WarriorAnt
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2009
- Posts
- 4,283
- Likes
- 157
Quote:
I don't see any of you expecting another company to waive the restocking fee simply because you'll also be purchasing a more expensive product. Audez'e bent over backwards to solve the problem with failed drivers, didn't they? The fact that they have that good of a return policy and a traveling warranty at all should be good enough. The sense of entitlement is ridiculous here. And no, it isn't idiot wind. At no point did they promise to waive the restocking fee because you're buying another product.
Here we go with the "what other companies do" entrapment. Well guess what Morbid Toaster didn't buy his LCD-2's from any other company he purchased them with his hard earned coin from one company Audeze, no "other" companies were involved. And in this particular instance Audeze really showed thier colors and lack of customer appreciation for that hard earned coin by denying his request to exchange a newly recieved pair of LCD-2's which he recieved 2 days after the LCD 3 was announced. He didn't own them or use them for a week, or two weeks or a month. He recieved them 2 days after the LCD-3 was announced and simply asked Audeze to take them back and sell him the LCD-3 instead. Regardless of the standing return policy with which Audeze operates under it would have been very good appreciation on their part to accept the return of the LCD-2's and accept payment for the LCD-3. No harm no foul.
This particular situation between Morbid toaster and Audeze does not evoke or suggest any sense of entitlement at all on MorbidToasters part. MorbidToasters request was extremely reasonable and no profit would have been lost. It was a very bad business policy and a very bad customer appreciation decision on Audeze's part to disregard MorbidtToasters request. How does any sense of entitlement come into play here. He received the headphones and asked if he could simply return and purchase instead a model that costs twice as much. If anything someone would have had to pay the shipping for return. But to charge a loyal customer $150 to restock his headphones in this particular case is what is ridiculous here. Lets see the idiot wind conversation that must have played out at Audeze.
"Hey Morbid Toaster just called us. He wants to know if the headphones that just arrived at his home for which he paid us one thousand dollars can be exchanged for the LCD-3 for which he will give us another thousand dollars. He says that seeing you guys announced a new flagship 2 days ago and he just got his one thousand dollar set of cans today he was hoping he could just send them back and make payment of another one thousand dollars totaling two thousand dollars and get the LCD-3 instead."
"WHAT?" Does he think we are some kind of charity here? Tell him if he wants to send us an additional one thousand dollars on top of the one thousand he sent us it's going to set him back 15% or $150 dollars. THAT'S THE BEST WE CAN DO FOR HIM!"
Your'e right what kind of ridiculous entitlement does MorbidToaster think he is, I hate to say it, entitled to?
As for Audeze bending over backwards to fix the driver problem they experienced with the R.1 thats a one thousand dollar backwards back bending deposit they get now for each R.2 they sell. Their backs must be completely broken now from the weight of all that new cash streaming in from the R.2. I hope I didn't hurt anyones back there with the one thousand dollar deposit I made for my pair of R.2's I'm pretty sure the one thousand dollars I sent for the R.1s I also purchased from Audeze didn't strain anyone's back there but who knows.