Wow that was harsh, you have no evidence that was what he was doing. When I worked at wal-mart theyhad a take anything back attitude becaause they wanted you to keep coming back. Lately they stopped accepting alot of things because they have a very firm grip on the consumer when it comes to shopping. Do I hate the store, yes. Do I save money there? Yes. Will I go back? Yes. As far as returning the games he was trying to do an exchange, not make money. The store can turn around and resell them for the same amount they paid which equals no money lost.(aside from labor costs) Plus if they had security tags on them it is likely he didn't get them free.




Shadow

First, I edited my above comments, which came off as rude. I apologize.

As for as equaling loss..

Actually it does equal loss. You trade a game that doesn't sell very well, and is discounted at many places and you trade it for more popular games...basically they have lost a guaranteed sale for a crap game that is going to be marked down to $15 bucks to move it.

Wal-Mart has become super tough to return things at. Someone bought me a Code Breaker for Game Boy Advance. I didn't want it and tried to return it with the receipt. One store wouldn't take it back because the packaging it was in was able to be opened and resealed (it was a box with a sticker on the lid inside of a hard plastic that could be pulled apart if you pulled hard on it). I didn't even know until they showed me and they were the first ones to open it. They said it fell under their opened software rule and they wouldn't take it back.

I tried a second store. I tried to argue that it was hardware and not software since its not really a game. Again this store opened the package (pulled the plastic apart to get to the box and took the sticker off the lid, after this the sticker wouldn't stick anymore)to make sure the box wasn't empty and then said they couldn't take it because it was opened. I finally blew up at them and got the manager from electronics called who said it was no problem to take it back since it was not software. The lady then made sure to tell me again that they shouldn't take it back and I should be more careful next time.

I've been very careful, I stopped shoping at Wal-Mart.

At one time they were the most customer service friendly store out there, but they have gotten tough in just about every area. I know from other people I have talked with that returning anything there can be very tough as they don't want to take anything back.

As in the example above, what is problematic is poor communication and vague policies. The CS rep viewed the package as "software" and management quickly overruled and declared it to be hardware. A manager of a different store may have viewed it as something else. So the signals are confusing and it results in unfortunate episodes such as what happened to me.

I have not posted a lot on this forum regarding my past store experiences. So this is a little new. But what I find really interresting with my original post about Walmart -- maybe it just human nature -- is that people are very quick to accuse me of sinister motives. I simply went in to exchange some games for my son. No they weren't "crap" games, at least I don't think so. Freekstyle (just released) and Tiger Woods PGA 2002. They're popular games, right? And what I have heard from some on this board:

* Walmart's under no obligation
* The employee that said you could was a disgruntled employee.
* You must do this on a regular basis.
* People do these exchanges to make money.
* I'm glad that Walmart employees care about their jobs.
* You can't blame the store.
* You just kept demanding an exchange.
* You got angry at them so they got angry back.
* They just relented to get you off their backs.
* Sometimes you get treated the way you treat them.
* Customers get nastier each year.
* If they take that back, they're doing you a favor.
* You are trying to rip off Walmart!
* You probably bought them at a discount to exchange for higher priced games.
* If they're gifts, call the people who gave them to you.
* You traded "crap" games for popular games.


Sometimes it sounds as if I'm back in Walmart at that CS counter. It's actually kind-of humorous -- and maybe a sign of our world today where there is so much distrust and animosity.

What we're missing here is volume. Yes, one is no big deal. But if they yes to you, why shouldn't they say yes to everybody? It's been stated here time and time again that it's on a per-case basis, and on your case, it was no, until you persisted.

Part of my problem is with the title of your thread - "I can't believe it" - well, it is not a right to be able to return things at stores.

Secondly, it is software. Management relented and classified it as hardware (which it isn't) to allow the return even though it should not have been allowed. That isn't inconsistent - its a way of getting a disgruntled person out of the store quickly.

