What would you do, Part the Second...

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA's second "single copy + freight" purchase is a deliberate act by a toxic customer who was disgruntled & looking for trouble and/or Comic General fodder.

 

 

You are wrong.

 

My second purchase was a deliberate act by a frustrated customer to obtain what should have been sent in the first place.

 

And you are letting your PERSONAL opinion of me affect your reason.

 

You are now lying about me and and my motives because your bad logic was refuted.

 

This is called "bearing false witness", and it's one of the Big 10.

 

 

Sue him for libel, RMA, sue him for libel!

 

You're not helping.

 

[Shootydog]

This whole thread lacks self control.

 

Its really quite simple. The guidelines have been dictated by the seller. The buyer, though not getting exactly what they wanted, is really out just a small bit. I am not siding with the seller but in this case, were I the buyer, would simply bring my money to another sellers table.

 

And yes...a neg is in order.

[bababooey]

RMA's second "single copy + freight" purchase is a deliberate act by a toxic customer who was disgruntled & looking for trouble and/or Comic General fodder.

 

 

You are wrong.

 

My second purchase was a deliberate act by a frustrated customer to obtain what should have been sent in the first place.

 

And you are letting your PERSONAL opinion of me affect your reason.

 

You are now lying about me and and my motives because your bad logic was refuted.

 

This is called "bearing false witness", and it's one of the Big 10.

Nice of you to finally admit you had an agenda when setting up your 'sting' operation. The CG viewers thank you for your expense & efforts.

 

You can't have a good "relationship" with a customer who doesn't seek a positive reasonable resolution. Toxic customer, with those you can only have good 'transactions'.

 

[mikenyc]

I'm sure Conan, the person, is just fine, and anyone thinking that I have been going after him personally, that would be an erroneous conclusion.

 

You go after everybody personally, don't you know that?

 

For me, I'm having a devil of a time not taking someone in this thread off ignore. It's getting harder and harder to resist.

 

Mike has been, as per the usual, and despite his word that he would "ignore" me from now on, taking potshot after potshot.

 

He lacks the maturity to exercise self-control.

 

I have said numerous times throughout this thread that it sucks that they sent the wrong book. I started by saying I'm not attacking you. The fact that someone disagrees with you doesn't mean that it's personal.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

This whole thread lacks self control.

 

Its really quite simple. The guidelines have been dictated by the seller.

 

Except it's not. It's set by eBay.

 

The buyer, though not getting exactly what they wanted, is really out just a small bit. I am not siding with the seller but in this case, were I the buyer, would simply bring my money to another sellers table.

 

Already done.

 

And yes...a neg is in order.

 

I've been leaning towards a neutral but thanks for your input.

[Guest Grails]

I've had smooth transactions with them in the past but was not aware this was how they conducted business. As stated earlier, the dollar amount of the books is not the issue. Pose this question to any business in the United States:

"What do you do when a customer pays for a product that you have in stock and you send the wrong product?"

The common sense answer would be to send the correct order at the expense of the business.

I will no longer order from them. Yes, over a one dollar transaction. Wrong is wrong.

 

This is the same mentality that is behind the park dwellers movement. A dollar transaction is not equal to a $5,000 transaction, period. I know that in a Utopian world, a Kmart shopper would be treated the same as a Tiffany's shopper, but this is a place called reality.

 

Not all workers are created equal, not all salaries are created equal, and not all transactions are created equal. Why do you think that there is a level of service when shopping at one establishment vs. another? It's not elitism, it's the ability for the margins to support hiring employees that want to maintain that level of service. If Target compensated a customer, above making them whole, every time there was an issue, they would be out of business.

 

Your allowed to make the distinction. It's not a dirty or bad thing to admit. I'm sure someone purchasing a 7 series with all the bells and whistles is getting better treatment than me. I can accept it. Maybe I'm crazy?

 

You've missed it completely. So let me ask you directly.

What do you do when you send the wrong book to someone and discover you have the correct one? Really, its that simple.

 

They made it right. RMA is whole. Whether they should have went above and beyond, over a tiny transaction, is up for debate. It won't stop them from getting my continued business.

