on their part to sell you additional stuff.
Excellent point.

 

[Doc4]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

STP's policy is that you can return any item you buy, but there's no obligation on their part to sell you additional stuff.

I wonder whether STP would decide to both refund your post-6-month purchase as a gift card, and tell you you can't shop there anymore.

 

[Ahab]

Originally Posted by raphaelargus

For what it is worth, Amazon.com has also gone through quite a few rounds of "firing" their worst customers.

As to what I think, I can understand the thought process behind why retailers might want to do this, but I don't understand the execution (sometimes). Instead of an abrupt canceling of a customer's account, you'd think a better way to handle it would be to give a warning first. Let your customer know what you expect reasonable behavior to be, and if they continue to violate that then don't accept their business any longer.

I actually also do not think any savings from firing bad customers are passed on to other consumers, which I think many people believe on this thread. These companies are just trying to maximize profit, NOT increase customer savings.
I certainly never have believed that. What I personally hope is that the cost of dealing with such customers would not be passed on to me through increases.

Originally Posted by raphaelargus

There is a line between normal and excessive returns, but many people defending the companies seem to be oblivious to the fact that sizing between companies and even lines within the same company do not fit the same way, and it often changes from season to season in my experience. If you are a clothing retailer people WILL return things or they won't buy from you.
Thought that may be correct I think a person should eventually learn their expected sizing and accept some responsibility. I highly doubt all of these returns were sizing issues.

Originally Posted by raphaelargus

What you people are defending is akin to saying you're okay with prevented from shopping in a brick and mortar store for trying on too many garments. Part of the online clothing shopping experience has to include an easy return process, since the "fitting room" process now takes place at home.
I do not think this is true as evidenced by the fact that STP is discontinuing their relationship with people who think this. Part of the pricing structure with an online or mail order business takes into account that they do not have the expense of as many brick and mortar stores with the hope that people will be able to figure out their sizing and what they want or like from pictures and other personal research.

Also I stare in amazement at the extreme cost to the environment that you are willing to pass off for the mere sake of your convenience. Having items personally shipped back and forth to you on your changing whims is not very responsible. Yet you preach responsibility to others.

 

[Ahab]

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

STP is being fundamentally dishonest, of course. There is no debating that.
I think there is a lot of room for debate on that.

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

The company makes a specific statement regarding its policy, and then violates that statement.
In what way specifically?

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

Yes, we understand why it's happening, and yes, STP is free to do as it pleases, barring an unlikely court ruling to the contrary.
I do not understand they are violating their policy, you understand why and they are free to do as they please within the law. How novel.

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

But what is the value of a specific policy statement if it doesn't represent the company's actual policy?
I think the value is that it represents the companies policy in the vast majority of cases. After dealing with some people whom they seem unable to please or who are not happy with their products they are admitting that they have failed these customers and think that it may be in the customers best interest to shop elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

Our society has become more tolerant of corporate dishonesty. I don't know that what STP is doing would have been considered acceptable by most people, say, 30 years ago. Personally, I'd like to see a return to the old ways.
I would too. Because I feel PERSONAL RESPONSIBIILTY was a lot different back then as well. Maybe people 30 years ago would have been more likely to be embarrassed by this kind of behavior?

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

To those defending STP...if the company violated its stated privacy policy and sold your information to other firms, would you be as forgiving? I mean, it's the same thing, right?
No.

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

Companies want to be as profitable as possible.
So?

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

If your response is that this would be a different sort or degree of dishonesty...okay, as long as you're acknowledging that both cases represent dishonesty of one form or another.
I do not agree with that. They were honest in their policy and when they feel their policies are not working for some customers they notify them that they do not wish to do business with them anymore. What is dishonest about that?

Originally Posted by Loose On The Lead

My own view is that lying shouldn't be tolerated in a specific company statement at all.
Specifically what was the lie? Also does this standard hold true to the customer?

 

[Vintage Gent]

Originally Posted by deaddog

STP is, of course, free to set its own business policies, including limiting its return policy. And, its obvious that it is "good business" to keep returns to a minimum.

But, I find it ironic that a business that prides itself (and markets itself) on the idea of an unlimited satisfaction guarantee and unlimited return policy (other than 6 months cash; thereafter gift card) will refuse to do business with you solely on the basis that you actually use this guarantee/policy. Hence, at least one purpose of my post (in additon to simply bitching about it) was to advise you guys that the STP return policy is not as advertised. It may be good business, and its certainly STP's right -- but, it contains hidden limitations.

Bottom line, I like STP and I am not discouraging anybody from buying from STP. Just understand that if you utilize the return policy in strict accordance with its stated terms they may choose to exercise their right to refuse to do business with you.

Whether you think STP's actions are correct from an economically pragmatic standpoint, I think this is nonetheless a reasonable response.