I'm thinking the issue could be clarified by better lighting. Looking at the picture provided, UnnamedPlayer might be struggling to notice any actual flaw. I mean, in that image, the curve described by Sergej isn't really perceptible. Still, I'm of the opinion that such an issue, if objectively observed, would be considered a defect and that any customer should return any shoes that do not satisfy them. Justification for Meermin's no-wear position could be two-fold, in that it reduces the amount of returns from those who simply dislike the shoe after wearing and it might allow them a market for factory seconds, similar to that of AE. Nevertheless, sergej's complaints could have been handled more appropriately. He requested a replacement and appears to have advised them of the details before shipping. When a manufacturer agrees to replace a shoe that has been worn, they should stand by that, no matter if it conflicts with the company's general policy. An agreement is just that, an agreement. (We are assuming that he is presenting the facts, rather than attempting to present himself in a manner that will garner more empathy.) His story has not, however, discouraged me from placing an order with Meermin at some point.