www.theatlantic.com Open in urlscan Pro
199.232.198.133  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

GET /search/

<form method="GET" action="/search/" class="SearchOverlay_searchForm___U0R_" data-action="search submit">
  <div class="SearchInput_root__6XLPB">
    <div class="VisuallyHidden_root__yoK4r"><label for="search-input-:R2srl2mm:">Search The Atlantic</label></div><button type="submit" title="Submit" class="SearchInput_searchButton__u0CP0"><svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 16 16"
        aria-hidden="true" width="20">
        <path d="M15.85 15.15l-5.27-5.28a6 6 0 10-.71.71l5.28 5.27a.48.48 0 00.7 0 .48.48 0 000-.7zM1 6a5 5 0 115 5 5 5 0 01-5-5z"></path>
      </svg></button><input type="search" name="q" id="search-input-:R2srl2mm:" class="SearchInput_searchInput__5hWhI SearchInput_hideClear__re5AE" placeholder="Search The Atlantic..." autocomplete="off" required="" value="">
  </div>
  <div class="QuickLinks_quickLinksContainer__F_iFd">
    <div class="QuickLinks_quickLinksHeading__ms7Ht">Quick Links</div>
    <ul class="QuickLinks_quickLinksList__e7x66">
      <li class="QuickLinks_quickLinkListItem__59_09">
        <a class="QuickLinks_quickLink__w_Fp0" href="/projects/dear-therapist/" data-action="click link - quick link" data-label="Dear Therapist" data-event-element="quick link" data-event-position="1"><img alt="Dear Therapist" loading="lazy" class="Image_root__XxsOp Image_lazy__hYWHV QuickLinks_quickLinkImage__FTMBA" src="https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/img/specialreports/lead/2020/10/14/Thumbnail.jpg" width="148" height="148"><div class="QuickLinks_quickLinkLabel__TYtIC">Dear Therapist</div></a>
      </li>
      <li class="QuickLinks_quickLinkListItem__59_09">
        <a class="QuickLinks_quickLink__w_Fp0" href="/free-daily-crossword-puzzle/" data-action="click link - quick link" data-label="Crossword Puzzle" data-event-element="quick link" data-event-position="2"><img alt="Crossword Puzzle" loading="lazy" class="Image_root__XxsOp Image_lazy__hYWHV QuickLinks_quickLinkImage__FTMBA" src="https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/files/nav-crossword.png" width="148" height="148"><div class="QuickLinks_quickLinkLabel__TYtIC">Crossword Puzzle</div></a>
      </li>
      <li class="QuickLinks_quickLinkListItem__59_09">
        <a class="QuickLinks_quickLink__w_Fp0" href="/archive/" data-action="click link - quick link" data-label="Magazine Archive" data-event-element="quick link" data-event-position="3"><img alt="Magazine Archive" loading="lazy" class="Image_root__XxsOp Image_lazy__hYWHV QuickLinks_quickLinkImage__FTMBA" src="https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/files/archive-thumbnail.png" width="148" height="148"><div class="QuickLinks_quickLinkLabel__TYtIC">Magazine Archive</div></a>
      </li>
      <li class="QuickLinks_quickLinkListItem__59_09">
        <a class="QuickLinks_quickLink__w_Fp0" href="https://accounts.theatlantic.com/accounts/subscription/" data-action="click link - quick link" data-label="Your Subscription" data-event-element="quick link" data-event-position="4"><img alt="Your Subscription" loading="lazy" class="Image_root__XxsOp Image_lazy__hYWHV QuickLinks_quickLinkImage__FTMBA" src="https://cdn.theatlantic.com/media/files/YourSubscription_300x300.jpg" width="148" height="148"><div class="QuickLinks_quickLinkLabel__TYtIC">Your Subscription</div></a>
      </li>
    </ul>
  </div><button type="button" aria-label="Close Search" class="SearchOverlay_closeButton___zntA" data-action="close search" data-event-verb="closed" data-event-element="close icon"><svg viewBox="0 0 16 16" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
      class="SearchOverlay_closeIcon__DrMMb">
      <path d="M9.525 8l6.159 6.159a1.078 1.078 0 11-1.525 1.525L8 9.524l-6.159 6.16a1.076 1.076 0 01-1.525 0 1.078 1.078 0 010-1.525L6.476 8 .315 1.841A1.078 1.078 0 111.841.316L8 6.476l6.16-6.16a1.078 1.078 0 111.524 1.525L9.524 8z"
        fill-rule="evenodd"></path>
    </svg></button>
</form>

