Zeni already got our dollars, and gave us their personal scrip.
It's the same mechanic as me handing a $1000 to you and getting 10,000 pieces of paper you ran through your home printer that says "1 token". Tokens non refundable for $.
You already have my $money, it's never coming back to me. I've already crossed one threshold of non-refundability by that initial transaction. Allowing me to return your product X due to dissatisfaction and get my tokens back so I can put them toward something I like better is attention to customer satisfaction. If I am stuck with your product X - that I don't like - then I am less inclined to hand you more of my $money.
Take the Breton hero costume for example. People bought it based on preview, and found themselves dissatisfied after they got a closer look than preview would allow. If zeni allowed a return of that costume, refund for crowns, then ZERO actual $money leaves their hands. Those people would take their refunded crowns and spend them on something else, transforming them from upset customers stuck with a disliked costume into satisfied customers with other-product-B.
Returns / refunds / exchanges of some sort in the crown store is a customer satisfaction tactic.
But it's that initial transaction of $money for crowns that it looks like most of the naysayers have forgotten. Their arguments are based on a presumption that zeni loses $money if they allow returns... That presumption is wrong.
Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Zeni already got our dollars, and gave us their personal scrip.
It's the same mechanic as me handing a $1000 to you and getting 10,000 pieces of paper you ran through your home printer that says "1 token". Tokens non refundable for $.
You already have my $money, it's never coming back to me. I've already crossed one threshold of non-refundability by that initial transaction. Allowing me to return your product X due to dissatisfaction and get my tokens back so I can put them toward something I like better is attention to customer satisfaction. If I am stuck with your product X - that I don't like - then I am less inclined to hand you more of my $money.
Take the Breton hero costume for example. People bought it based on preview, and found themselves dissatisfied after they got a closer look than preview would allow. If zeni allowed a return of that costume, refund for crowns, then ZERO actual $money leaves their hands. Those people would take their refunded crowns and spend them on something else, transforming them from upset customers stuck with a disliked costume into satisfied customers with other-product-B.
Returns / refunds / exchanges of some sort in the crown store is a customer satisfaction tactic.
But it's that initial transaction of $money for crowns that it looks like most of the naysayers have forgotten. Their arguments are based on a presumption that zeni loses $money if they allow returns... That presumption is wrong.
The simple answe is NO. The more complex answer is No WAY.
Zos will not setup a situation where once someone finds a mount they like better the player can just return the mount, get crowns back smso they can buy a new mount. It completely undermines the forensic store and eliminates much if the drive to create new items.
Preview the costume or mount before your purchase it. It works really well, great design with that. If one fails to use the tools available to ensure they like the appearance or makes an impulse buy, tough luck, as it should be.
I packed all of the pixels I got into a box and mailed them back to ZOS with a note requesting a refund. Now we play the waiting game.nimander99 wrote: »Its physically impossible to refund digital pixels my friend
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
No, it absolutely isn't.But it's that initial transaction of $money for crowns that it looks like most of the naysayers have forgotten. Their arguments are based on a presumption that zeni loses $money if they allow returns... That presumption is wrong.
Currently:
- You pay X amount of money to buy crowns.
- ZOS has your money.
- You spend those crowns on crown store items.
- You decide the items you bought aren't as cool as you first thought, but there's nothing to be done about it.
- You see a new item in the crown store that you really want.
- You pay another X amount of money to buy more crowns.
- You spend those crowns on the new item in the crown store that you want.
- ZOS now has 2X worth of real money from you.
- Cycle starts again.
If there was an option to allow returns (without severe limitations):
- You pay X amount of money to buy crowns.
- ZOS has your money.
- You spend those crowns on crown store items.
- You decide the items you bought aren't as cool as you first thought, so you return it.
- You get your crowns back.
- You see a new item in the crown store that you really want.
- You don't have to pay any more money to buy more crowns because you have the crowns you already bought back.
- You spend the same crowns again to get the new item in the crown store that you want.
- ZOS now has X worth of real money from you.
- Cycle starts again and you might never have to pay any more money to ZOS for more crowns.
See the difference? With returns ZOS loses tons of money.
But it's that initial transaction of $money for crowns that it looks like most of the naysayers have forgotten. Their arguments are based on a presumption that zeni loses $money if they allow returns... That presumption is wrong.
Absolute baloney. It's inapplicable to you and to a small segment of the player base. To the average person it's exactly correct. It's only when people are very upset that it breaks down (and those people will often be lost forever as customers in any case, regardless of whether they can get refunds - it generally takes a lot more than a refund to retain a customer who is particularly upset). People who are generally satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied follow the cycle I laid out. If the vast majority of your customer base doesn't fall into the "satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied" categories then your business is going to fail regardless.So your cycle is inapplicable. It is a forced scenario that does not match reality.
