B Stock?
You gotta be kidding!
Who on earth would buy something like this only to return it, didn't they do their due-dilligence? Geez
Well, I'll tell ya right off, in no uncertain terms, You Ain't gonna get away with returning a Car you bought from us!!! Forgetaboutit! We got no dam "Restocking" fee, No return policy, Buyers-remorse is on You, p-u-r-e and simple. You might get the Bank to repo it if you stop making payments but you're still on the hook. Don't even think about it.
.....
Where's this malaise coming from?, deceptive advertising?, reviewers inaccurate evaluations?, Audiophile Nervosa?, Neurosis?, Psychosis?
Or is this just the way Internet Business has to do "Safety Net" & "Umbrella" coverage for skittishness & uncertainty?
...
Tony in Michigan
Tony,
Bear in mind that these days many audio equipment manufacturers, such as Schiit, have zero dealer networks. Other than shows and informal get-togethers of fans, there is NO place to go for a "test drive" for much audio gear. And there are certainly any number of "reviewers" out there who seemingly will ooze gold glitter over anything they are sent to review, so our actual ability to do reasonable due diligence on many products is really limited.
For many potential consumers worldwide, audio gear is expensive relative to their disposable income. Obviously there is a tier of consumers who really aren't price-sensitive at all, but that's a relatively thin sliver. For the rest, if the manufacturers can say anything they want about their gear, and the consumer is at-risk, without effective recourse, if those claims are proven unjustified when the gear is in-hand... well, the very predictable reaction of most consumers is to not buy in the first place.
On the other hand, some manufacturers are so confident that their products will meet consumers expectations that they offer very easy return policies, with the deliberate intent of encouraging consumers to try their brands at low risk. And if the product does not meet its' hype, the mfr ends up being the one that suffers the majority of the loss, not the consumer.
So there's a very legit business strategy behind this "try it at low risk" approach.
That said, there are too many people, including some conspicuous here on Head-Fi, who just totally abuse the system. They'll buy two or three competing products at one time, have an at-home shoot-out, and then return the 2nd or 3rd place finishers. And that was their explicit intent all along. To me, that is hugely different from a consumer who does a reasonable due diligence beforehand, orders a product he/she genuinely thinks is the optimal solution for the needs, and then post-purchase finds it's not everything it was expected to be. This practice is probably not illegal, but it sure as heck is unethical IMO.
As an analogy, who believes you should be able to go to a nice restaurant, order three entrees, try them all, and send two back to the kitchen, saying "I don't like these, I'm not paying for them" ???
Many more Head-Fi-ers will purchase a lot of products essentially for trial, but they sell the ones they don't ultimately want on the second-hand market. That's the ethical way to do it, and I applaud all of the stand-up people out there who do it that way.
(Sorry for the rant/venting. Got close to one of my hot- buttons there.)