 

Let me ask you directly, do you feel that when a policy is spelled out, and a mistake is made, that it is a company's duty to go beyond making someone whole? Why can't everyone acknowledge that it very much has to do with the value of the transaction? Why brush over my complete argument and simply say I missed the point? I got your point loud and clear, it's my refusal to agree with it that is causing the confusion.

 

And to answer your question, I don't sell books, but if I sold a few a month, and still screwed it up, then there's something wrong with me. Now, if I was selling hundreds of thousands of books, out of an inventory of millions, and a mistake was made, I would make the customer whole.

 

You still haven't answered my question. "I would make the customer whole?" There has been enough canned responses here today. It was a simple question. You sell me a book and ship the wrong one to me. How are you going to make me whole? Are you going to send me the correct book? Are you going to charge me for your error?

 

What is canned about my response? RMA used a portion of his $175,000 comic book budget and spent it on a transaction. A wrong book was shipped and a refund issued. RMA now has his comics + his money. That means he is whole. I believe you understand the concept fully.

 

In your equation you pay me x for book y. We have a contract. I supply book z in error. I have breached our contract. You return book z and I return your x. Done, in my thread I clearly state that I may ship the wrong book and if I do I'll refund your money.You place me on ignore, which will probably occur after our exchange, and you start a thread in a public forum about how naughty I am.

 

If you want me to say I would send the book, to validate your argument I can. I would send the book. Care to respond to anything I posed, or are you not a fan of the reach around. Selfish lovers are becoming an epidemic in CG.

 

I wasn't dismissing anything you have said previously. I was just waiting for a simple yes or no answer to my question first which you haven't really answered. I'll ask the same question again. After sending me the wrong book, would you send me the correct book at your expense? Yes or no?

 

I'll still expect a slap and tickle, but your flirting has enticed me just enough.

 

To answer your question, personally I would. There are numerous times on these boards, that I have sent a follow up payment, after seeing what "free shipping" cost the seller. Please read on.

 

But, nothing is cut and dry. The policies implemented by someone running a booth at a flea market, can't just be juxtaposed on any entity. That is the reality of running a business. There were stated policies that deal with pulling the wrong book and MCS is choosing to adhere to them.

 

Much like returning a pair of jeans at Bloomingdales after the thirty day return policy. They are choosing to not follow the stated policy at their discretion, it isn't a privilege as a consumer to have anything, whenever you want. Yes it sucks that he didn't get the right book. It happens, every customer was forewarned of its possibility. He chose to reorder the proper book and had to pay shipping again.

 

 

Thank you, that's all I wanted. An honest simple answer on what you would do. You wouldn't have to do it if your policy stated otherwise but it would be the right thing to do and speaks of your character.

As far as your initial response to me, I agreed with most of what you wrote. Many people don't treat the lower value transactions the same as the high ones. I do. I used to sell here on the boards and on ebay a few years ago and I afforded each person the same care and respect whether it was ten dollars or a thousand. If I was selling thousands of books, my ideal wouldn't change.

 

What this came down to was a simple error that could have been fixed simply. You send someone the wrong book, you send them the correct one on your dime. Even the largest of businesses realize this. I received the wrong blu-ray disc from Amazon at the beginning of the year. They sent me the correct movie with free shipping. And I believe that everyone here knows that its just the right thing to do.

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA's second "single copy + freight" purchase is a deliberate act by a toxic customer who was disgruntled & looking for trouble and/or Comic General fodder.

 

 

You are wrong.

 

My second purchase was a deliberate act by a frustrated customer to obtain what should have been sent in the first place.

 

And you are letting your PERSONAL opinion of me affect your reason.

 

You are now lying about me and and my motives because your bad logic was refuted.

 

This is called "bearing false witness", and it's one of the Big 10.

Nice of you to finally admit you had an agenda when setting up your 'sting' operation.

 

Of course I had an agenda: I wanted the book. Is that a nefarious agenda?

 

However, a "sting" operation, it was not.

 

The CG viewers thank you for your expense & efforts.

