Should I be annoyed with Adorama... or is it my own dumb fault?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

PLEASE don't call me PR!!!

Well, that's what you get for writing something nice ... I'm not up to the correct obvious terms obviously as you relate to the public - otherwise you'd just write a PM to the op - but maybe PR is something different entirely and is considered deprecating since it made you post your qualifications ... so sorry for that.

Helen has helped CR members many times on this web site, and on many other forums, just as Henru Posner has for B&H. They both take buyer issues seriously and see that fixes get made and that sales people get educated.

I find that Helen and Henry's presence on the forums when needed is invaluable.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=search2

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=search2

 

[dstppy]

+1 for dumb fault (for expecting anything other than one describes, sometimes, you have to swing at the ball either way )
+1 for done well with Adorama

I'm actually of the opinion that I like vendors/manufacturers that engage in a public forum; it takes guts because you run the risk of taking flak, even if nothing is wrong. (TWM Performance, for example, won't reply even when they are a sponsor ;D -- some people take every chance to mention that fact :

I've seen tech-support reply to bad reviews (in comments) on Amazon trying to rectify technical problems.

In the end, nothing and no company will be distinct except for how it treats it's customers.

 

[Skulker]

Reminder - We still ban users for abusive posts and language. There is a lot of stress during the holiday season, but please act like adults.

Thanks and have a happy holiday.

Blimming good job I didn't say what I was thinking then ;D

 

[Skulker]

....... so I have gear at a price that I don't really want. So I have to figure that out. ........

Let me know if I neglected to address a point... and I'll be happy to respond.

As Homer would say "Dohh" Lesson learned?

Don't worry your response was far more detailed than I was expecting. Although to be honest I haven't read it. ;D No offence intended.

 

[rporterfield]

Had both the picture and the description matched, you might have had a case. But, since the description had the correct items listed, you should have at least called and double checked what came in the kit before you ordered. Since you didn't, I cannot sympathize with you and therefore I vote that it was your own fault. I won't even say dumb, because I think you knew what was going to happen even before you submitted the order.

 

[chas1113]

In October, I ordered a refurb 7D body from Adorama. It came in two days and was perfect. I took a half-dozen shots, pulled them up on screen and realized I would never be happy with the noise. I called Adorama and apologized and requested a return. They not only didn't question my decision, they gave me an RMA and even paid for the return shipping. Incredible customer service.

On the other hand, I recently purchased an "advertised" EF 35mm f/2 IS through the Canon Direct Store at the "too-good-to-be-true" price of $245. Thinking they had mistakenly advertised the wrong lens, but hoping for the best, I waited with baited breath for the lens to arrive. Sure enough, it was the EF 35mm f/2. I called them out on the phone after the rep admitted they had been "caught" before. He even admitted that he thought that mistake had been fixed...I didn't expect them to honor their mistake, but demanded they pay for the return shipping, which they did.

 

[jdramirez]

In October, I ordered a refurb 7D body from Adorama. It came in two days and was perfect. I took a half-dozen shots, pulled them up on screen and realized I would never be happy with the noise. I called Adorama and apologized and requested a return. They not only didn't question my decision, they gave me an RMA and even paid for the return shipping. Incredible customer service.

On the other hand, I recently purchased an "advertised" EF 35mm f/2 IS through the Canon Direct Store at the "too-good-to-be-true" price of $245. Thinking they had mistakenly advertised the wrong lens, but hoping for the best, I waited with baited breath for the lens to arrive. Sure enough, it was the EF 35mm f/2. I called them out on the phone after the rep admitted they had been "caught" before. He even admitted that he thought that mistake had been fixed...I didn't expect them to honor their mistake, but demanded they pay for the return shipping, which they did.

I've seen on the Canon refurb site have a picture the 70-200mm f2.8L is (could've been the mkii) on the page for the 70-200 f2.8L usm.

 

[dak723]

The OP seemed quite aware that the text in the ad was correct and the photo was incorrect. Nonetheless, they hoped to take advantage and cause the company to lose a lot of money by providing him a much more expensive lens. They seem to have no moral qualms about this - which is a shame. I wonder if this transaction had taken place in the store dealing directly with real people if they would feel the same. Does the impersonal nature of purchasing online make us forget basic ethics?

If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it? The answer when purchased in person seems obvious. The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

 

[jdramirez]

The OP seemed quite aware that the text in the ad was correct and the photo was incorrect. Nonetheless, they hoped to take advantage and cause the company to lose a lot of money by providing him a much more expensive lens. They seem to have no moral qualms about this - which is a shame. I wonder if this transaction had taken place in the store dealing directly with real people if they would feel the same. Does the impersonal nature of purchasing online make us forget basic ethics?

