2. analog
  3. 125746-1640

Who's absorbing the cost?

The other day I purchased a couple of albums from HMV.

Got them home and discovered that one album (with two discs) was damaged

The damagewas to both discs and looked identical, it was though they had been jammed into a thin slot and had pressure applied to actally bend them.

I returned them to the same HMV store only to be told that I could either
  • Get a gift certificate
  • Get an in store credit
  • Exchange for another album of equal or greater value
  • BUT Refunding my money was against corporate policy
So I contacted HMV and got the same reply.

They also said they had no option because the Record companies refuse to take back damaged goods

However, most other stores I deal with do offer refunds on damaged albums.

My point to HMV - even if I exchanged the album they would still be left with an album they could not sell and would have to write off. So they could actually give me a refund and glean a lot of customer goodwill, but instead chose to alienate me.

Sometimes corporations cannot see the wood for the bottom line.

So who does absorb the cost if not the record company 
  1. The distributor
  2. The retailer
  3. The store
  4. The customer, i.e. built into the price of each album
#4 you say? That's what I believe

Thanks in advance 😩
williewonka

Showing 6 responses by lowrider57

lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
Refunds are only available when it is unopened with factory seals intact.
That’s true, but in the past a customer with a defective record was sometimes given a refund depending on the store’s policy. Defective product was returned to the distributor for credit.

Since the resurgence of vinyl, record labels will not take back an album for any reason. The burden is on the consumer and the individual vendor. Music Direct would not even exchange a defective Zeppelin LP for me, whereas Amazon has no problem doing so.
I agree that the cost is built into the price of each album. Have you noticed the price of new vinyl continues to rise?
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
@dweller ,
Music Direct told me they considered vinyl records as software. So we went back and forth with emails, but they wouldn’t budge.
Now I have a worn out LZ I from the early 70’s and a defective remastered LZ I.

I'll bet they were getting too many returns with defects.
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
That must have been way back, when staff actually possessed the knowledge of what to look for.
That's right. These were people who loved and lived vinyl.
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
jeff1225
My local record store said that their distributor refused to take returns.
That's what I've been told by several venders. That's why in today's music business model, the consumer always loses.
(Well, the artists also lose, but that's another story).
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
whart...
This is probably an incomplete answer since I was never involved in the distribution side, but in the old days, the major labels ate the cost of defects and returns and probably pushed back against the pressing plants if there were defective pressings;
That's my understanding of how it worked it the golden days of vinyl records. My friend owned a shop and had a bin that contained defective records that were sent back to the distributor.
Another friend worked at Tower, and the same policy applied; defective records were shipped back. (1970's thru 80's).

Refunds were given if defects were found in the same batch of records the store received; e.g., returning a record that had clicks or pops, exchanging it, and finding the replacement had the same problem. These were the shops that would open an LP for you and play it and/or inspect it.
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,393 posts
 
@whart
Very true about there being few defects in the "golden era" of vinyl records. I only remember problems when they were manufacturing those ultra-thin LPs that could warp, or music would bleed thru grooves. There was also a period of using inferior quality vinyl, (1980’s, I think).

As for new vinyl, look at the many threads regarding defects.
More to discover