Bottom line is this: you didn't buy the product at that store. As such you were never a customer, so they aren't obligated to give you anything. People here in this very forum OPENLY brag about buying DVDs at a discount at Columbia House and then abusing liberal exchange policies at places like Walmart...no wonder they're gunshy.

"I can't believe it" doesn't refer to the fact that they rejected the return, but the way I was treated. THEY (Employees) kept telling me to come back and then treated me like a criminal -- suggesting that I rewrapped the games with a shrinkwrap machine. Ridiculous!

That's when I called the store manager as per their sign. He told me that they SHOULD HAVE allowed the return and I was mistreated and to COME BACK and he would take care of it. But when I returned again, I was mistreated again -- even with store manager involved. That's what I "can't believe." Not the fact that they didn't want to do the return. If they would have told me on the phone when I initially called, "Sorry, I'm afraid since the merchandise was probably not purchased here and you don't have a receipt we will be unable to exchange the items." I would have just said, "okay" and dropped the whole thing.

The "hardware - software" policy doesn't even apply in my situation since it only deals with OPENED merchandise not new. I don't even know why you bring that up, it doesn't have anything to do with me.

I really can't believe that returning one game is "no big deal," but two games IS a big deal. If it WAS a big deal, then why didn't they tell me so when I called them. I told them I had two games to exchange. They were the ones that said, "it shouldn't be a problem."

In my case the answer on the phone was "it shouldn't be a problem." In the store it was No, you problably rewrapped these games." The acusation and treatment was inappropriate. That's when I called the store manager. They have a sign with his smiling face and phone number on it that states if EVER you have any problem with the service you receive, please call me. So I did. HE told me to come back and the return will go through.

If they would have just said no, I would have never gone there. But it was the mixed messages of "shouldn't be a problem," and "yes," that made the whole situation a mess. That's what the problem was along with the rude behavior.

That perfectly fine. Why couldn't they just say that. "I'm sorry sir, but the games your son got as gifts were most likely not purchased at our store. You don't have a receipt and, therefore, we will be unable to complete an exchange." I would have said, "okay, thanks anyway," and gone elsewhere.

But they said "it shouldn't be a problem." And then I go to the store. And even THEN if they would have said the above, I would have been okay. But they said "No, you problably rewrapped these games." Which, I guess, implies that I opened them. Maybe even took out the disks. Reapplied all the security tapes, and then used a shrink wrap machine to reseal them. And then brought them back and lied about my son getting them as gifts, and then tried to exchange them for good merchandise, thereby defrauding them. That's quite an accusation. THAT'S what I was upset about.

Exactly!

CS: "Bring them in. It'll be up to the manager that's on duty, but it shouldn't be a problem.

CS rep: "But it very easy for you to rewrap these games."


So, which is it?

First they say it's up to the manager on duty. Manager on duty said no. You persisted, they gave in just to get you to leave, probably.

And they said it's very easy for you to rewrap it (you being you or any customer). Not the same as in You rewrapped them.

Just curious.

Is it really that easy for the average person to re-wrap games and films? I doubt it. I wouldn't have a clue where to go or how to do it. If you work somewhere that does that sort of thing then I guess it would be easy but how many people do?

I think you would need a shrink wrap machine or access to one. But what's more . . . you would also need some of those annoying "security" tapes and seals that are plastered all over the things. I don't know who would have access to those, but I guess it HAS been done, at least that's what Walmart says.

I recall the whole converstation to be something like:

ME: Hi, my son has a couple of Playstation 2 games he received as gifts and would like to exchange them for something else. They haven't been opened, but we don't have a receipt. Can they be exchanged?:

CS Rep: "Yes, just bring them in. It'll be up to the manager on duty but it shouldn't be a problem. We exchange them quite often." That's pretty close to the coversation if I remember correctly.

If volume was a problem though, she should have just said, "The manager might be able to exchange one but not more than that. You can try though." Or something like that.

