Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Slammed for Destroying As-New and Returned Goods (fortune.com)

Posted by msmash on from the stranger-things dept.

Amazon is destroying "massive amounts" of as-new and returned items, raising the ire of the German government and environmental campaigners, local media reported. Fortune: 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."

15 of 209 comments (clear)

  1. It's about cost... by MikeDataLink · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I sell some products on Amazon. In many cases (especially electronics) Amazon will not/can not determine if the product is actually good or bad (ex: a consumer firewall that customer claims is not stable or reboots). It's most likely cheaper to have Amazon destroy it than to pay to ship it back, pay an employee to test it and repackage it, list it on feeBay as used/open box to resell it, and pay to ship it yet again (if its even good).

    Mike

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    1. Re:It's about cost... by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does it have to be destroyed on the off-chance?

      There's plenty of people out there who'd take that risk if they could pay less than full price.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:It's about cost... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's plenty of people out there who'd say they'd take the risk for a lower price, but would then turn around and sue you if it turned out bad. They'd probably win, too, no matter what they signed; there are consumer rights you can't sign away. So Amazon can't resell this junk.

    3. Re:It's about cost... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's plenty of people out there who'd take that risk if they could pay less than full price.

      I think this is precisely the point. After accounting for risks, the business can't sell it for less than full price.

      Even if the business sells it AS-IS there is still the issue of having your name/brand on it.
      When some idiot buys AS-IS because it's cheaper, he'll still go on social media to complain about it.
      When the business says, sorry, but you bought it AS-IS, social media will still skewer the brand of the "heartless business" to shit.

      And for what purpose? Barely breaking even on shit merchandise?
      I don't think any business would sign up for that.

      Basically, if there is a law, Amazon is going to ship all the stuff to a huge flea market.
      There it will sit until the folks there figure out what the businesses already did:
      This stuff isn't worth crap, time to pitch it.

      Next, a law on disposal of flea market goods.

    4. Re:It's about cost... by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No you want to dictate to them how they dispose of their property. You're a totalitarian a-hole just admit it.

      Amazon IS accepting the consequences of their model. They accept most returns from their customers no questions asked. They eat the cost of the returned merchandise. Once they accept the return its their property again! They can do whatever they want with it! That is the way it should be!

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:It's about cost... by orlanz · · Score: 3, Informative

      They would actually have to pay equal or more than full price. The logistics and stocking of these types of items is high because of the rarity and high defect rate. This is why non-profits and volunteers usually soak up the middle costs in getting used items to that low cost sector. However, unlike regular retail, there is no steady supply of the items, its a hit or miss. So the supply chains to move this stuff needs to be recreated over and over again which adds to the high cost.

      I have seen two local businesses that did just this, go out of business due to the overhead involved. They rented cheap space and basically got used/opened/defective merchandise from local big stores. Think perfect sofas with a broken foot or unopened laundry detergent with a ripped label. They got the stuff for like 90% off. They did their own transport. And for some stuff, they couldn't keep them on the shelves. But there was much they had to pay for disposal because it wouldn't sell and just took up space (again, no volume in disposal). So they had to be careful of what they took on and customers wouldn't find the same bargain every visit. The overhead involved in each specific item, just wasn't worth it.

    6. Re:It's about cost... by XXongo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you read the second of the links on the German language website (which you have to click through to get to-- should have been linked here but it wasn't), it makes exactly these points: the "Scandal" is mostly invented; Amazon doesn't destroy stuff it doesn't have to, and they go to some amount of effort to sell at lower cost, or donate, stuff that is returned but can't be resold "as new". https://www.wortfilter.de/wp/h... (translate: https://translate.google.com/t... )

    7. Re:It's about cost... by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Interestingly I don't give a flying fuck about your personal health - I value my freedom and I want to protect the freedom of my children etc.

      I am not trying to destroy the planet. I am not suggesting Amazon should just be able to dump about PCBs and lead batteries in the local wilderness area or something. I am saying they have basic rights to what they want with stuff that belongs to them. If you care so much go live in mud hut and eat only raw vegetation foraged etc and leave the rest of us alone.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    8. Re:It's about cost... by hey! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I once volunteered for a group which tidied up and fixed used furniture and housewares and provided them to poor families.

      The economics of that was interesting. I once fixed an old Singer sewing machine that had frozen up because the old oil had congealed. Now if you paid me what my time was worth as an engineer that'd make no sense: you could buy a new one for that. But in fact I wasn't paid in money. The next week a family came in and the mom knew how to sew. When I loaded the sewing machine on the van I had the satisfaction of seeing something I'd fixed with my own hands go where it would mean clothes for the kids.

