Makes sense to have the discount if you keep items, savings from processing returns.
[1] http://www.esquire.com/style/mens-fashion/a8386/pants-size-c...
>It's also unbelievably damaging to environment
Citation needed. Are we talking about the fuel costs from picking up and delivering a package?
>customers like this aren't worth anything to us
It sounds like you have an attitude around retail that isn't very future-proof. I feel that, if your attitude persists, soon you will find that the customers do not think your business is worth anything to them.
Why exactly is this unbelievably damaging to environment is an exercise left to the reader.
How do you replicate the fitting room experience online? with colors you can see differently on a monitor, texture you can't feel, sizes for each body type that are different, etc. , the best way today is to order more and return.
> Why exactly is this unbelievably damaging to environment is an exercise left to the reader.
Well people need to find clothes that fits them. So they're either left with going to a brick & mortar store, or ordering online and returning items that don't fit.
Me and all other customers driving to the outlet malls (assuming that mall has all the stores we're interested in, otherwise drive to each store separately), and driving back in our cars is certainly more damaging to the environment than one extra shipping, given that UPS, USPS, Fedex and everybody involved in the transportation business is making sure they're wasting the least amount of gas.
I was just thinking about a compromise model: what if a retailer would deal with the send/return cost once as a bit of configuration and customer acquisition cost and profile the choices to a standard type of fit. Then from that point on you could shop just for the type of clothing that will fit you well, and would only be able to return if you could show that it wasn't the case.
It obviously wouldn't work with standard brands of clothing since the fit there can be so variable, but if they clothing would be engineered for this I could see it working. It would be an interesting trade off for customers to consider. In the end you get lower prices, unless the real standardization is too costly.
Seems like something lots of people would go for. It seems like more and more people are aware of all the things that are priced into goods, like the cost of physical shops or the cost of shipping/returns for online retailers.
I work in a store that has, on average, 200-250 returns a day (1/10 sales/traffic). It's a very popular store.
I would segment this way (without any data, just envelope) in no particular order:
Buy A Lot & Return Some or All
Occasional Honest Jane
Mad As Hell With Wild Expectations
Scammers (part 1); Return counter is a bank
Scammers (part 2): Free lease of equipment
Scammers (part 3): Online Returns
Scammers (part 4): Garage Sale Pickups
Scammers (part 5): Anything Electronic or Gift Card-esque
Scammers (part 6): Stolen Goods
Scammers (part 7): "Last 15 minute Jack"
Shoplifter
I clearly see that we affect customer behavior if we turn the screws on our policy.
Wear and return is certainly prevalent though our customers see it more often in occasion-wear (for example bridesmaid dresses). Their average customer values (even their highest returning customers) far exceed $0.01. I'd be really interested in learning why things are so different at your organisation (not that I doubt you but it would make for a really interesting dataset!)
We generally try to help clients integrate returns prediction into their business rules. For example if you've got scarcity of stock, perhaps prioritise customers who are most likely to keep items. Or if you're handling customer calls at the contact centre, prioritise customers who are returns sensitive (those who probably won't shop with you ever again if they have a poor returns experience).