When he said, "It would be very easy for "you" to rewrap them." I felt he implied that "I" was possibly there to rip them off. I thought the implication was innappropriate since there was no possible clue that I had done anything of the sort. Now if I had a history of returning a lot of stuff and there was some evidence that the packaging was tampered with, etc., I could understand it. But there was no such thing so I thought the comment was inappropriate.

You may be right about them "giving in." But my intention was not to "wear them down." If they would have just said at the beginning, "Sorry sir, I'm afraid that we cannot exchange the games since they were probably not purchased here and you don't have a receipt," I would have just said, "Okay, thanks anyway," and dropped it. But can you see how Wal-mart's comments and behavior actually led to the problems and result?

Yes, maybe I'm partly to blame. But I feel that Wal-mart's handling of this certainly contributed to the situation.

You'd have to have the equipment (or work at a place that gives you access to equipment), but it's not like it would be that hard.

You'd need: 1 roll of shrinkwrap (which I can't imagine is that hard to come by)

1 heated cutting device (probably the hardest part; it has to be hot enough to melt the shrinkwrap together; at work we used a papercutter with a heated wire in place of a blade)

1 blowdryer with a good 'high' setting.

That's it. Not something everybody would have lying around the house; but if you make a practice of reshrinkwrapping items and returning for profit, it's pretty easy to do.

Is it just me or does this not make any sense? If a company does an even exchange (as described in above example) based on suggested MSRP they will make a profit in the long run. Just because ricwhite got the game for 10 and Wal-Mart is "buying it back for 20" doesn't mean they are losing money. They then turn around and exchange a game they paid for 10 and "sell" it for 20 to ricwhite. That makes it an even exchange. What ricwhite paid for the game doesn't even matter to Wal-Mart. All they care about is getting a game worth the same amount for the one they are exchanging. Now they go and sell the game from ricwhite for 20 which gives them a 10 dollar profit that they would have got from the other game.

An even exchange is an even exchange. An hourly worker takes profit away from any game sold, not just those that are returned.

Simple math -10 (merchant price for original game) even exchange (original game for exchanged game with same MSRP) +20 (selling exchanged game)=+10

Of course other factors will reduce it. Wal-Mart will still make a profit for an item not from their store but it doesn't make much sense to deal with the hassle.

Returns from other stores is like buying from a merchant; not the process of exchanging unless it consists of completely different items. At least if you do a return or exchange of different items you are still likely to have a profit if the items are in new condition, from your store, and are bought at back or close to the price it was originally sold for. Items from other stores will have to be sold for more than the return/exchange price to get a profit, but the other end is that the person returning or exchanging is given a gift card meaning they will have to buy something that Wal-Mart will make a profit on.

This math is flawed. It's not +20, it's +10 (they didn't get it for free, did they?)

-10+10 = 0.

How do they pay for the space, A/C, electricity, workers, cleaners, trucks that bring the merchandise in, etc?

LOL! I guess I better simplify it even more. You buy a game for $10.00 from a merchant/vendor. You sell it for $20.00. Gives you a $10.00 profit.

Now if you exchange a game for a game (as ricwhite did/will) that is worth the same the end result is a $10.00 profit.

Ok let ME simplify it also

Cost to ricwhite: $0.

Walmart:
Gives RicWhite a game off the shelf that they paid $10 for a game that they will sell for $20. So far, they are out of a game.

Cost to Walmart= -$10.

Then they turn around and sell that new game for $20.

Profit=$10.

This is the SAME as if they had just sold the game. Hence, even exchance. However...

They spent the time to do an exchange.
They had to mark the new game with a price sticker.
Someone had to put it with the other games.

Even if this is $1-$2 cost per transaction, it all adds up when you have thousands of exchanges a year.

Hence, Wal-mart ends up losing money each time they do this.