Text Content

WE VALUE YOUR PRIVACY

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies
and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information
sent by a device for personalised advertising and content, advertising and
content measurement, audience research and services development. With your
permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation data and
identification through device scanning. You may click to consent to our and our
1045 partners’ processing as described above. Alternatively you may click to
refuse to consent or access more detailed information and change your
preferences before consenting. Please note that some processing of your personal
data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such
processing. Your preferences will apply to this website only. You can change
your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by returning to this site
and clicking the "Privacy" button at the bottom of the webpage.
MORE OPTIONSI Do Not AcceptI Accept
Skip to content


SITE NAVIGATION

 * The Atlantic
 * PopularLatestNewsletters
   
   
   SECTIONS
   
    * Politics
    * Ideas
    * Fiction
    * Technology
    * Science
    * Photo
    * Business
    * Culture
    * Planet
    * Global
    * Books
    * Audio
    * Health
    * Education
    * Projects
    * Features
    * Family
    * Events
    * Washington Week
    * Progress
    * Newsletters
   
    * Explore The Atlantic Archive
    * Play The Atlantic crossword
    * Listen to Podcasts and Articles
   
   
   THE PRINT EDITION
   
   Latest IssuePast Issues
   
   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
   Give a Gift
 * Search The Atlantic
   Quick Links
    * Dear Therapist
    * Crossword Puzzle
    * Magazine Archive
    * Your Subscription
   
   
 * Popular
 * Latest
 * Newsletters


 * Sign In
 * Subscribe



Technology


AMAZON RETURNS HAVE GONE TO HELL

What happened?

By Ian Bogost

Illustration by The Atlantic
May 28, 2024
Share
Save


Listen to this article

00:00

13:37

Listen to more stories on curio

This article was featured in the One Story to Read Today newsletter. Sign up for
it here.

Updated at 11:25 a.m. ET on May 30, 2024

After ordering two packs of 11-inch, rope-woven storage cubes from Amazon.com
recently, I found that the resulting cubes were, in fact, 11-by-10.5-by-10.5
inches. Alas, they weren’t what I expected. I elected to return both sets.



Thus began the latest of my ill-fated journeys through logistics at what strives
to be “Earth’s most customer-centric company.” The system promised to be easy:
First I’d set up the return within the Amazon app, then scan the QR code it gave
me at a self-serve kiosk in my local (Amazon-owned) Whole Foods Market store.
After that, I’d simply load my items into a proffered poly bag, print off a
mailing label, and drop the package in a chute that the kiosk would unlock for
me.

If only life could be so simple. Upon arrival at the Whole Foods, I discovered
that I couldn’t fit both of the items I wanted to return into a single poly bag.
With a line forming behind me, I panicked and decided to regroup at home, where
I would begin the process over again, this time as two returns, one for each
pack of not-quite-cubes. When I went back to the kiosk a few days later, I
couldn’t fit even a single pack of storage cubes into a poly bag. Luckily, the
cubes were still in their plasticized wrapper, so I applied the labels directly
to the packaging. But then I accidentally used the same QR code for both items—a
fatal error, it turned out. Didn’t this used to be much easier?

Read: The free-returns party is over

According to the National Retail Federation, one-seventh of the $5 trillion
worth of retail goods sold in the United States in 2023 were returned. Online
retail, which now accounts for about one-quarter of all sales, grew, in part, on
this foundation. If you can’t see and touch goods that you’re about to buy, then
you don’t ever really know what you’re going to get, and you might be
disappointed. Free shipping and returns have helped consumers hedge that risk.
But free for you doesn’t mean free for the retailers, which lose a lot of money
on restocking and refurbishment. As Amanda Mull wrote for The Atlantic last
year, the standard way of selling things online—with the blanket promise You can
always send it back!—has become unsustainable.

“For the first time, companies are making return reductions a priority,” Jacob
Feldman, an associate professor of supply chain, operations, and technology at
Washington University in St. Louis, told me. Amidst their efforts to accomplish
that reduction, some have tweaked their free returns to make them slightly
less-than-free; others have been warning customers away from suspect purchases,
or clamping down on fraud. And according to experts I spoke with, the biggest
online retailers have, over time, revised, modified, and amended the logistics
processes that they’re using for returns. All those small changes have started
to compound. What used to be a simple system for consumers is getting more
complex. And customers like me have begun to notice.





