Is this moral?

[quakerboy]

Say you see a chair that you like. You buy the chair for $249.99, plus a warranty for an additional $29.99.

You take it home, put it together, etc. You like your chair, though it cost far more than you can really afford, even with a bonus that your boss provided.

3 days later, you see an ad from that same store for that same chair, costing only $159.99 on sale, and with the lower price the warranty would also cost less. At that time, you also notice that the back of your receipt reads "If you aren't satisfied with your purchase for any reason, simply return it, blah blah"

Is it moral to return an item based on having found that item at a lower price?

Would it be immoral to purchase said chair for 159.99 plus only 19.99 for warranty, then to return the still sealed chair using the first receipt for the higher price.

Would it be more or less moral to return the original chair, even though it is already opened, then buy a new one and put it together?

[Debi]

1. Why not take your receipt back to the store and ask them for a refund

of the difference?

[quakerboy]

5. Retail is weird

They cannot do that. I talked to the manager, the same guy I bought from in the first place, the same one who helped me find the particular chair, and who had a pretty awesome Halloween costume, not withstanding the fact any perceptive person could immediately tell that he wears that outfit outside of work all the time. They can and are perfectly happy to do it either of the other ways I described, achieving the exact same end result, but they do not refund differences.

[Kali]

8. I did not see this reply before I posted my response.

If they are willing to exchange the chair, knowing what the story is then I think that would be OK.

[Forkboy]

2. I'd do it.

Not that that answers your question. ;)

[quakerboy]

9. I would too

I figure, if they are ok with it, it meets the letter of the law, and I am ok with it, it is probably ok. Then again, I find our whole basis of our economy somewhat immoral, so bending bits of it does not inherently bother me. And returning something for monetary reasons seems perfectly acceptable to me, though if you had gotten financial gain or damaged the item, that would make it a bit more gray to me.

Personally, I feel better about the first way than the second. Returning a still sealed package seems the better thing for the store.

[logosoco]

3. Since it was the same store...

I would go back and ask for the difference in price. A lot of stores do price matching from other stores, so I don't see why they wouldn't do this.
It isn't any less moral for the store to be charging that much for an item and then that soon offer it for so much less.

[quakerboy]

13. see post 5

[rug]

4. Oh, just bring the damn chair back. This is the Lounge, not Opus Dei.

[quakerboy]

6. In reality the deal is done.

But I was curious how people think about these things.

[Kali]

7. no, it is unethical for you to return the chair either way

of course the store knocking $100 off the price of something you just bought is disappointing.
The only exception (to me) would be if they accepted your lack of satisfaction with the item going on sale a few days after you paid full price and refunded the difference to you. Which they might if they were interested in keeping you as a customer. That wouldn't hurt to look into.

If not, just try to put yourself mentally back to the place where you were willing to pay what you did.

edit - see my other reply - if the store is ok with the exchange, then this post is moot.

[quakerboy]

11. I should clarify

The manager of this particular store is OK with it. Store policy itself just says "if you are not satisfied" and does not specify what are acceptable or unacceptable reasons for dissatisfaction. I have been other places with similar rules, and received differing results. Some interpret that very narrowly (The purchase, meaning you have to be dissatisfied with the physical being of the item purchased) and others very broadly (any dissatisfaction with your item or purchasing experience in totality). Which approach did the policy originators intend?

[Kali]

14. Seems it would be the manager's call

and if he is OK with it...:shrug:

Again, he may view it as a customer service move and you may return for another purchase. (don't forget to ask if it will be going on sale soon! ;-) )

[quakerboy]

15. I originally didnt even go in to buy a chair

It has been needed for some time, but I went to see if they would price match on totally different item, and he was nice enough to do it even though several other stores dug up technicalities to avoid meeting their price match promises (only if the store advertising it has it in stock. I don't care if one has it in stock, it has to be the physically closest store to us or I won't do it, etc)

I chose to do my chair shopping there. And bought one that was outside of my means because my wife's spine is very valuable to me. But the opportunity to bring the price down to match the bonus my boss provided was one of the better things to happen, as I have been worrying since the purchase about how we were going to afford to pay it off(I knew I could do it, but I was not looking forward to what I would have to cut for the month to make it work).

[Rabrrrrrr]

10. Perfectly moral - fuck 'em. I know they are okay with it, but even if they weren't, I say fuck 'em.

Business is a bit of a game, especially retail, and you gotta be able to game 'em back when they game the customers like that.

[quakerboy]

12. Very utilitarian.

[Louisiana1976]

16. I'd see if I could return the chair. Once my mom bought a top,

then those tops went on sale a few days later, and she returned the one she'd bought so she could get another at the new lower price. She had no problem doing that.