Unshopping

[PinkDalek]

You see, it's a little bit different for us chaps. ...

For those who can access Pauylypilot's Small Cap Value Reports at Stockopedia, there's an interesting report today, as linked below, regarding Sosandar (LON:SOS) an eCommerce fashion company :

https://www.stockopedia.com/content/sma ... tc-433888/

The section on Returns rate includes:

"Sosandar's 52% returns rate in H1 did raise some eyebrows, as being rather high. … Industry average of 40% includes menswear, which is lower than womenswear. As Sosandar only sells womenswear, then they just have to live with a higher returns rate ... returns come in & are usually dispatched back out again to a new customer, immediately, if in as-new condition, which they nearly all are (more mature, affluent customers don't tend to abuse the returns policy)"

Physical shop retailers are said to have a returns rate of circa 5%.

[bungeejumper]

Physical shop retailers are said to have a returns rate of circa 5%.

I've heard that in the UK it's 9% for physical fashion shops, compared with 30% for online. But that was two years ago, and it will presumably have got worse. It's estimated that a fashion item that gets returned online will need to be processed by 13 people, compared with just three who were required to sell it.

Mind you, this is nothing compared with Germany, where online return ratios for fashion are said to be nudging 70%. Every time a German retailer cuts the price of something, there'll be people who've already bought it at a higher price who'll now be sending it back ("unsuitable", "wrong size"), so that they can then buy the exact same item at the reduced price.

Free carriage on returns is what makes this monster so attractive to consumers. And it's fundamentally dishonest. But what can the retailers do about it?

BJ

[EssDeeAitch]

Unshopping - yes, I know about this.

Someone I know has just ordered two different sizes of the same article and will return the one that doesn't fit. Is that morally reprehensible? The problem being that a previous purchase surprised somewhat in it's voluminous generosity but the purchaser kept it nonetheless. To avoid a further disappointment, this course of action is necessary ( I am led to believe).

[bungeejumper]

Someone I know has just ordered two different sizes of the same article and will return the one that doesn't fit. Is that morally reprehensible? The problem being that a previous purchase surprised somewhat in it's voluminous generosity but the purchaser kept it nonetheless. To avoid a further disappointment, this course of action is necessary ( I am led to believe).

A strong argument, and thanks. Yes, if in doubt about sizes, there's definitely a case for that.

But the situation we've seen described here is one where people are buying online stuff willy-nilly (and, you might say, frivolously), in the planned expectation that most of it will be tipped straight back onto the vendor as 'used goods' - and sometimes worn outside the home and photographed for social media. That's what I think is dishonest. I also wonder where it leaves the good old contract of sale?

I have only once returned an online item, and that was where I had erroneously bought a reel of plastic hose in the wrong size. I apologised profusely to the vendor. It seemed like the right thing to do.

BJ

[swill453]

But the situation we've seen described here is one where people are buying online stuff willy-nilly (and, you might say, frivolously), in the planned expectation that most of it will be tipped straight back onto the vendor as 'used goods' - and sometimes worn outside the home and photographed for social media. That's what I think is dishonest.

I really doubt if that's a major part of it.

I'd imagine a large number of returns are where multiple sizes and/or colours are bought, and after trying them on maybe one is kept and the rest are returned straight away. And they'll be put straight back into new stock.

It's really the price that online retailers have to pay, the other side of the equation of not having to support retail premises.

It's also exactly why the Consumer Contracts Regulations (2013) allow buyers to return goods - because they haven't had the opportunity to see, touch and try on before purchase.

Scott.

[Hypster]

Unshopping - yes, I know about this.

Someone I know has just ordered two different sizes of the same article and will return the one that doesn't fit. Is that morally reprehensible? The problem being that a previous purchase surprised somewhat in it's voluminous generosity but the purchaser kept it nonetheless. To avoid a further disappointment, this course of action is necessary ( I am led to believe).

From what I've learned when I've heard the younger generation discussing this, is that in the online shopping model has moved the store's changing room to the home. Someone wants to buy one dress, but they'll order six. They'll choose three different styles, say, and maybe each in a size 8 and a size 10. They try them on at home, see how they look and feel, and then return the five that don't make the grade.

In the olden days, you'd take six garments to the changing room in store and on the way out an assistant would take the ones you don't want and put them on a separate rail for returning to the shop floor later.

I think the online-only retailers are now offering schemes like VIP status and discounts - offered to those customers who maintain their return rate below a particular level.

[Howyoudoin]

I bought something online from the shop 'Joules' in early December, which needed to go back.

I went to their bricks and mortar shop in Waterloo station and was served by a girl who I estimate was between 18 and 25.

Ring in her nose. Not through the septum but just one nostril. You just know that things are not going to go well before you even start.

Me: 'Hello. I have this coat that i'd like to return please.'

Girl: 'OK, receipt please'

Me: 'I didn't buy it here, I bought it online, here is the order confirmation.'

Girl: 'I can't refund your money without a receipt, i'm sorry.'

Me: 'You can see that this coat is from 'Joules', can't you? Look at the label. I couldn't have bought it from anywhere else.'

Girl: 'I'm sorry, there's nothing I can do'

Me: 'Sigh. Ok thanks'


I get home and phone customer services and they confirm that I should be able to get a refund in any branch without a receipt, as long as I have an email order number, which I had.

I do understand why the high street is struggling but it's not helped by staff who don't know what they are doing or what advice they are dishing out.

/rant over

HYD

[melonfool]

You see, it's a little bit different for us chaps. ...

For those who can access Pauylypilot's Small Cap Value Reports at Stockopedia, there's an interesting report today, as linked below, regarding Sosandar (LON:SOS) an eCommerce fashion company :

https://www.stockopedia.com/content/sma ... tc-433888/

The section on Returns rate includes:

"Sosandar's 52% returns rate in H1 did raise some eyebrows, as being rather high. … Industry average of 40% includes menswear, which is lower than womenswear. As Sosandar only sells womenswear, then they just have to live with a higher returns rate ... returns come in & are usually dispatched back out again to a new customer, immediately, if in as-new condition, which they nearly all are (more mature, affluent customers don't tend to abuse the returns policy)"

Physical shop retailers are said to have a returns rate of circa 5%.

I bought three dresses from Sosandar last year, I sent all three back, they were rags. These 'more affluent' customers (odd, as most of Sosandar's advertising is on Facebook, not The Lady!) must have money to waste as it wasn't even cheap rags!

There is no way I'd be investing in them.

Mel

[melonfool]

Free carriage on returns is what makes this monster so attractive to consumers. And it's fundamentally dishonest. But what can the retailers do about it?

BJ

But they don't always have free returns? The law only says you have to provide a free return if the whole order is returned.

'Good' retailers do, but of course one only shops at good retailers in the first place!

Mel

[melonfool]

But the situation we've seen described here is one where people are buying online stuff willy-nilly (and, you might say, frivolously), in the planned expectation that most of it will be tipped straight back onto the vendor as 'used goods' - and sometimes worn outside the home and photographed for social media. That's what I think is dishonest. I also wonder where it leaves the good old contract of sale?

BJ

Described here, yes, but no evidence of that has been presented. I have certainly never done it. I suspect where this does happen it's a very very small % of sales and returns.

Mel