Amazon has sometimes treated its returns as losses, offloading rejected items or
bundling them for sale at auction instead of returning them to stock. But over
the past year or so, and for the first time I can remember, I’ve been getting
frequent notices checking in on my returns. “This is a reminder to return the
item below,” the emails say. One such item was an HDMI coupler—a
home-theater-cable doodad—that I’d bought from Amazon, and then sent back
successfully (I thought) for an automated refund. Now the company was telling me
that the coupler was unaccounted for. Send the item back, it warned, or you’ll
be charged for it again. I’ve had this same experience—where Amazon insists that
it never got an item I really have sent back—many times now. In some cases, I
did end up getting charged, and had to talk with customer service to unwind the
matter. Sometimes it took several separate calls or chats to resolve.


RECOMMENDED READING


 * COMPANIES WANT REMOTE WORKERS IN ALL STATES BUT 1
   
   Saahil Desai
   


 * WHAT NUMBER OF KIDS MAKES PARENTS HAPPIEST?
   
   Joe Pinsker
   


 * WHAT IF EVERYONE ATE BEANS INSTEAD OF BEEF?
   
   Tynesha Foreman, Alice Roth, and Brianna Pressey
   

Read: This is what happens to all the stuff you don’t want

In the supply-chain industry, providing for returns is known as “reverse
logistics.” For a huge e-commerce business like Amazon’s, this system is
necessarily involved. Whenever you make a purchase, your items may be shipped to
you from a number of different locations, packaged all together in a single box
or spread across a handful, and arriving on the same or different days from
either Amazon or its “Marketplace” of third-party sellers. Then, if you want to
return an item, all those elements must be unwound. According to Zachary S.
Rogers, an associate professor of supply-chain management at Colorado State
University, Amazon is better adapted to this problem than other online
retailers. “They have understood for a long time that returns are a necessary
evil,” he told me. The company also makes lots of money from Prime memberships,
which come with fast, free shipping and returns.

“The name of the game now is mitigation: How do we mitigate this crazy number of
returns?” Rogers said. “One of the things you could do is put a little more
friction in it. They’ll never say returns are going to cost money or not be
allowed. But if it’s a little more inconvenient, that’s not necessarily a bad
thing.” In other words, if a return process put customers off just enough to
dissuade some returns, but without upsetting the precious idea of free returns,
that would be a net benefit for retailers. Rogers, who used to work in logistics
for an Amazon subsidiary, couldn’t say for sure whether this was going on at
Amazon or any other online retail company. And Amazon itself, through its
spokesperson, told me it would be “patently false and misguided” to assert that
any of its return practices are meant to discourage returns. “Customers usually
get a product they love, but in case they don’t, we welcome returns and invest
heavily in technology, infrastructure, and staff to make them fast, convenient,
and easy for customers,” the spokesperson said.



Read: The nasty logistics of returning your too-small pants

Still, Rogers told me that he’s seen other retailers add rules and limits to
their returns practices. A company might not let you return a television that
you bought the day before the Super Bowl, for example. But sellers have to be
careful. “You can put some subtle frictions in the system, but you can’t go
overboard,” he said.

I’ve certainly dealt with some form of friction using Amazon. The company may
unexpectedly split up a group of items into separate returns, for example. That
experience can be disorienting. In principle, you might order three of the same
hand towel, discover the color isn’t to your liking, and then be forced by the
website’s software to return two of them in one batch and the other in a second.
And although Amazon still advertises free returns for many of its products, what
that means in practice may vary by customer. You could be directed, as I was, to
a self-service return kiosk at your local Whole Foods. Or you could be sent to
Kohl’s, or Staples, or perhaps the UPS Store.

The spokesperson for Amazon told me that the company presents customers with
return options “based on product attributes” and that “the options for return
locations may vary.” But that’s not the whole story. “Behind the scenes, Amazon
is figuring out the cheapest return option for them, today,” Rogers suggested.
The best way for Amazon to route an item might vary with factors such as
geography (in rural areas, USPS pickup might be cheapest, for example) or
current shipping volumes (a UPS Store might provide for more or less efficiency
than Kohl’s on any given day). “I think they cherry-pick the things that make
sense for them economically,” Rogers told me. When presented with this
assertion, Amazon’s spokesperson did not offer a response.

