Originally posted by: rbhawcroft
at the end of the day if you said to a cfo in a retailer how do you price your returns policy they would say well on the good will basis, and those che*ting fu*ks who dont engage it in the way they should are the source of the cost of the policy, you antisocial people are tos*ers, have you ever seen an ad that says no worries returns policy? i have , have you ever seen a returns policy that says buy all the copies we have and bring back the ones you dont like? er no. and the idea that a 85% refund pays for the cost to the retailer is wrong, the only reason the retailers do it is that the think the cost that shits like you cause them is outweight by the good will to the standup peope
hey sketcher how many innocent iraqies did you vaporise with misfires for a $25 barell of oil, in an easily avoidable war? (it didnt need to be fought as the indpendence of Kuwait is not central to the oil price), do their dead chilren get warm feelings anymore?
\Sketcher kneels and bows to the obvious wisdom and incontestable political mind of rbhawcroft... rbhawcrofts' grasp of corporate economics thinking is beyond reproach as are his calculating and irreproachable insights of humanity.
Pardon my sarcasm and foul language following:
rbhawcroft.... how do you pronounce that? I keep trying to sound it out, but all I get out of it is
D U H MMMB A S S. Sorry if I botch that up - but I know how important names are.
Where to begin... The sensible part of my mind says "leave it alone". But, but... It's kind of like road kill - you just gotta keep on looking.
I actually printed this thread out and asked my CFO for his take on the matter. After noting that some of it was hard to read because of poor grammar and that it seemed to be written by children (I explained to him that some users here are from other countries and that many of the users here are indeed kids) he berrated me for spending valuable work hours paying attention to "Chat room lunatics" and also for wasting his time with it - but like looking at roadkill, he just couldn't pull himself away! He's reading this as I'm typing it
Actually, now typing what he's tellling me!
1. CFO's generally do not use foul language to express themselves when addressing mundane topics. (We save that for the arguments over tee times)
2. "Sketcher", Rio Rebel and merlocka seem to have a reasonable grasp on various issues of return policies. But now he wants to know if I'm buying company hardware at Best Buy and If I'm cashing the rebates without submitting them to accounting...
he caught me. j/k
He's now calling his daughter who works at the call center for Minneapolis MN. Circuit City's customer service. Got her voicemail.
3. Looks like someone pissed in rbh'whatever's wheaties. Would be interesting to see what he (is it a "he"? I guess you don't know) looks like in person.
Daughter called. She doesn't know anything about the impact of returns on her company but she knows that Best Buy draws more customers because of their lenient return policy. When asked, she said she didn't know how Best Buy is able to sell same products for less than Circuit City. She said her CFO is on Memorial Day vacation but she'd ask him about it if she remembered to next week.
4. My CFO has a 5:30 board meeting to prepare for - he warns me not to spend much more time on this, but he see's how it can be somewhat addicting. \CFO leaves office.
rbhawcroft,
Regarding your excellent grasp of political and international warfare. Innocent killed... from misfires... tomowawk missiles = "0". Dizmac imaging and real time satellite surviellance verified electronically and visually confirmed 28 of 28 sea launched T-hawks from my platform successfully achieving proper yield. (meaning hit their target w/in 3 square feet of intended point of impact) Now, if there were innocent people there against their will, that is a tragedy. But these targets were known ammo dumps, bunkers and military strategic holdings. It is well known and documented that Saddam convinced and forced civilians to walk in front of troops and stand in front of potential target landmarks in an attempt to dissuade pilots from dropping bombs.
BDA assessment of war time scenarios involve innocent people. It's war. It's unfortunate, it's a fact of war. Do I take on the mindset of a killer of the manner of which you imply in your ranting? No. I dutifully served my country and supported the goals of that war. Do I have doubts? I'm human. Of course I do. I'm not going to argue whether or not my psyche is as scarred as you make me out to be. But a final answer = no innocent people were killed by misfires of T-hawk missiles from my platform. There were no misfires.
easily avoidable war? (it didnt need to be fought as the indpendence of Kuwait is not central to the oil price
Uhmmmm, you sort of step in your own ignorance with that statement. You're right in that the independence of Kuwait was not central to the oil price - which makes you wrong about what you're arguing about. But NATO did not approve war time appropriation simply to make Kuwait independent. There were a couple other minor reasons (much sarcasm in the word "minor") - Kuwait's independence was a by-product of the NATO coalition's effort. People tend to overlook the fact that NATO decided what happened there, not just the U.S. the U.S. just happened to carry the biggest stick. Well, there is the whole "Leader of the free world" mumbo jumbo, but there's a bigger picture here than the small target that you're war-bashing about.
Uh oh, the sensible part of my mind is beginning to win over. This is a soap opera that is better eschewed in "OFF TOPIC". I know that regardless of what I say you're going to impress the world with more incredible enlightment. Your insulting remarks are almost witty. Just try to regurgitate a little less of the ignorance you hold on economic and political issues.
You really do not know what you are talking about.
Oh, and I think it was $18.00 a barrel, not $25.00 - but then there was a variance between pre and post Gulf War oil pricing and whether or not imported fuel oil was supplemented with assurance from Federal Reserve - look at me, going on and on - ignoring the sensible voices again.
REMEMBER PEOPLES, THIS IS THE VIDEO FORUM - ASIDE FROM A LITTLE OT SIDETRACKING, RANTING SUCH AS IS RECEIVED FROM DUMBASS is out of place here.
So I'm thinkin' of pickin' up a couple of Matrox Parahelia's and see if I can run dual 6 monitor setups under windows XP Pro. Of course that means I'll have to get a few more monitors to test it all out - Returning it all when I've realized I've spent way too much money of course!
-Sketcher