 

You're Comics General's spokesman...? When was the election?

 

You can't have a good "relationship" with a customer who doesn't seek a positive reasonable resolution. Toxic customer, with those you can only have good 'transactions'.

 

 

I agree. Good thing I'm not one of those. Are you?

[bababooey]

 

Transaction #1 ends after the credit is accepted "I was ok with the refund"

 

 

But then he found out that it wasn't just an error (book already sold, website not updated) where the book no longer was available for purchase. It was still available for purchase and MCS couldn't be bothered to go track it down and get it to him, as they should have.

Aggravating, annoying? Yes.

 

His discovery that the book was on hand took place after the transaction had been completed, sure they could have gone the extra mile for him sent it with no freight charge but they weren't technically wrong in following their policy.

 

Yes, they were technically wrong...according to eBay policy, which trumps theirs when it is in conflict.

 

Again, I think the 'customer relationship' is a two way street - sellers or buyers can be wrongheaded in their thinking - a buyer can choose to spend elsewhere, a seller needs to guard against being taken advantage of.

 

Your PERSONAL opinion of me clouds your judgement.

I don't have a personal opinion of you. Dork.

 

I like your contributions to the forum.

I don't even take offense when you call me names, I realize it is because you lack the ability to respond with facts and without emotion getting the better of you.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I'm sure Conan, the person, is just fine, and anyone thinking that I have been going after him personally, that would be an erroneous conclusion.

 

You go after everybody personally, don't you know that?

 

For me, I'm having a devil of a time not taking someone in this thread off ignore. It's getting harder and harder to resist.

 

Mike has been, as per the usual, and despite his word that he would "ignore" me from now on, taking potshot after potshot.

 

He lacks the maturity to exercise self-control.

 

I have said numerous times throughout this thread that it sucks that they sent the wrong book. I started by saying I'm not attacking you. The fact that someone disagrees with you doesn't mean that it's personal.

 

 

No one said it did.

 

What makes it personal are potshots like this:

 

RMA used a portion of his $175,000 comic book budget and spent it on a transaction."

 

. Just whining for the sake if you ask me.

 

Stop whining, stage a coup, and change your successful company's policies, every time someone is unhappy!

 

..are.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Transaction #1 ends after the credit is accepted "I was ok with the refund"

 

 

But then he found out that it wasn't just an error (book already sold, website not updated) where the book no longer was available for purchase. It was still available for purchase and MCS couldn't be bothered to go track it down and get it to him, as they should have.

Aggravating, annoying? Yes.

 

His discovery that the book was on hand took place after the transaction had been completed, sure they could have gone the extra mile for him sent it with no freight charge but they weren't technically wrong in following their policy.

 

Yes, they were technically wrong...according to eBay policy, which trumps theirs when it is in conflict.

 

Again, I think the 'customer relationship' is a two way street - sellers or buyers can be wrongheaded in their thinking - a buyer can choose to spend elsewhere, a seller needs to guard against being taken advantage of.

 

Your PERSONAL opinion of me clouds your judgement.

I don't have a personal opinion of you. Dork.

 

Everyone has a personal opinion of everyone they interact with.

 

It's called human nature.

 

And when you lie about my motives, and characterize me as something I am not, the conclusion is beyond obvious.

 

I like your contributions to the forum.

I don't even take offense when you call me names, I realize it is because you lack the ability to respond with facts and without emotion getting the better of you.

 

 

You're clearly unaware of my fondness for creative name convolutions. Ask Jeffro if he still offers the course online. I took it, and was very pleased with my results.

 

Nice try, but fail. Again.

[mikenyc]

I've had smooth transactions with them in the past but was not aware this was how they conducted business. As stated earlier, the dollar amount of the books is not the issue. Pose this question to any business in the United States:

"What do you do when a customer pays for a product that you have in stock and you send the wrong product?"

The common sense answer would be to send the correct order at the expense of the business.

I will no longer order from them. Yes, over a one dollar transaction. Wrong is wrong.

