Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#261

Post by reallydontask » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:25 AM UTC

sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

> If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it.

It's just good PR for Amazon to undo it

Also, as pointed out by other commenters the asymmetry might also be related to the asymmetry in financial resources between the parties involved.

A lot of shops will not honour deals like this, maybe even Amazon in the past (I could well be remembering this wrongly and not be Amazon but other online retailers)

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#262

Post by cf498 » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:28 AM UTC

sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

I think the underlying question is, is it unethical to act morally towards immorally acting people? Not immoral actions in the past but continuing behavior? Especially once unethical actors count on you still acting morally towards them?

Amazon is maximizing profits at all cost, why should my actions towards them not be influenced by their behavior?

edit: It gets interesting once you take it one step further, is it ethical to act ethically towards unethical actors? Or more specific, are you obliged to steal Hitlers wallet?

http://www.aeromental.net/2012/04/05/the-book-with-the-quest...

edit2: Less abstract, there is also a real life example, some women who scammed ISIS by posing as to be wives on the internet.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11775228/Three...

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#263

Post by Sherl » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:29 AM UTC

acid__ wrote: post #123

I got in on this! I got a Sony A7R II and a 24-70 2.8 II I'd always wanted but could never justify the purchase of. ($~3k value for $200) A few observations: - Despite the extraordinary deal we got, my friends (who also made a purchase) and I all have our joy offset by a feeling of regret that we didn't order more. Greed! - Despite the fact that I couldn't justify the purchase before I owned them, I now definitely do…

No. Amazon is not going to send you a legal notice to return this. Amazon wants to be the customer centric company and this act is to prove that they own the mistake and the customer is the king.

Source: Amazon employee.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#264

Post by close04 » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:29 AM UTC

moksly wrote: post #246

sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

Is it really about morals? I see it more as a service that makes people chose your site over the competition. It basically boils down to “the customer is always right”, doesn’t it? Morally the customer isn’t always right, but you sell more when you protect them from their own mistakes as well as yours.

> Morally the customer isn’t always right

The customer isn't always right regardless of metric. That saying is just a distilled version of "treat your customers right even when they're wrong and you will gain more than you lose". But it's a choice the shop makes, it's not a law. And many customers (try to) abuse it.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#265

Post by chillacy » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:30 AM UTC

sgift wrote: post #249

Mirioron wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's talking about it from the moral standpoint. Most customers will be able to tell that something is off when camera gear is that cheap.

Amazon is not a person, it's a company. Attributing moral to a transaction with non-person entities is frail itself. Does moral even apply here? What does it mean?

I’m not the op but if you take morality to be an emotional thing then it does work: people (and primates) have an intrinsic sense of fairness.

But that is sort of a relativist position, most people talk about morality like it’s some absolute truth.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#266

Post by ultrarunner » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:31 AM UTC

sgift wrote: post #249

Mirioron wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's talking about it from the moral standpoint. Most customers will be able to tell that something is off when camera gear is that cheap.

Amazon is not a person, it's a company. Attributing moral to a transaction with non-person entities is frail itself. Does moral even apply here? What does it mean?

Someone is responsible for that listing and the pricing it receives. The company operates collectively, but there is ultimately a human behind each sale. OP seems to be interested in the morality surrounding the treatment of the people involved, not the legal entity they’ve invented.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#267

Post by Accacin » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:32 AM UTC

Yeah, it's Amazon losing money.. Big deal. However it does make me wonder the same people that jump on these kind of deals and justify it (rightly or wrongly) would do it to a much smaller company or even a person that's selling something.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#268

Post by hrktb » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:32 AM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #245

sgift wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is a professional seller, they should know better. Buyers are not professionals, they shouldn't have to. Depending on the country this is even enshrined in law (e.g. customer protection laws against accidental buying).

He's talking about it from the moral standpoint. Most customers will be able to tell that something is off when camera gear is that cheap.

It goes both ways, something too cheap will also get you no sympathy when it ends up being fake or a knockoff. On a moral standpoint I think it evens out.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#269

Post by ultrarunner » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:34 AM UTC

reallydontask wrote: post #261

sagebird wrote: post #239

It’s kind of interesting- the asymmetry of moral expectations and entitlement. If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. On the other hand, if the matter is reversed, Amazon is expected to be a good sport and take the loss — even if the purchase was made in bad faith (ie- knowing Amazon mis-priced it but purchasing it anyways.) I’m not going to en…

> If you accidentally purchased a bag of M&Ms from Amazon for 500 dollars instead of 5, they will let you undo it. It's just good PR for Amazon to undo it Also, as pointed out by other commenters the asymmetry might also be related to the asymmetry in financial resources between the parties involved. A lot of shops will not honour deals like this, maybe even Amazon in the past (I could well be remembering this wrongl…

Computer parts often get priced erroneously low. People manage to order them, but I’ve never heard of someone not having their order canceled.

Re: Amazon Accidentally Sold $13k Camera Gear for $100 on Prime Day

#270

Post by antihero » Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 7:39 AM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #245

sgift wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is a professional seller, they should know better. Buyers are not professionals, they shouldn't have to. Depending on the country this is even enshrined in law (e.g. customer protection laws against accidental buying).

He's talking about it from the moral standpoint. Most customers will be able to tell that something is off when camera gear is that cheap.

I don't think there's really that much morally decadent in taking advantage of the mistakes one of the richest companies and quite morally dubious companies on the planet.