Hacker News Reader

Comment by powertower | Hacker News Reader

1. The original post had a couple of people who experienced Linux drivers throwing the thermal control systems of the laptop in a loop, and damaging it.

2. Was there anything wrong with the laptop (70% of returns work perfectly)? If not, and it is returned in a non-original condition, why the hell would Newegg (who's margins are 1%) accept it and take a loss on it.

Again, Newegg makes 1 dollar for every $100 sold, this is the lowest margin in the industry, and is why their prices are cheap...

They simply can't cover people burning out their laptops with bad drivers, or accept working laptops with a missing OS, that might or might not have been partially damaged.

They also can't cover people buying a laptop simply to see if Linux runs on it, knowing they can just ship it back. They probably don't want that type of business.

View on HN

Following the previous story, they explicitly stated that OS installs didn't prevent returns

"Newegg's Computer Standard Return Policy does not exclude a computer from being accepted for return if an operating system is modified or installed."

It's one thing if they had a clear policy against installing Linux. I'd probably think twice about buying a new computer from them, but it's their call.

If that is their policy, however, then they need to make up their minds and be consistent in what they tell people.

Where is this 1% figure coming from? Having worked for a competitor, I would not have been surprised at a 3-5% figure (closer to 5% when considering the margin gain on shipping charges).

1. If the laptop was damaged because of the user's actions, then that should be their reason for rejecting the RMA. Not "you installed an operating system".

2. If there was nothing wrong with the laptop, then that should be their reason for rejecting the RMA. Not "you installed an operating system".

I don't understand why there is such an obsession with their margins. How does that matter to me as a consumer in any way? I am purchasing a product. I expect to be able to return it if it is defective. Period. I do not care why they lie and refuse to accept a return on defective product. I do not care how much or how little money they make. I care that they are an honest business I can trust. If you value doing business with companies based on how little money they make, you are welcome to choose to do business with companies by that criteria. Those of us with different criteria do not become objectively incorrect for using those other criteria for making our decisions.

1. There is no telling how much (or little) of the situation and the discussion the original customer made available to the public and the consumerist.

2. Maybe Newegg sent her a canned response, and sometimes you learn that it's best to keep things general and not to enter into the specifics, because once you do, people start taking advantage of the situation.

My point is there are plenty of reasons why they can't, and shouldn't, accept working laptops in non-original condition back. Nor heat damaged ones with a non-original OS.

> I don't understand why there is such an obsession with their margins. How does that matter to me as a consumer in any way?

Because they already provided you with the lowest price, fast shipping, and a general return policy that works for 99% of the customers.

> I am purchasing a product. I expect to be able to return it if it is defective. Period.

Agreed. Except we don't really know much of anything about this particular case, other than what two biased parties have told us.

Though we do know that 1) the laptop boots up and probably works (70% of returns are 100% working) 2) it's being returned in a non-original state, and 3) even if the warrantee or return-policy was voided by the customer she still might be able to do the Manufacturers' Warranty.

Your "point" isn't actually a point if it is unrelated to the discussion. The issue is one of rejecting legit RMAs on the grounds that "you installed an operating system". Again, you are welcome to shop where you like. Just stop telling those of us who have told newegg "that's not acceptable and I won't be doing business with you" that we're doing something wrong.

There's a difference between boycotting the retailer and demanding that they accept a return.

Also, from their perspective, they sold you "a computer with Windows installed" and expect to receive the same in return, unless the reason for your return is the lack of said Windows.

Except that they already said "no, installing an OS doesn't void your warranty, that was just a mistake". But the people actually processing RMAs are clearly not aware of this. That's the problem. I can not trust the company to process an RMA, because they have demonstrated that they do not train their staff to do that job competently.

Warranty, Return Policy and One-Time-Exception are three different things.

Since the previous laptop had issues, and a shit-storm was kicked off, they said it was their mistake and that they will accept the return, even though it was being returned in a non-original state (one-time-exception).

This laptop apparently has no issues that they can detect, and was returned in a non-original state. Hence the RMA is not valid.

How is installing a new OS not a user action? Look, if you buy a piece of hardware, install software that damages it, and then expect to get a refund, you're out of your mind. The laptop was not defective, it was broken by the customer.

>How is installing a new OS not a user action?

Who said it isn't? The issue is newegg said "no RMA for you because you installed an OS, we're not even going to look into the issue to see if it was related". Then they said "oh no, that rep just made a mistake, installing an OS is fine". But the reps doing RMAs clearly still don't know this policy, and still reject RMAs without even looking into them. I'm really not understanding why this very simple, easy to understand concept needs to be repeated over and over.

> I don't understand why there is such an obsession with their margins.

Me neither. Their business model is their business, not their customers.

If they put in big letters on the website "if you install Linux, you can'tr return this machine for faulty", then i would have no objevction to them. But their behaviour of a one-off refund strikes me as an attempta at fraudulent damage limitation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com