Amazon Slammed for Destroying As-New and Returned Goods

[dugoldstuff]

eBay sees this and thinks: "Hmmm. . . Returned merch is just destroyable, so why can't we make OUR sellers take back everything too. They can just throw it away when it comes back. No biggie." 'This Is a Huge Scandal:' Amazon Slammed for Destroying As-New and Returned Goods

http://fortune.com/2018/06/11/amazon-destroying-inventory-germany/

By David Meyer

June 11, 2018

Amazon is destroying “massive amounts” of as-new and returned items in Germany, according to a report from business weekly WirtschaftsWoche and news show Frontal 21.

       The types of items being destroyed here go way beyond the “health and personal care” products that Amazon has long been destroying when people return them, for sanitary reasons. We’re talking things like washing machines, smartphones and furniture.

      The revelation drew an angry response from the German government and environmental campaigners.

      “This is a huge scandal,” Jochen Flasbarth from the German environment ministry told WirtschaftsWoche. “We are consuming these resources despite all the problems in the world. This approach is not in step with our times.” Greenpeace’s Kirsten Brodde said there was a need for a new “law on banning the waste and destruction of first-hand and usable goods.”

[southern*sweet*tea]

Nothing new, sadly.

https://www.economist.com/business/2016/11/24/the-business-of-reselling-returned-shop-items

"Many excess goods suffer an uglier fate. Valuable ones are often incinerated or ground up to preserve a brand’s aura of desirability. Neither retailers nor brands divulge which products are subjected to such treatment. Many goods will end up going into landfill."

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-happens-to-returned-products-2013-1

"But it may never get back on sale — by the time it's been sent back to distribution, repackaged, if it's in a condition for sale, it could have been discontinued or discounted. In some cases, it'll just get shredded."

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/fashion/victoria-secret-retailers-destroy-returned-clothing-me...

"What's Victoria's Secret? She destroys perfectly good clothes that are returned to the store.

Marie Wolf, of Tampa, watched stunned as a clerk proceeded to take a pair of scissors and cut up a pair of unworn sweatpants that Wolf had just returned for a full refund.

"I was shocked, because, mind you, these were $70 sweatpants, and there's nothing wrong with them," Wolf told "Today". "The clerk just said, 'I know, but it's our policy.

Last year, H&M was caught redhanded chopping up clothes after N.Y.C. students found discarded garments with holes cut in them in a dumpster. Macy's has also confirmed that while they try to salvage returned clothing, much of it ends up in the shredder."

Note the dates on these articles. This is nothing new, it's been going on a long time.

[phono_0490xxxxxx]

I it's a matter of Counterfeit goods, they should be destroyed rather than go back to the fraudster that tried to sell them.

If they are returned to seller they will no doubt be re-marketed and another buyer is scammed.

Where does it end?

In some Countries, Customs agents targets goods and do send them to land-fill.

Unfortunately, sometimes fake designer purses and wallets attract more interest and attention than fake coins that can go into it.  This seems to be the case on ebay.

[thallidguy]

Point 1: If you read further in the article than what you rather selectively quoted, it seems like German politicians and enviro activists are ginning this up for maximum outrage. The people who claim that this is this a crime against humanity are the sort of people who view everything through a single-colored lens (the enviros) or the sort of people who will lie outrageously for positional advantage as a matter of instinct, so that nothing they say can be taken at face value (politicians).

Point 2: Amazon takes it in the shorts for destroying returned items, but they also take in the shorts for hanging onto returns and trying to resell them through Amazon Warehouse (they'll peddling defective garbage!). You can't please everyone, and sometimes it feels like you can't please anyone.

Point 3: Your assumptions about the purpose behind a liberal return policy is badly off-base. Amazon has such a policy because buyers like it, and it encourages brand loyalty. It has nothing to do with the disposbility of returned items; in fact, the article you cite actually tends to point out that having all of the returns on their hands is a problem, and destroying them is sometimes the least bad of a series of bad options.

[thallidguy]

@ph_0490xxxxxx wrote:

I it's a matter of Counterfeit goods, they should be destroyed rather than go back to the fraudster that tried to sell them.

If they are returned to seller they will no doubt be re-marketed and another buyer is scammed.

Where does it end?

In some Countries, Customs agents targets goods and do send them to land-fill.

Unfortunately, sometimes fake designer purses and wallets attract more interest and attention than fake coins that can go into it.  This seems to be the case on ebay.

Take off the blinders. None of this is about counterfeit goods; it's about legitimate goods being destroyed because the cost of storing them is too high, especially if the original manufacturer doesn't want them back.

Seriously, did you actually read anything in this thread?

[dougsue123b]

I remember when I was a kid, I was walking downtown behind a shoe store. I saw a guy throwing new shoes in a big dumpster. I was a poor kid wearing shoes with my toes sticking out. I waited for them to close the door then went in the dumpster to have a look. Had to have been hundreds of pairs, all with a big knife slice through the sides of them. I thought what a waste.

[phono_0490xxxxxx]

---

@thallidguy wrote:

Point 1: If you read further in the article than what you rather selectively quoted, <.. //edit content.

Point 2: Amazon takes it in the shorts for destroying returned items, but they also take in the shorts for hanging onto returns and trying to resell them through Amazon Warehouse (they'll peddling defective garbage!). You can't please everyone, and sometimes it feels like you can't please anyone.

Point 3: Your assumptions about the purpose behind a liberal return policy is badly off-base. Amazon has such a policy because buyers like it, and it encourages brand loyalty. It has nothing to do with the disposbility [sic] of returned items; <... //edit content

---

Point 1. 

a) The post cites above limit of 10% of the original article so as to not breach copyright rules and so, constitute 'over quoting', that is enforced on more responsible forums. The link to full article is there.

b) There is justifiable reason for 'waste minimisation' Acts around the World.  

Obviously, some Nations are backward in addressing 'cradle to grave' recourse management issues. The notion of 'infinate' resources is highly flawed, but some seem to think that excess, pointless and 'brand integrity' are all important.  

From the Amazon response it appears they do have a degree of 'consern' and suggest not 'all' is so fated.. but that's a Corporation response, isn't it.

c) The attack on political ideology / reasoning ?  Whats that about?

Point 2.

Seems there are some who work within the Corporation that claim serviceable items do get the land-fill treatment, sometimes due to a manufacturers 'brand integrity' [more likely production vs turnover figures].

It's hard to sell this 'ideology' to those doing it hard with holes in their shoes... but no prob to the 'disposable' fashion victims and CEO's who profit from waste.

Point 3.

It would be fair to assume this Corporate policy could apply to other selling platforms, if operations are the same.

Sure looks like eBay are attempting to emulate Amazon operations. seems there is no concern at all when it comes to 'shipping' back and forth due to customer whims... because "it encourages brand loyalty."

--------

Perhaps look at the 'cause' rather than the 'effects' and the how to manage those undesirable effects.