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
Absolute baloney. It's inapplicable to you and to a small segment of the player base. To the average person it's exactly correct. It's only when people are very upset that it breaks down (and those people will often be lost forever as customers in any case, regardless of whether they can get refunds - it generally takes a lot more than a refund to retain a customer who is particularly upset). People who are generally satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied follow the cycle I laid out. If the vast majority of your customer base doesn't fall into the "satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied" categories then your business is going to fail regardless.So your cycle is inapplicable. It is a forced scenario that does not match reality.
Bottom line: from a business standpoint ZOS would lose a ton of money if they allowed refunds on crown store items without putting significant controls on refund eligibility. Trying to claim otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.
*sigh* you clearly don't have even a basic understanding of how business works. Everything is budgeted based on projected earnings (other things factor into it as well, like capital costs etc, but projected earnings are the most important). If your actual earnings are significantly lower than the earnings targets you budgeted for, you lose money. The fact that I had to explain that to you shows that you aren't qualified to even be involved in this discussion.Absolute baloney. It's inapplicable to you and to a small segment of the player base. To the average person it's exactly correct. It's only when people are very upset that it breaks down (and those people will often be lost forever as customers in any case, regardless of whether they can get refunds - it generally takes a lot more than a refund to retain a customer who is particularly upset). People who are generally satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied follow the cycle I laid out. If the vast majority of your customer base doesn't fall into the "satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied" categories then your business is going to fail regardless.So your cycle is inapplicable. It is a forced scenario that does not match reality.
Bottom line: from a business standpoint ZOS would lose a ton of money if they allowed refunds on crown store items without putting significant controls on refund eligibility. Trying to claim otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.
Strange place to put a benchmark - they've /lost/ money because I didn't buy more crowns? You act almost as if that money is theirs already, and it is my fault they /lost/ it by not buying crowns.
Does McDonald's /lose/ money if you decide to buy more fruits and vegetables? Was that actually McDonald's money and they /lost/ it when you are healthy?
How about music artists, do they /lose/ money when you listen to the radio instead of buying their song?
You have a bass-ackwards view of whose money it is when it is in my hand. Mine. The choice to purchase is mine alone, and it doesn't become theirs until I hand it to them. They cannot /lose/ money that never reached their hand. What they can lose is *future* sales, and that is a measure of satisfaction/dissatisfaction.
And you can only make empty claims as to how many people curtail future spending based on their feelings on previous experiences. You have no way of knowing the size of the segment that stopped or slowed down buying crowns, those who ended their subscription.
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
How about music artists, do they /lose/ money when you listen to the radio instead of buying their song?
You have a bass-ackwards view of whose money it is when it is in my hand. Mine. The choice to purchase is mine alone, and it doesn't become theirs until I hand it to them. They cannot /lose/ money that never reached their hand. What they can lose is *future* sales, and that is a measure of satisfaction/dissatisfaction.
*sigh* you clearly don't have even a basic understanding of how business works. Everything is budgeted based on projected earnings (other things factor into it as well, like capital costs etc, but projected earnings are the most important). If your actual earnings are significantly lower than the earnings targets you budgeted for, you lose money. The fact that I had to explain that to you shows that you aren't qualified to even be involved in this discussion.Absolute baloney. It's inapplicable to you and to a small segment of the player base. To the average person it's exactly correct. It's only when people are very upset that it breaks down (and those people will often be lost forever as customers in any case, regardless of whether they can get refunds - it generally takes a lot more than a refund to retain a customer who is particularly upset). People who are generally satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied follow the cycle I laid out. If the vast majority of your customer base doesn't fall into the "satisfied or only somewhat dissatisfied" categories then your business is going to fail regardless.So your cycle is inapplicable. It is a forced scenario that does not match reality.
Bottom line: from a business standpoint ZOS would lose a ton of money if they allowed refunds on crown store items without putting significant controls on refund eligibility. Trying to claim otherwise is absolutely ridiculous.
Strange place to put a benchmark - they've /lost/ money because I didn't buy more crowns? You act almost as if that money is theirs already, and it is my fault they /lost/ it by not buying crowns.
Does McDonald's /lose/ money if you decide to buy more fruits and vegetables? Was that actually McDonald's money and they /lost/ it when you are healthy?
How about music artists, do they /lose/ money when you listen to the radio instead of buying their song?
You have a bass-ackwards view of whose money it is when it is in my hand. Mine. The choice to purchase is mine alone, and it doesn't become theirs until I hand it to them. They cannot /lose/ money that never reached their hand. What they can lose is *future* sales, and that is a measure of satisfaction/dissatisfaction.
And you can only make empty claims as to how many people curtail future spending based on their feelings on previous experiences. You have no way of knowing the size of the segment that stopped or slowed down buying crowns, those who ended their subscription.
Doesn't matter how old you are, your grandfather would see the wisdom in the saying "do not count your chickens before they are hatched". Thus, do not spend next quarter's profits before they arrive.
OutLaw_Nynx wrote: »I personally would like to see what the animation for mounts are before I buy them. For example, I was excited about the bear mount only to realize how dizzy it made me. I wouldn't of bought it otherwise