If you receive a defective mail order rod blank that has to be sent back for exchange, who do you think should pay the return postage? It is my opinion that the seller has the responsibility to check the blank for defects before selling/sending them therefore the the seller should assume all the costs of an exchange.

Don

You make a good point - none of it was your fault. Now you're having to foot a bill created by a problem that you didn't cause. Unfortunately that opinion isn't likely to carry any legal weight. Most dealers have set policies regarding these issues and when you engage in business with them you are expected to have read and understood those policies. So even though you may not have been aware of it at the time, you may have already agreed to foot the shipping costs in such an instance.

Obviously these are instances that most of us don't expect to happen so none of us spends much time reading all the fine print in the catalogs and/or on the web pages. Nevertheless, most companies do have such policies in place and when you place your order, you accept those policies. And, sometimes a dealer does see things from a perspective such as yours and agree to foot the bill. It all depends on who you're dealing with and what their policies are.

.................

its like read the small print. Have a good one !

This just happened to me this week. And I did have to pay the return shipping. The blank looked like it was dragged behind a car and then put back into the package. I still dont understand how this even happens, what rod builder would even accept that kind of blank? We want our rods to look better than, not worse than, factory models!

I would find a new supplier!

The buyer pays for it regardless of whether it's paid by the buyer on an as-needed basis or if the charge is covered by the seller and built into the cost of every blank they sell. When making a purchase you need to compare more than just the line item cost.

James Hicks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The buyer pays for it regardless of whether it's
> paid by the buyer on an as-needed basis or if the
> charge is covered by the seller and built into the
> cost of every blank they sell. When making a
> purchase you need to compare more than just the
> line item cost.

James,

I don't think that I understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying that the buyer can't rely on the sellers advertised price plus a one time shipping and handling charge but must factor in all possible future expenses should the item be defective? I guess that you are implying that the buyer is responsible for the cost of fixing any junk that the seller sends to him.

Don

Hello Don.

I (think) he means the person that buy's the finished rod from you pay's for it in the long run.

James is that correct?

Tight Wraps.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.

Mr. Oneil,
When you said that your received a "defective mail order rod blank that has to be sent back for exchange", I am curious what the defect was and how you discovered it. Was there obvious shipping damage, did the blank break while finding the spline, etc..? This is an interesting post that has certainly caught my attention. Thanks.

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

Mr Staples,

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I received a defective rod blank, I didn't, a post on another sight brought the question to mind. I thought that there would be some interesting comments so I posted the question.

Don

>I don't think that I understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying that the buyer can't rely on the sellers
>advertised price plus a one time shipping and handling charge but must factor in all possible future expenses
>should the item be defective? I guess that you are implying that the buyer is responsible for the cost of fixing
>any junk that the seller sends to him.

Yes, the buyer should consider the vendors return policy, level of customer service, availability of product, and anything else that may influence your business relationship. No, I'm not saying "the buyer is responsible for the cost of fixing any junk that the seller sends to him"; just that you should be aware of their return policy and be prepared to abide by it. If you are a vendor you may want to estimate your cost of handling future return shipping costs and build it into the selling price; or, you may want to keep the price point down and have a policy where the customer pays the return shipping cost on the (hopefully) few occasions that it's required. If a vendor des not consider all his costs when setting his price point then that vendor is looking to be very surprised when he looks at his P&L.

Mr. O'neil,
I also think this post should generate some interesting dialogue regarding blank warranty. Such discussion certainly helps us serve customers better. We have some seen some pretty crazy stuff happen to blanks in transit, etc... Mr. Hicks' post above is correct about vendors taking all costs into account when pricing blanks. It can be a tricky thing to do in today's marketplace of cut-throat blank pricing. Its almost enough to make a blank vendor want to sell nothing but unpainted solid e-glass to avoid returns. Almost...

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

In the past I have received defective products from non-rodbuilding retailers and have never had to pay any return shipping cost. I have always been sent a return shipping label to send products back. Why should rod suppliers be any different? Whether we are building for ourselves or for profit, the cost of components is already high and there is not much room if extra cost are incurred to make profit. Retailers should stand by there product. It would be interesting to hear from some of the suppliers on this site as to what there policy is and why. Thus far I have never had to return a blank, but have had some issues with fluids leaking. In this case, Mudhole sent me replacements for everything that was damaged.

Every now and then a problem comes up, other than damaged in shipping.
Unless it is a return because the customer decided they did not want it, we credit return postage.
Each case is a one on one, but believe it or not, we sometimes send the wrong item.
Making that right is a very high priority for us.
I had a purchae on line from a major box store where we got a APC battery backup theat was dead on arrivel.
I called, got a return autorization, asked for a replacement unit and credit for my return shipping.
I got neither, they credited my card back the original purchase price and shipping at that time.
Never got any satisfaction on my return cost of shipping, and then had to order again somewhere else.
They closed their doors a few monthes later.

I understand those kinds of frustrations and we make every effort to smooth things out.

Best wishes,
Ron Schneider
Schneider's Rod Shop
Mountain Home, Arkansas
[www.schneidersrods.com]
mtnron40@yahoo.com
870-424-3381

Mr. Gay,
We did have an issue similar to the Mudhole issue you described a couple of years ago and made the exact same call in that situation. As far as our standard warranty policy goes, I am happy to disclose it here. The returning party (customer or end user) pays the return shipping, we pay the shipping on the replacement unit, if its indeed under warranty. It is rare for items to arrive "DOA" and be truly defective, but it does happen. These cases we handle one at a time as exceptions. Since we aren't retailing, we don't include return ship labels on product as we typically ship bulk orders to our re sellers. And honestly, the cost would be a factor to an extent that we would need to adjust pricing to do so. Companies like Amazon, Zappos, @#$%&, etc, have extremely high volumes with their carriers and receive tier discounts that our organization can't even fathom making return shipping less of a factor for them.