Ok, I'm glad you finally got what I was saying, but don't act like that is what you meant to say in the first place. You said, "But to do an exchange, they give you $20 for it, essentially buying it for $20. Then they sell it for $20, meaning they make no profit, and even lose money because of the service reps it took to process your refund", but right above you say they turn around and sell it for $20 and make at $10 profit this time.


Ok, the rest of this has almost nothing to do with the original problem. It now has been established that Wal-Mart is still making a $10 profit with the game they are exchanging.

The air conditioning, electricity, and employees are elements outside of this situation. These factors are in place no matter if an exchange is taking place. The cost of these factors are already accounted for. The profit from the game and everything else sold is what allows these factors to be in place. The fact remains that Wal-Mart is still gonna make a profit off the game plain and simple. It's not gonna lose money because a cashier has to ring up an extra return or an employee has to resticker another game.

What will cost money if this occurs too much resulting in an employee having to work overtime or another employee having to be hired. Once again though, these are factors not related to this problem directly and we can't assume either way. Whose to say Wal-Mart is making more money since they only issue gift cards, resulting in less returns from individuals and the need for less employees on the clock.

What I meant with no profit, is that the actual exchange nets them no profit. They still make $10 exchange or not. The exchange does not profit them.

And how can all that not be taken into consideration? Yes the profit takes into consideration all that, but EVEN exchanges don't. They gain NOTHING from the exchange, but do have COSTS associated with it.

That's the whole point, if it happens enough. Why should they say yes to someone and no to everyone else? Hence a "no" is an appropriate answer... which is the whole point of one side of the argument in this thread


And BTW my statement is correct. They "buy" that game for $20 and sell it for $20, making no money off of it. The exchanged game does get them the $10 profit. The whole point is, they would have made those $10 off that game exchange or not. They do NOT make money off the game he brings in.

Ok, so you spent all this time just to show an even exchange is just an even exchange. Something everyone already knows. However, an exchange does have costs associated with it. Something all sales does as well. Something everyone already knows. So basically, your main point in this thread is that they should have denied his return/exchange to save money they can't control? but...

It still remains that the CS rep provided bad customer service, both employees and customers are confused by return/exchange policies, and Wal-Mart only brings these situations upon themselves by accepting mdse not from their store and not having a clear policy. On this occasion, Wal-Mart provided bad customer service, which occured only because they have a cloudy return/exchange policy. If they don't want him returning games not purchased from their store, then they should make it a policy and stop accepting the mdse. If they were in no way liable for not accepting the game then they would not have. *hint*

The costs associated with returns/exchanges are gonna be there no matter what. Wal-Mart's store hours will be the same and the same amount of individuals will be on the clock whether they have 1 return/exchange or 100 return/exchanges in a given day.

I think that pretty much sums things up, but go ahead and argue on and ignore the facts. I've spent enough time on this thread.

Whatever dude, its not that simple. As I said before, you are assuming several facts:

1.) Person actually makes an exchange, something ricwhite has not done. He said he was, but he has landed up with Wal Mart GC to spend on anything he wants. This isn't specific to Ricwhite, but to anyone who trades in one product to get another one.

2.) Assuming these games are as popular as the ones he is going to buy. If one of these games does not sell, they have to markdown the game to make it sell. Marking down? Well, if they paid $20 for it from a distributor, then selling it for $20 is OK. But they basically bought that game for $49 - resulting in a major loss.

I am not going to argue with the value good customer service provides. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who ABUSE the system and get away with outright fraud.

In my view, Wal-Mart has a great policy because THEY DO NOT HAVE A SET POLICY. Sure, it creates some hassles, but allows managers and employees to screen people and ACTUALLY GIVE GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE TO REAL PEOPLE, NOT SCAM ARTISTS..like that are on this board.

If you want to argue with that, that's fine. According to ricwhite's version, someone told on the phone that "iIt shouldn't be a problem, but check at the store." Well he did, they said NO and then he raised a big stink about it.

I really wouldn't worry about the profit margins of the Waltons.