Hypothetical question: Would you keep a wrong ordered lens, if it was in your favour?

ed rader wrote in post #8796525
so let's change the slant to sigma. you'd have no problem with being honest with sigma because their lenses are fairly priced and they've always done you right?

ed rader

Ed , I was mainly talking about the prices over the last year . Sigma didn't raise the price on a lens I wanted . Canon did, way to much. So I am pissed at Canon also, because of their greed.

By the way, any time I've had dealings with Canon they me right also.

I once was the first customer at a stall at a dive show, I had researched the prices of a specific air integrated computer that I wanted to buy, the cheapest I could find it on the web was £650 but most were at about £700. I had taken a print out of the £650 web page and was going to ask if they would match it.

The guy was still unpacking when I asked him how much he was charging for that model, he looked at his price sheet and said £250, I paid him and walked away with my goods. I got to the exit, turned around and went back to the stall told the guy that I thought he may have made a mistake, he checked, he had. His list price was £700. He let me have it for £625.

CountryBoy wrote in post #8796588
Ed , I was mainly talking about the prices over the last year . Sigma didn't raise the price on a lens I wanted . Canon did, way to much. So I am pissed at Canon also, because of their greed.

By the way, any time I've had dealings with Canon they me right also.

Honesty and things aside, it's not really Canon's fault that the exchange rate is the way it is. I'm led to believe it's the exchange that is causing the price hikes. Canon are probably making the same money they've always made on these lenses.

I liken it to Apple prices in NZ. A US$1999 currently costs US$2999 in New Zealand due to the exchange at the time it was released compared to now (Apple fix a price until each update). Likewise, some things end up costing a little less if you take direct exchange rates.

eror11 wrote in post #8796574
=eror11;8796574]Well, it surprises me that there are more people who would be fair. It's a nice surprise... cos' personally, no matter what the price difference, if i got a better lens then what i payed for, id probably keep it. No guilt either!

i'm more surprised at how willing some are to publically display their dishonesty !

ed rader

mrkgoo wrote in post #8796613
Honesty and things aside, it's not really Canon's fault that the exchange rate is the way it is. I'm led to believe it's the exchange that is causing the price hikes. Canon are probably making the same money they've always made on these lenses.

I liken it to Apple prices in NZ. A US$1999 currently costs US$2999 in New Zealand due to the exchange at the time it was released compared to now (Apple fix a price until each update). Likewise, some things end up costing a little less if you take direct exchange rates.

Canon had a layoff early this year , 1000+ people. The cited lack of camera sales for the reason. They also planned on cutting back production. So I don't think exchange rates is the only reason.

When I sent my Sigma 50-150mm in for repairs , I did neglect to tell Sigma that it had took a bad fall . You really couldn't tell by looking at it . They fixed it under warranty. I really don't feel any guilt.

I would send the incorrect lens back without any further thought. In the end, it isn't Canon or Amazon that made the mistake, it is another human being at his/her job that made an error in filling the order. That person, not the company, is the one that will have to pay the price for the error should it be noticed. You might try to reason it out by saying you are getting screwed by high prices, but in the end you are just punishing somebody at a probably crappy low paying job that happened to have a bad day.

i'd like to think that i'd send it back, but who knows until you're actually in that situation...i do tend to do the right thing though, i remember i was in the airport, and bought a couple slices of pizza...they only charged me for one so i pointed it out to them....then when i was walking away i thought to myself...they really ripped me off anyways, and that 2 slices for the price of one is probably the typical pricing outside of the airport...2 slices for $15 bucks really isn't right

DreDaze wrote in post #8796693
i'd like to think that i'd send it back, but who knows until you're actually in that situation...i do tend to do the right thing though, i remember i was in the airport, and bought a couple slices of pizza...they only charged me for one so i pointed it out to them....then when i was walking away i thought to myself...they really ripped me off anyways, and that 2 slices for the price of one is probably the typical pricing outside of the airport...2 slices for $15 bucks really isn't right

But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)

CountryBoy wrote in post #8796650
Canon had a layoff early this year , 1000+ people. The cited lack of camera sales for the reason. They also planned on cutting back production. So I don't think exchange rates is the only reason.

When I sent my Sigma 50-150mm in for repairs , I did neglect to tell Sigma that it had took a bad fall . You really couldn't tell by looking at it . They fixed it under warranty. I really don't feel any guilt.

i'll bet they knew or at least suspected that you were at fault. i'm sure many of their repairs really don't qualify for warranty and they figure the cost of customer dishonesty into the cost of doing business, which just raises prices for everyone. so if you think you got one over on sigma i really doubt it .

ed rader

neil_r wrote in post #8796702
But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)

and i chose to tell them...i just was thinking to myself that if i didn't let it go in that instance(where i could've easily talked myself into being right somehow) i probably wouldn't in any case....either way i'd do it again even though i hate paying that much for pizza

I bet it was not even good pizza

DaveSt wrote in post #8796664
I would send the incorrect lens back without any further thought. In the end, it isn't Canon or Amazon that made the mistake, it is another human being at his/her job that made an error in filling the order. That person, not the company, is the one that will have to pay the price for the error should it be noticed. You might try to reason it out by saying you are getting screwed by high prices, but in the end you are just punishing somebody at a probably crappy low paying job that happened to have a bad day.

If the error was found, and it was a genuine mistake, the company would probably take the hit. Depending on the error, and the company, the nature of the mistake, the person 'responsible' doesn't necessarily get screwed- businesses can be insured agains these kinds of errors.

It probably comes down to one less 17-55 on the stock shelf, one extra 18-55. During stock take this error is noted and business continues. This is obviously for larger operations. If it happened repeatedly, then maybe there will be an investigation.

neil_r wrote in post #8796702
But even though you knew the price you chose to enter into the trade, so that argument is moot.

(PS I am taking no moral high ground I am simply enjoying the debate)

i'm really doing the same too. i am human too. i know for me rigorous honesty is very important....and not just so i can sleep at night.

do i fall short? sure i do. for me cash register honesty is the easy one because it makes me look good in front of others when i return 75 cents.

i am making progess in other areas too. i pick up my dog's poop even in the dark of night when no one is looking .

the trick to honesty for me is it must be instantaneous otherwise "possession is 9/10ths of the law" comes into play.

ed rader

mrkgoo wrote in post #8796747
If the error was found, and it was a genuine mistake, the company would probably take the hit. Depending on the error, and the company, the nature of the mistake, the person 'responsible' doesn't necessarily get screwed- businesses can be insured agains these kinds of errors.

Yeah, I agree that the employee might not have to actually pay for the mistake out of his own pocket, but it could very well mean that he will be looking for a new job. If he makes that kind of mistake on a normal basis he probably deserves that, but everyone has bad days and any mistake looks bad on the employee record.

Insurance is still our money, we all pay, remember the premium comes out of the retailers margin, the number and value of the claims determines the insurance premium, if the premium goes up the retailers puts up their prices to cover it, in the end we all pay.