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

As James pointed out early in this thread ... you pay one way or another.

Let me give an example:
Vendor "A" sell his GHX blanks for $40 each and gladly pays return shipping.
Vendor "B" sells his PHX blanks for $35 each and does not pay return shipping.
Both "A" and "B" purchase their blanks from a manufacturer in China and pay $15 each for them, after import expenses.
Rodbuilder "C" purchases 20 blanks per year and experiences 1 defective blank each year that must be returned.
If he purchases from "A", his only expense is the blank (returns are included), total cost of $800.
If he purchases from "B", his expenses are blanks, material cost of $700 plus return shipping at $20, total cost of $720.

Guess what ... "B" is less expensive by 10%.

In your initial post, it was assumed that practices such as not paying return shipping were unfair and predatory. The fact is that "B" doesn't hide the "true cost" of doing business. Things aren't free, per se, as you have seen unfold in this example.

Jim Gamble Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As James pointed out early in this thread ... you
> pay one way or another.
>
> Let me give an example:
> Vendor "A" sell his GHX blanks for $40 each and
> gladly pays return shipping.
> Vendor "B" sells his PHX blanks for $35 each and
> does not pay return shipping.
> Both "A" and "B" purchase their blanks from a
> manufacturer in China and pay $15 each for them,
> after import expenses.
> Rodbuilder "C" purchases 20 blanks per year and
> experiences 1 defective blank each year that must
> be returned.
> If he purchases from "A", his only expense is the
> blank (returns are included), total cost of $800.
> If he purchases from "B", his expenses are blanks,
> material cost of $700 plus return shipping at $20,
> total cost of $720.
>
> Guess what ... "B" is less expensive by 10%.
>
> In your initial post, it was assumed that
> practices such as not paying return shipping were
> unfair and predatory. The fact is that "B"
> doesn't hide the "true cost" of doing business.
> Things aren't free, per se, as you have seen
> unfold in this example.


James,

In your example "A" is collecting return postage on every blank sends out. He won't stay in business very long when "B" is underselling him. "B" wouldn't have to charge for return shipping and anger his customers if he inspected his product before shipping.

I didn't imply that the shipper was being deceptive or predatory, just not checking to verify that he was selling/shipping goods as advertised. I assume that when I make a mail order purchase it is in pristine condition when it was shipped, if it isn't I don't think any of the cost of making it right should be born by me. If "A" & "B" checked the blanks before they shipped them consumer "C" wouldn't have a defective blank to send back.

Don

Don O'Neil Wrote:
> In your example "A" is collecting return postage
> on every blank sends out. He won't stay in
> business very long when "B" is underselling him.
> "B" wouldn't have to charge for return shipping
> and anger his customers if he inspected his
> product before shipping.
>
> I didn't imply that the shipper was being
> deceptive or predatory, just not checking to
> verify that he was selling/shipping goods as
> advertised. I assume that when I make a mail order
> purchase it is in pristine condition when it was
> shipped, if it isn't I don't think any of the cost
> of making it right should be born by me. If "A" &
> "B" checked the blanks before they shipped them
> consumer "C" wouldn't have a defective blank to
> send back.
>
> Don


In a perfect world with flawless execution, you would be correct. But things DO slip through even the best quality control available ... after all it is human OR designed by one. Again, the cost IS somewhere ... hidden or not.

> In your example "A" is collecting return postage on every blank sends out.

The vendor would estimate his cost of return shipping as a percentage of sales; example, for every 100 blanks shipped they may expect 5 to be returned for whatever reason... with an estimated return shipping of $20 per blank, 5 * $20 = $100 in total estimated return shipping costs... divide that by the 100 blanks shipped you get $1 per blank that the vendor would need to add to their sellnig price. So far so good; but guess what, the vendor finds out that by offering to pay return postage he gets a lot of folks returning perfectly good blanks (or purpously breaking them) just because they're not quite what they wanted and the vendor finds that they need to add an additional $1 per blank to cover their return shippnig costs... and it's not just the cost of shipping, there's a big cost involved in the vendor's internal processing of returns; receiving, inventory control, returns to their vendor, credit processing, etc. I know of a particular instance where a company calculated their cost to process a return as being nearly $20 per line item. These additional costs also need to be accounted for too. In the above vendor example, if their original base price already included expected cost of handling 5% returns then the incremental 5% (above the expected 5 per 100) adds an additional $100 to their costs and they need to raise their selling price by yet another $1 per blank. Their blanks now cost $3 more that the competitors that don't pay return postage. Loyal customers that appretiate the return policy will continue to pay the extra $3 but new customers will gravitate to the lower cost vendor and now you're getting into the "soft cost" of business policies; way beyond the scope of this venue.

The bottom line is that the buyers must cover all the vendors costs or the vendor goes out of business.

>"The bottom line is that the buyers must cover all the vendors costs or the vendor goes out of business."<

I agree. The buyer must cover the legitimate costs but not those that might happen because the vendor doesn't check his product prior to shipping.


If the vendor inspected the blank before he ships it there would never be a return because of a defect in the blank. If the return was because the purchaser changed his mind for any reason then I have no problem with the vendor charging a restocking fee and expecting that the return postage be paid by the customer. I do object to a vendor inflating his price to cover things that might happen.

Vendors add "Shipping and Handling" as well as insurance costs to the purchase after the sale is consummated. We, as customers, are paying the shipping to us, insurance against loss or breakage by the carrier, packing material and the vendors labor charge to pull and pack the items. I think that somewhere in all that "handling" the blank should be inspected for manufacturing defects and culled if it isn't right.

Don