If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it? The answer when purchased in person seems obvious. The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

First of all... and this seems to be a serious misinterpretation of my original post, but I was annoyed that I hadn't received a response from Adorama. Not that they sent me the cheaper lens. I didn't receive an automatic response indicating that my question was received and I should expect a response within X amount of time.

Second, I worked in retail part time for mostly shits and gigs as a commissioned sales man. The more profit in the product, the more I would make. I quite honestly made every effort to save the customer every dime possible and I didn't feel as though I was betraying the trust of the company I worked for. I simply felt that giving the customer a great deal was more important than the company making more of a profit.

I suppose I take the same "immoral" attitude when I'm the customer. Regardless of whether the purchase occurred online or in person, I would have acted in much the same way. But after receiving the lessor lens, I would have returned the items. As it was an online purchase I was at the mercy of the customer service department... which as I may remind you (and as defended by Helen), was not an immediate response.

As for the surprise L in the bag... I haven't really thought about it. I have returned wallets, I have found money on the ground and provided to the customer service departments of stores, I've helped old ladies walk across icy pathways... well... she wasn't that old... but still.

 

[chas1113]

The OP seemed quite aware that the text in the ad was correct and the photo was incorrect. Nonetheless, they hoped to take advantage and cause the company to lose a lot of money by providing him a much more expensive lens. They seem to have no moral qualms about this - which is a shame. I wonder if this transaction had taken place in the store dealing directly with real people if they would feel the same. Does the impersonal nature of purchasing online make us forget basic ethics?

If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it? The answer when purchased in person seems obvious. The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

BS. I worked in the publishing industry for most of my life. We had a concept called "make good" ... if you screwed up, you made it good. Back in the bad ole' days, an advertisement was proofed by several different agencies (I can't tell you how many times mistakes were caught on press). Now, nothing "online" gets proofed properly (look at most forum entries, mine included). If you "put it out there" erroneously be prepared to honor your offer. And the flip side of caveat emptor (let-the-buyer-beware) is, let the buyer take advantage of false or misleading advertising. You have a moral obligation to; that way the advertiser learns from his mistakes.

 

[sanj]

... and as a mere foreigner I'd like to add that at first I found it to be a bit creepy for some retailer PR agents to scan the forums and pick up critical threads, but after looking at a couple of them I have to say you U.S. boys should be lucky to have such online shops over there, in Germany if something doesn't work out you're out of options very quickly.

PLEASE don't call me PR!!!

My post was developed in 2007 as a direct response to the increasing desire by customers to use a variety of Social Media platforms to communicate with retailers - and each other.

I act as an Independent Advocate on behalf of Adorama customers, representing Adorama's presence on social network sites (eg Twitter, Facebook, Google + and Linked In), shopping sites and newsgroups; Photography Blogs and Forums - across the globe

With a diverse background in Law, Journalism and Mental Health, and experience as an Expert Witness in the fields of Workplace Stress and Bullying, I aim to provide a rapid response for customers seeking advice and / or support in relation to their purchases - investigating and resolving complaints and concerns that customers have been unable to address through regular customer service channels.


Any customer with an enquiry, query or complaint regarding an order - or any aspect of service from Adorama, is also most welcome to contact me directly: [email protected]

You may be of the above you describe. But it is all too lengthy. I think shorter and to the point ROCK STAR describes you better.

 

[Don Haines]

... and as a mere foreigner I'd like to add that at first I found it to be a bit creepy for some retailer PR agents to scan the forums and pick up critical threads, but after looking at a couple of them I have to say you U.S. boys should be lucky to have such online shops over there, in Germany if something doesn't work out you're out of options very quickly.

PLEASE don't call me PR!!!

My post was developed in 2007 as a direct response to the increasing desire by customers to use a variety of Social Media platforms to communicate with retailers - and each other.

I act as an Independent Advocate on behalf of Adorama customers, representing Adorama's presence on social network sites (eg Twitter, Facebook, Google + and Linked In), shopping sites and newsgroups; Photography Blogs and Forums - across the globe

With a diverse background in Law, Journalism and Mental Health, and experience as an Expert Witness in the fields of Workplace Stress and Bullying, I aim to provide a rapid response for customers seeking advice and / or support in relation to their purchases - investigating and resolving complaints and concerns that customers have been unable to address through regular customer service channels.