 

This is the same mentality that is behind the park dwellers movement. A dollar transaction is not equal to a $5,000 transaction, period. I know that in a Utopian world, a Kmart shopper would be treated the same as a Tiffany's shopper, but this is a place called reality.

 

Not all workers are created equal, not all salaries are created equal, and not all transactions are created equal. Why do you think that there is a level of service when shopping at one establishment vs. another? It's not elitism, it's the ability for the margins to support hiring employees that want to maintain that level of service. If Target compensated a customer, above making them whole, every time there was an issue, they would be out of business.

 

Your allowed to make the distinction. It's not a dirty or bad thing to admit. I'm sure someone purchasing a 7 series with all the bells and whistles is getting better treatment than me. I can accept it. Maybe I'm crazy?

 

You've missed it completely. So let me ask you directly.

What do you do when you send the wrong book to someone and discover you have the correct one? Really, its that simple.

 

They made it right. RMA is whole. Whether they should have went above and beyond, over a tiny transaction, is up for debate. It won't stop them from getting my continued business.

 

Let me ask you directly, do you feel that when a policy is spelled out, and a mistake is made, that it is a company's duty to go beyond making someone whole? Why can't everyone acknowledge that it very much has to do with the value of the transaction? Why brush over my complete argument and simply say I missed the point? I got your point loud and clear, it's my refusal to agree with it that is causing the confusion.

 

And to answer your question, I don't sell books, but if I sold a few a month, and still screwed it up, then there's something wrong with me. Now, if I was selling hundreds of thousands of books, out of an inventory of millions, and a mistake was made, I would make the customer whole.

 

You still haven't answered my question. "I would make the customer whole?" There has been enough canned responses here today. It was a simple question. You sell me a book and ship the wrong one to me. How are you going to make me whole? Are you going to send me the correct book? Are you going to charge me for your error?

 

What is canned about my response? RMA used a portion of his $175,000 comic book budget and spent it on a transaction. A wrong book was shipped and a refund issued. RMA now has his comics + his money. That means he is whole. I believe you understand the concept fully.

 

In your equation you pay me x for book y. We have a contract. I supply book z in error. I have breached our contract. You return book z and I return your x. Done, in my thread I clearly state that I may ship the wrong book and if I do I'll refund your money.You place me on ignore, which will probably occur after our exchange, and you start a thread in a public forum about how naughty I am.

 

If you want me to say I would send the book, to validate your argument I can. I would send the book. Care to respond to anything I posed, or are you not a fan of the reach around. Selfish lovers are becoming an epidemic in CG.

 

I wasn't dismissing anything you have said previously. I was just waiting for a simple yes or no answer to my question first which you haven't really answered. I'll ask the same question again. After sending me the wrong book, would you send me the correct book at your expense? Yes or no?

 

I'll still expect a slap and tickle, but your flirting has enticed me just enough.

 

To answer your question, personally I would. There are numerous times on these boards, that I have sent a follow up payment, after seeing what "free shipping" cost the seller. Please read on.

 

But, nothing is cut and dry. The policies implemented by someone running a booth at a flea market, can't just be juxtaposed on any entity. That is the reality of running a business. There were stated policies that deal with pulling the wrong book and MCS is choosing to adhere to them.

 

Much like returning a pair of jeans at Bloomingdales after the thirty day return policy. They are choosing to not follow the stated policy at their discretion, it isn't a privilege as a consumer to have anything, whenever you want. Yes it sucks that he didn't get the right book. It happens, every customer was forewarned of its possibility. He chose to reorder the proper book and had to pay shipping again.

 

 

Thank you, that's all I wanted. An honest simple answer on what you would do. You wouldn't have to do it if your policy stated otherwise but it would be the right thing to do and speaks of your character.

As far as your initial response to me, I agreed with most of what you wrote. Many people don't treat the lower value transactions the same as the high ones. I do. I used to sell here on the boards and on ebay a few years ago and I afforded each person the same care and respect whether it was ten dollars or a thousand. If I was selling thousands of books, my ideal wouldn't change.