Consumers have no view into this back-office murk, and the confusion it
engenders may effectively be limiting returns. I couldn’t help but wonder if
this explained my problems with “unreceived” items that I’d definitely sent back
to Amazon. Perhaps my returns had veered off-course amidst the convoluted steps
of grouping items with their proper labels, determining whether each one goes
into a return-shipping box, and then understanding where and how they ought to
be dropped off.



The company rejected the idea that my befuddlement about the system of returns
was the norm. “A lot of this is based on your experience,” the spokesperson told
me. Out of curiosity, I asked Amazon corporate to look into my account. What had
gone wrong with my return of the HDMI dongle, or of the box of stainless-steel
washers, both of which I’d sent back to Amazon in January? And what had happened
to the pack of nail-in cable clips that I’d returned in April? The spokesperson
said that I’d packed the first two items together in one bag when it should have
been two. That’s possible, I suppose. It’s true that I was flustered at the
drop-off. The barcodes all looked the same, and the item thumbnail on my phone
screen, which I had to reference at the kiosk, was hard to see, and I didn’t
have enough hands to do everything.

When summarizing the review of my orders, Amazon’s spokesperson told me: “You
didn’t follow the instructions properly.” Again, this may be true—but I’d been
trying to follow instructions, and still things didn’t go my way. Amazon
eventually conceded that one of the unreceived-return notices I’d gotten, for
the cable clips, had been sent in error, because the item was incorrectly
scanned at the fulfillment center. The company also told me that the kiosk had
allowed me to use the same barcode twice for the storage cubes because “when not
all of the items fit into one bag, the kiosk allows customers to print multiple
labels.” The whole experience seemed riddled with arbitrary, hidden rules.

I’ve been feeling less inclined, these days, to make returns. Others seem to
feel the same. “If I even think there is a .1% chance I may have to return an
item, I am not buying it from Amazon,” one frustrated customer posted on Reddit
a few weeks ago. Others have alleged that Amazon is taking longer to issue
refunds than it used to. The company maintains that the system is working very
well for its customers. It says that 90 percent of eligible refunds are issued
within five hours. The spokesperson told me that kiosk returns are completed on
average in 60 seconds, that “hundreds of thousands of customers use these kiosks
weekly” and that those customers “provide highly positive feedback on the
experience.” Amazon also stressed that its system for processing returns—which
I’d come to see as a sprawling bureaucracy—is actually designed for convenience,
offering customers one or more free return options at 8,000 locations across the
U.S., the spokesperson said. But from his perspective as a logistics expert,
Rogers thinks that’s not a totally straightforward answer. “Everyone I’ve talked
to, almost universally, feels that there needs to be some control of the crazy
cost of returns,” he said of the retail sector overall. “But you have to do it
in a way that’s subtle.”



Indeed, the whole returns situation seems equivocal. I’ve noticed returns
getting harder recently, but Amazon contends that it only ever strives to
improve its processes. Is it possible that we’re both right? “They might want it
to seem like they’re making returns easier, when it’s actually harder,” Feldman,
the WashU professor, said. “That’s probably exactly what they want.” (Amazon had
told me that this is not, in fact, what it wants.) Feldman added that it might
be difficult for the company to know exactly what makes returns “easier,”
anyway. Different options may appeal to one customer but not another. “There’s
no silver bullet.”

Faced with that reality, Amazon has tried to do it all: In the absence of a
silver bullet for returns, it now provides an ammunition store of options
(though it may be the case that only one of them is free). But this creates its
own problems, Rogers told me. “As you increase optionality, you add
complication,” he said. “From the consumer’s side, it’s not just one consistent
process every time.” Inconsistency isn’t only maddening for people with some
storage cubes that they don’t want. It may also lead to more mistakes in
processing their returns, and more anger over missing refunds.

Late in the process of writing this story, I created yet another free Amazon
return, but did not get the option of making a poly-bagged, Whole Foods drop-off
like before. Instead, I was instructed to seal all four of my items into a
single shipping box (I’d already recycled mine!) and take the package down to
the UPS Store. I did not feel like I’d been graced with any greater freedom by
this new directive. The choice of where to go had been made on my behalf. That
might be more efficient in the end, but it makes me feel like a cog in a
reverse-logistics machine I can never hope to understand, but which I also
cannot seem to give up.


Ian Bogost is a contributing writer at The Atlantic.