      Sometimes we got antiques or other pieces that were valuable. These went to auctions and the proceeds bought re-manufactured mattresses. Other times we got stuff that was just trash; this went into the dumpster, or if it were metal to a scrap dealer with the pennies earned going into the mattress kitty.

      I suspect the same kind of charitable sweat-equity economics could be applied to a lot of the things being destroyed by Amazon. They could go to community volunteer groups and diverted to local causes where they would do good without affecting the primary market for those goods.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  2. Not new.. by sqorbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is not new, companies have been doing this for a long time. Companies now are probably destroying items daily. Amazon just happens to be big enough to get caught. Not that we should be defending Amazon or this practice but it's always easier to blame large companies.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
    1. Re:Not new.. by Scarred+Intellect · · Score: 4, Informative

      This.

      I spent a summer working in Office Depot's Returns Consolidation Center in Auburn, WA. We accepted returns from pretty much every Office Depot west of the Mississippi River. And Chicago. At times, I'd receive bubble wrap, or pallet wrap, or boxes...I could use all of these, especially the boxes for repack...but no. They have to get destroyed. They were brand new, unopened (or still folded, for the boxes) and immediately useful to us. But bureaucratic paperwork says it needs to be destroyed, so out the went.

      The amount of HP ink cartridges I received still baffles me. And whoever packed those water coolers for return that still had water in them, may your ancestors forever be cursed to torment in hell!

  3. Re:Losing the right of abuse by mi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It will be limited to those "engaged in economic activity" — like GDPR and the entire "right to be forgotten" concept. There will be people welcome this intervention and lamenting, once again, "why the US can't be more like Europe".

    Insert the cautionary tale beginning with the "when they came for corporations I did not object, because I do not have a corporation" here...

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  4. Something similar happened to me by timholman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I ordered an external battery pack for a UPS from Amazon several months back. When it arrived and I unpacked it, the case was visibly bulging on the top. Not wanting to risk plugging it in, I contacted Amazon for a return. Instead, they refunded my money on the spot and told me to take it to the nearest recycling center.

    I could understand Amazon's reasoning. Why risk shipping a possibly defective battery that might pose a fire hazard? And for what I paid for it, it was hardly worth trying to repair or refurbish.

    From Amazon's point of view, if it's cheaper to dispose of the goods rather than repair or refurbish them, then that's the smart move. They can't even donate them, because what happens if a lawyer sues because someone was injured by a donated item that Amazon knew was defective? The much safer route, economically and legally, is simply to destroy the returned items. It's part of the cost of doing business at their scale.

  5. Liar by DogDude · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Too bad the Germans didn't get so incensed when - every single one - of their automotive companies lied about diesel emissions and wrote software specifically to fool testing....

    You're a liar. "The Germans" certainly did "get so incensed". They sent people to prison over it.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  6. Re:Amazon gave me a $175 thing once... by jittles · · Score: 4, Funny

    A few years back I ordered something small that cost $12 or so. I think it was some kind of Park bicycle wrench. What they sent me was this: https://www.amazon.com/YELLOW-... An air-conditioning test and charging manifold, that was priced $175 at the time. I got on the website and requested a return and explained what happened, and then for the next few days started getting two different sets of messages. One set was the usual automated set that said I had to return the item by a certain number of days or I would get charged for it. The other set was real people responding, telling me that I wouldn't get charged for it and that I didn't need to return the item and that I could dispose of it as I pleased. When I asked why they didn't want it returned, the real person said that some items are hazardous enough that if they make a mistake and send one out, they will not accept if back for any reason. I said that I had only opened the shipping box and not the sealed item box itself, and he said that didn't matter. I could keep it since they would just destroy it if it was returned, and the company didn't want to pay the return shipping cost just to destroy it. I never got charged for it either. I gave it to my AC repair guy, since AC maintenance is not a hobby of mine and it's not good for much else. Ever since then I have wondered however,,,, what is the most-expensive thing that Amazon has given away just because they shipped the totally-wrong item? I don't know how happy they'd be to talk about that, but it would be an interesting read...

    I bought a $400 android tablet from Amazon (a few years ago). They shipped it LaserShip and the courier tried to steal the package. I called LaserShip after they claimed it was delivered and video surveillance showed it was not. Guy tried to weasel out and make excuses. Eventually admitted that the courier had opened the package and the tablet box. I told them to return it to Amazon. I complained to Amazon and they gave me an instant refund. LaserShip then threw the box on my front porch and tried to claim it hadn’t been stolen - open boxes and everything. Video surveillance showed he literally threw it there from the street trying to stay of-frame in the camera. I actually found it on my porch and told Amazon about it. They told me they would not be able to keep it after it had been stolen by LaserShip. They told me I could do whatever I wanted with it and I still got my money. Still have that tablet to this day.