Any customer with an enquiry, query or complaint regarding an order - or any aspect of service from Adorama, is also most welcome to contact me directly: [email protected]

You may be of the above you describe. But it is all too lengthy. I think shorter and to the point ROCK STAR describes you better.

More to the point, everyone in the company who is visible to the public is involved in PR.... With some it is the primary focus of the job, with others it is a side effect, but all public contact has the ability to affect the image.

 

[Don Haines]

The OP seemed quite aware that the text in the ad was correct and the photo was incorrect. Nonetheless, they hoped to take advantage and cause the company to lose a lot of money by providing him a much more expensive lens. They seem to have no moral qualms about this - which is a shame. I wonder if this transaction had taken place in the store dealing directly with real people if they would feel the same. Does the impersonal nature of purchasing online make us forget basic ethics?

If you went to a store and looked at both lenses, bought the cheaper lens, then when you got home found out that they had put the wrong lens in the box - the "L" lens - would you have kept it or returned it? The answer when purchased in person seems obvious. The "online" answer should be the same, in my opinion.

My reaction would have been to assume that the picture was in error. If I were to go ahead and order the product I would have informed them that the picture was wrong....

Was there, anywhere in the add or website, the standard "items may not be as pictured" clause.... If so; sorry, no leg to stand on.....

 

[Ruined]

Why was this thread created in the first place? To attempt to pressure Adorama to giving out free stuff via public forum passive aggressive bad PR? I don't get it.

If it were me, I just would have asked them to pay return shipping if I didn't want it since they didn't send me what was pictured. Anything more than that is really stretching it IMO, not much of a debate.

 

[Helen Oster]

You may be of the above you describe. But it is all too lengthy. I think shorter and to the point ROCK STAR describes you better.

:-* :-* :-*

 

[Helen Oster]

Was there, anywhere in the add or website, the standard "items may not be as pictured" clause.... If so; sorry, no leg to stand on.....

http://www.adorama.com/help/termsAndConditions

By opening or using a product purchased from Adorama, the purchaser agrees to be bound by the term and conditions of sale as set forth below. If you do not agree to the terms and conditions of sale, please ship the product back to Adorama unopened within 5 days of receipt for a full refund (less shipping and handling charges).

Adorama Camera makes no warranty, either expressed or implied, of merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose, and none shall be implied by law.

Final determination of suitability of any item sold for the use contemplated by purchaser is the sole responsibility of the purchaser, and Seller shall have no responsibility in connection with such determination.

Adorama Camera will not be responsible for any consequential or incidental damages resulting from the sale, non-delivery, use or improper function of any equipment purchased from us. The responsibility, if any is imposed, of Adorama in regard to any item purchased shall be limited to the monetary value of the merchandise purchased.

Adorama.com is intended to be a guide only. Some item illustrations are for display purposes only, may not be exact, and are not necessarily included in the purchase price. Adorama is not responsible for typographical or pictorial errors, and specifications may change without notice.

 

[Helen Oster]

.....I just would have asked them to pay return shipping if I didn't want it since they didn't send me what was pictured.

I have already requested a pre-paid label to be emailed to the OP

 

[jdramirez]

.....I just would have asked them to pay return shipping if I didn't want it since they didn't send me what was pictured.

I have already requested a pre-paid label to be emailed to the OP

That she did... so the customer service issue has been resolved... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play.

 

[Helen Oster]

... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play.

It does? I also sent you a $10 coupon code by way of an apology for any disappointment caused - even though it states on our website that:


Terms & Conditions
Purchaser, by placing an order, makes an offer to purchase pursuant to these terms and conditions, which offer, if accepted by Adorama Camera, is accepted within the State of New York, .....Adorama.com is intended to be a guide only. Some item illustrations are for display purposes only, may not be exact, and are not necessarily included in the purchase price. Adorama is not responsible for typographical or pictorial errors, and specifications may change without notice.

 

[jdramirez]

... but the moral/ethical issue appears to still be in play.

It does? I also sent you a $10 coupon code by way of an apology for any disappointment caused - even though it states on our website that:


Terms & Conditions
Purchaser, by placing an order, makes an offer to purchase pursuant to these terms and conditions, which offer, if accepted by Adorama Camera, is accepted within the State of New York, .....Adorama.com is intended to be a guide only. Some item illustrations are for display purposes only, may not be exact, and are not necessarily included in the purchase price. Adorama is not responsible for typographical or pictorial errors, and specifications may change without notice.

Nope... not referring to adorama... evidently you missed all the posts that question my moral compass or the lack there of.

I kinda want to watch Scarface now... thre whole scene in the restaurant where Tony says... I'm the bad guy...