 

What this came down to was a simple error that could have been fixed simply. You send someone the wrong book, you send them the correct one on your dime. Even the largest of businesses realize this. I received the wrong blu-ray disc from Amazon at the beginning of the year. They sent me the correct movie with free shipping. And I believe that everyone here knows that its just the right thing to do.

 

I ordered my father a Criterion collection DVD set for around $100 bucks from Amazon. It never came. I called them and they sent one out, overnight, and said if the original one ever shows up send it back. Amazing. I've had superb customer service experiences that truly make me a lifelong customer.

 

Should MCS keep customers happy, yes. If they had the book, it would have been easier to just send it out. I see that side as well. If it was a high dollar book would they have acted the same, probably not. Is that horrible, maybe, but I'm ok with it.

[cd4ever]

All I know is this: For some reason I want a copy of Man Of Steel 18 5th printing so badly I can taste it. And I don't even collect that crappass book!!

 

I am willing to go as high as $1.25 for a copy.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

To those concerned about the "dollar amount"...as Charlie said, the dollar amount is irrelevant..the lost future business, by whomever, as a result of this transaction is far outweighed by the amount at issue here, by magnitudes.

 

Will Lonestar survive? Of that I have no doubt.

 

You cannot put a price on customer relations.

[comix4fun]

I've had smooth transactions with them in the past but was not aware this was how they conducted business. As stated earlier, the dollar amount of the books is not the issue. Pose this question to any business in the United States:

"What do you do when a customer pays for a product that you have in stock and you send the wrong product?"

The common sense answer would be to send the correct order at the expense of the business.

I will no longer order from them. Yes, over a one dollar transaction. Wrong is wrong.

 

This is the same mentality that is behind the park dwellers movement. A dollar transaction is not equal to a $5,000 transaction, period. I know that in a Utopian world, a Kmart shopper would be treated the same as a Tiffany's shopper, but this is a place called reality.

 

Not all workers are created equal, not all salaries are created equal, and not all transactions are created equal. Why do you think that there is a level of service when shopping at one establishment vs. another? It's not elitism, it's the ability for the margins to support hiring employees that want to maintain that level of service. If Target compensated a customer, above making them whole, every time there was an issue, they would be out of business.

 

Your allowed to make the distinction. It's not a dirty or bad thing to admit. I'm sure someone purchasing a 7 series with all the bells and whistles is getting better treatment than me. I can accept it. Maybe I'm crazy?

 

You've missed it completely. So let me ask you directly.

What do you do when you send the wrong book to someone and discover you have the correct one? Really, its that simple.

 

They made it right. RMA is whole. Whether they should have went above and beyond, over a tiny transaction, is up for debate. It won't stop them from getting my continued business.

 

Let me ask you directly, do you feel that when a policy is spelled out, and a mistake is made, that it is a company's duty to go beyond making someone whole? Why can't everyone acknowledge that it very much has to do with the value of the transaction? Why brush over my complete argument and simply say I missed the point? I got your point loud and clear, it's my refusal to agree with it that is causing the confusion.

 

And to answer your question, I don't sell books, but if I sold a few a month, and still screwed it up, then there's something wrong with me. Now, if I was selling hundreds of thousands of books, out of an inventory of millions, and a mistake was made, I would make the customer whole.

 

If the error is entirely yours, and you want to stay in business, you find out what the customer wants to make them happy, if it's reasonable (like a $1.50 shipping cost to send the right book) then you do what makes the customer's life easier and not what makes the seller's life easier.

 

If a customer wants a specific item, and doesn't get the specific item, even if they get a refund they aren't "whole" they aren't economically damaged but they are dissatisfied, which is just as bad if your goal is customer retention.

 

To the individual customer it doesn't matter how great your track record is, how 99.9999999999% of other customers are happy. THEIR transaction got screwed. At that point you have a choice. You can make that customer happy, create good will at a very low cost, and perhaps gain a customer for the future...OR...You can stone wall do the easiest thing for yourself and tell the customer "shrug, palms up, oh well that's it..didn't you read the policy?"

