Ethical Question?

[Gombessa]

I think he is halfway to Belize now.

Keep an eye on youtube for the next week, I guess

 

[The Chairman]

GoPro has put most of the Scuba Retailers in an untenable situation here. They are only shipping to the big box stores until probably after Christmas. While I think it's great he wants to support his LDS, GoPro has made that impossible. Since I don't have any imminent trips, I am waiting patiently. I already have my filters and tray from Snake River Prototypes and I will keep working on my patience until such time I can purchase one through a shop.

I admire Hostage's loyalty to his LDS. That he would deign to go to so much trouble and still wants to do what is right speaks well of his character. Kudos to you my friend and we look forward to your videos! Be sure to post them!

 

[nimoh]

GoPro has put most of the Scuba Retailers in an untenable situation here. They are only shipping to the big box stores until probably after Christmas. While I think it's great he wants to support his LDS, GoPro has made that impossible. Since I don't have any imminent trips, I am waiting patiently. I already have my filters and tray from Snake River Prototypes and I will keep working on my patience until such time I can purchase one through a shop.

I admire Hostage's loyalty to his LDS. That he would deign to go to so much trouble and still wants to do what is right speaks well of his character. Kudos to you my friend and we look forward to your videos! Be sure to post them!

I agree that the OP has not indicated what they did or didn't do, but merely soliciting opinions with respect to "moral compass".

Although I think it is obvious that the OP would never consider pulling a scam on their LDS such as this, the question arises, at what point does a store become big enough to pull such a scam?

The intention is honorable (trying to support their LDS), the means is dishonorable (essentially stealing from a "faceless corporation") and it seems to me, it would be a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul"

 

[EastEndDiver]

GoPro has put most of the Scuba Retailers in an untenable situation here. They are only shipping to the big box stores until probably after Christmas. While I think it's great he wants to support his LDS, GoPro has made that impossible. Since I don't have any imminent trips, I am waiting patiently. I already have my filters and tray from Snake River Prototypes and I will keep working on my patience until such time I can purchase one through a shop.

I admire Hostage's loyalty to his LDS. That he would deign to go to so much trouble and still wants to do what is right speaks well of his character. Kudos to you my friend and we look forward to your videos! Be sure to post them!

Considering scamming another store is NOT right in my world.The fact that he had to ask if it was acceptable tells me has no "Moral Compass" .

 

[DandyDon]

Oh, I can see the temptation. I think he was hoping we'd make him feel better by saying "Sure, I would," but nope.

Too bad he just didn't rent one.

 

[Gombessa]

Considering scamming another store is NOT right in my world.The fact that he had to ask if it was acceptable tells me has no "Moral Compass" .

Just for the sake of discussion, and to play devil's advocate, let's take a minute and look at the practical effect of this action.

Other than the fact that OP is returning a different unit that he purchased, what is the harm suffered by the big box retailer? I'm sure there are some in terms of opportunity cost, restocking, labor, inventory control, etc. But the retailer gets an unused, unopened, product that they can (I'm assuming) put back on the shelf. At worse, it goes into the "returns" pile and is dealt with along with opened returns, right?

Now, compare that to a user purchasing a product from the same retailer, using it, and returning it. Totally within the return policy, but the user sends back an opened, used product that definitely cannot be restocked and sold as new. Retailer reports such as the number of big screen TV sales/returns immediately before/after the Superbowl surely suggests this happens intentionally and with some frequency. And it's probably not just $2000 big ticket items. Some people fully intend to return, some go in with the default position to return unless they are blown away with the product, etc. Is this behavior viewed with the same revulsion? Based on net effect, I would think it should be even more frowned upon. But shops with generous return policies encourage "try before you buy" and some even bank on people who want to return but never get around to doing so.

All this to say that interestingly, the "harm" here seems to be fairly low. The end result is that the user gets what he originally wanted from the dive shop, and the big box retailer gets a new, functional, unopened unit back. A lot of people regularly do worse, with worse intentions, and we don't bat an eyelash at it. Not to say this makes it right, but it is interesting for us all to consider how our own moral compass is calibrated...

 

[The Chairman]

The fact that he had to ask if it was acceptable tells me has no "Moral Compass" .

From reading your reply it's my opinion that you don't understand unyielding loyalty. His loyalty to his LDS is so great that what is obvious to most others has been obfuscated to him. Loyalty often causes our moral compass to deviate. It's why he asked the question. He could sense an issue, but he was too close to the problem to be able to completely identify it. What would normally be black and white has become gray. No, not everyone has experienced this kind of loyalty, so it's easy for them to judge harshly. That's kind of sad just on it's own. Me? I get it, and I admire him for it. I'm just glad he was smart enough to ask us for guidance. Hopefully, we can learn to give guidance without impugning character. That will encourage others to ask questions without an undue fear of being castigated for asking. To be sure, my moral compass is telling me to judge not and just answer his question.

 

[DandyDon]

From reading your reply it's my opinion that you don't understand unyielding loyalty.

He was getting a better price from the LDS. Otherwise, I wonder if there would have been a question in his mind what he needed to do.

 

[ScubaSteve1962]

Just for the sake of discussion, and to play devil's advocate, let's take a minute and look at the practical effect of this action.

Other than the fact that OP is returning a different unit that he purchased, what is the harm suffered by the big box retailer? I'm sure there are some in terms of opportunity cost, restocking, labor, inventory control, etc. But the retailer gets an unused, unopened, product that they can (I'm assuming) put back on the shelf. At worse, it goes into the "returns" pile and is dealt with along with opened returns, right?

Now, compare that to a user purchasing a product from the same retailer, using it, and returning it. Totally within the return policy, but the user sends back an opened, used product that definitely cannot be restocked and sold as new. Retailer reports such as the number of big screen TV sales/returns immediately before/after the Superbowl surely suggests this happens intentionally and with some frequency. And it's probably not just $2000 big ticket items. Some people fully intend to return, some go in with the default position to return unless they are blown away with the product, etc. Is this behavior viewed with the same revulsion? Based on net effect, I would think it should be even more frowned upon. But shops with generous return policies encourage "try before you buy" and some even bank on people who want to return but never get around to doing so.

All this to say that interestingly, the "harm" here seems to be fairly low. The end result is that the user gets what he originally wanted from the dive shop, and the big box retailer gets a new, functional, unopened unit back. A lot of people regularly do worse, with worse intentions, and we don't bat an eyelash at it. Not to say this makes it right, but it is interesting for us all to consider how our own moral compass is calibrated...

okay devil, big box usually charge 15 to 25% to restock, as already pointed out big box usually have special upc codes and dates to prevent this from happening. So if he did what he planned on doing his only other alternatives would be to take it back to his LDS or have 2 cameras. Your analogy about the Super Bowl, you end up paying 2 to 3 hundred or more to watch the game, you would come out better going to Rent a Center, just like he would have came out better renting a camera.

 

[Gombessa]

big box usually charge 15 to 25% to restock, as already pointed out big box usually have special upc codes and dates

Best buy doesn't charge a restocking fee. Neither does Apple. Neither does Costco. Neither does REI. Neither does Walmart. Neither does Target. Let's not say "usually," and assume for this hypo that OP can find a place that doesn't charge to return.

I haven't seen any of these "special UPC codes" on actual product or manufacturer packaging. Lots of retailers put stickers on the shrink-wrap that have retailer-specific SKUs. Let's not fight the hypo too much, and assume he's getting it from a regular, run-of-the-mill big box, not one with special eagle-eye paranoia procedures. Worst case he returns the unit he bought there, just like the thousands of other people bringing in returns every day.