bobthenormal wrote:I certainly agree Woot should deal with it. So don't think what I'm going to say is an argument for why Woot should not deal with it, but rather just to understand how something like this happens without someone "evil" purposely mislabeling the sale.
From what I understand, Woot is often a middle-man for sales. A company comes to them and says "Hey we'd like to clear out some stock at a discount." and Woot arranges to present it to their buyers. On the back end, I imagine Woot does not then go and inspect all the merchandise thoroughly - they promise whatever the seller promised.
Sounds like in this case two companies I hold in high regard, Woot and Canon, have something to work out. And in the mean time, I get a used camera. =/
As the seller (to me), Woot should deal with me (us), I think. But as the provider of the products, Canon (or whatever other company might be involved) shouldn't have lied to or misled Woot about the condition of the goods. I am giving Woot the benefit of the doubt there and assuming that's what happened.
That's my take on it - I'll send Woot an e-mail about it during the week if I haven't heard anything back through this thread or PM. So please do let me know either here or through PM what happens!
I agree that there may not be anything sinister going on here, but, as you allude, my contract is with Woot and it's their responsibility to make sure their suppliers (whoever they are) are filling their orders as promised to the customer. If I don't hold woot responsible, they'll never hold their suppliers responsible. If woot experiences a bit of financial pain by eating the return shipping charges enough times, we'll get what was advertised because woot will do a better job of checking on their suppliers.
However, this is not my first experience with this scenario, which tells me there is at least a systemic issue and at most an intentional business reason. But, at any rate, woot corrected the problem for me and I have continued buying stuff from them.