 

The company's duty is to stay in business. When you have a choice between a small shipping cost loss and a happy customer or saving the buck-fitty and creating an angry, vocal, unhappy ex-customer, and you choose the latter, then you are failing at your primary duty and goal, regardless of shifting return policy.

[mikenyc]

I'm sure Conan, the person, is just fine, and anyone thinking that I have been going after him personally, that would be an erroneous conclusion.

 

You go after everybody personally, don't you know that?

 

For me, I'm having a devil of a time not taking someone in this thread off ignore. It's getting harder and harder to resist.

 

Mike has been, as per the usual, and despite his word that he would "ignore" me from now on, taking potshot after potshot.

 

He lacks the maturity to exercise self-control.

 

I have said numerous times throughout this thread that it sucks that they sent the wrong book. I started by saying I'm not attacking you. The fact that someone disagrees with you doesn't mean that it's personal.

 

 

No one said it did.

 

What makes it personal are potshots like this:

 

RMA used a portion of his $175,000 comic book budget and spent it on a transaction."

 

. Just whining for the sake if you ask me.

 

Stop whining, stage a coup, and change your successful company's policies, every time someone is unhappy!

 

..are.

 

The $175,000 comment was dooshy, sorry, it was.

 

The whining comment is universally said if a thread like this is started. I added the emoticon to show I wasn't being venomous.

 

The last comment was a stab at Conan, referring to his father, using your public situation to goad him.

[Chespirito]

Why does my burn when I urinate?

 

I have stayed up for days thinking about your problem. I have thoroughly analyzed your circumstances and the predicament seems to point out only one possible answer, with it's own set of unique factors that, not only make sense but also seem to indicate that aside from being in discomfort, you also have one choice in life, as we all do (really). If by rationalization, I am correct, I have come up with one true answer... I have entirely too much time in my hands and my thoughts are always incoherent. Now, where did I leave my scarf?

Don't worry guys! I found it, it was under my table

 

Everyone is too busy having a contest right now. Give it about another five pages and I will join you in your incoherent time wasting rage.

Oh my goodness!! Seriously?!!!.. I can't believe its not butter!!!

[Chespirito]

All I know is this: For some reason I want a copy of Man Of Steel 18 5th printing so badly I can taste it. And I don't even collect that crappass book!!

 

I am willing to go as high as $1.25 for a copy.

 

Wait.... what exactly are you tasting?

[Whizzer]

How am I supposed to read the entire CGC chat boards from top to bottom, like I do every day if you all keep posting in this thread every five seconds?

 

I can't keep up with this thread at the moment, let alone the whole board.

 

Have some consideration for my ocd for s sake

[cd4ever]

All I know is this: For some reason I want a copy of Man Of Steel 18 5th printing so badly I can taste it. And I don't even collect that crappass book!!

 

I am willing to go as high as $1.25 for a copy.

 

Wait.... what exactly are you tasting?

A man of steel, of course.

I was very clear, I thought.

[comix4fun]

This seems so simple:

 

1) RMA should have gotten the right book the first time

 

2) RMA shouldn't have had to pay shipping twice.

 

3) LoneStar is shooting themselves in the foot to make a point.

 

4) RMA is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

At the end of the day, the reality is, most people wouldn't make a huge deal out of this issue and go on and on and on about this. But, the reality is, RMA isn't wrong here.

 

LoneStar is in the wrong here and frankly, and, as comix4fun pointed out, handling things pretty stupidly with poor PR 101.

 

I am no champion of RMA nor his long winded blatherings, but if you look at it objectively, he's in the right here.

 

Why do so many people...including so-called "professionals" like Foolkiller...have to take personal potshots at others?

 

I haven't taken any personal potshots at anyone.

 

So why is it IMPOSSIBLE for some of you not to...?

 

Just vicious, vicious people.

 

 

I don't agree with taking pot shots, but I think Brian was mentioning what he did to point out that he wasn't a buddy of yours and taking your side because of it. I think he said what he said to demonstrate that in spite of him not being a buddy of yours he sees the merit of your beef and that you are right.

 

It makes his statement far stronger in that it is adverse to his lack of love for your posting style.

 

Just putting it out there.