I think this is a false dichotomy. Consumer return policies, customer service, etc. tend to be much better in the US than in the EU.
I would characterize it rather that the US is pro-business and pro-consumer, but somewhat anti-average worker.
I think this is a false dichotomy. Consumer return policies, customer service, etc. tend to be much better in the US than in the EU.
I would characterize it rather that the US is pro-business and pro-consumer, but somewhat anti-average worker.
That’s not true. From mandatory refunds when selling online, to capped credit card fees, to longer warranties, the EU is clearly better for consumer rights. Some US businesses have realized that openly screwing your customers isn’t good business practice, but they’re somewhat of the exception I hear (and a lot of those companies offer the same policies, or better, in the EU, e.g. Costco)
Apple is another good example. Their base warranty is two years in the EU versus one year in the US, and there’s additional protection on top in many EU countries that extends it to the expected life of the product, in some cases as long as 5-6 years.
And again, all of these are backed up by the law, not just a policy that the company can revoke or decide not to enforce.
It seems to me that if there is some sort of law or regulation that can be passed, then that policy will be better in the EU. If the better service is a result of competition, then it will likely be better in the US.
In general though, culturally, the US is much more "the customer is always right", whereas in the EU, it's considered a hassle to cater to customers that much. This mentality translates across the economy as a whole.
At least that's in my experience of being American and living in the EU for the last 10 years.
I have never received cash compensation for a delayed flight in the US, but I have in the EU. In my opinion, in the EU if the business screws up it’s their problem: in the US it is the customers, unless you shop somewhere large enough to voluntarily cover their mistakes. Which is, indeed, one reason that anybody can run a business with nothing in the US.
And all of Apple's products are much more expensive in the EU. In Austria, a MacBook Air starts at EUR1199, and the same device starts at USD1099. At today's exchange rate, that European device costs USD1360, or nearly 20% more.
We can argue about the consumer friendliness of the regulations in the EU but they also add demonstrably to the cost of tech products (and likely other categories).
Apple.com like all retailers in the US don’t include sales taxes in the listed price while in Europe ~20% VAT is included.
So if you bother comparing apples to apples that MacBook starts at around $1,145 in Germany… if you actually want that 1 extra year of warranty and get Apple Care in the US it actually becomes cheaper in Europe
> We can argue about the consumer friendliness of the regulations in the EU but they also add demonstrably to the cost of tech product
Nope, they don't. You'd have to compare with some countries that are 1. Not the US 2. Have less consumer protections than the EU. And guess what? Apple products are also significantly more expensive than the US there. But hey, half your comments on here are this kind of EU bashing based on grade school reasoning.
It's surprising to see on HN of all places people unaware that Apple products (and almost all other tech products) have been a lot cheaper in the US than elsewhere for decades.
So much FUD here, same for the Bunny thread. It doesn't feel organic anymore.
[dead]
Is that so? In Germany for example, you have a legal right to return anything you purchased via a remote means of communication - so e.g., the internet, or a phone call - free of charge, within two weeks, and it must be simple to do so; if a vendor tries to obfuscate how to cancel a purchase contract, you can simply write them an email.
yeah most US companies have return policies of 30 days or more, no questions asked.
The word "most" is doing a lot here. Europe guarantees consumer rights by law, while the US relies on companies adopting the practices voluntarily. Most do, but larger companies more universally than smaller, and it's by no means universal.
Don't buy if you don't like company policy, no need to have a law. There is plenty of choice in the US. Some companies even offer 90 days (again, no laws required).
It's the reality for the vast majority of larger companies. Quibbling with word choice is really not a good argument.
We are talking of entrepreneurship and new companies, what small business are required to do for returns/refunds in the US is definitely not ahead of Europe for consumer protection.
It's not word choice, you are just making the wrong argument.
Try canceling your NYT subscription.
Let me support your argument by telling you what you just reminded me of...
I was briefly subscribed to the NYT from Germany. To my surprise, I couldn't cancel online, but had to call. (The EU has a law which requires that if you can subscribe online, you must be able to cancel online.)
They have national numbers for many countries, but they're just forwarders to the same call center, with notably mangled audio quality presumably due to multiple lossy compression algorithms applied at each hop of the call.
Additionally, there was lots of background noise when I got connected to a rep. Over this barely usable line, I was now asked to spell out my email address, which naturally took multiple attempts of painfully slow spelling before the rep was able to locate my account. (My very limited knowledge of the NATO alphabet didn't help.)
Of course, I then had to go through the spiel of declining alternative offers and providing a reason for my cancellation (all of which I never had to do in Germany before) before they finally confirmed it. Yeah, I'm glad about consumer protection law in the EU.
The same exists in the EU, French Le Monde (NYT local equivalent) required you for a long time to send a registered letter costing 7€ and a trip to the post office to cancel your subscription.
So don't subscribe. It's not that hard to cancel though, yes, you need to spend some time on the phone.
most large companies, maybe, but small-to-medium-sized businesses can and will tell you to take a hike. there are no consumer protections in the US regarding returns beyond the goodwill of the company
As it should be when you buy a product IMO. It only works out in high-trust societies and the business model is ruined by scammers. REI is a great example, some people would buy shoes, wear them out, then return them years later because the policy accepted it. It's obviously not a way to keep a company in business, but people just don't care because the reward for them is just too good to pass up.
There's a lot of overlap between protecting consumers and enabling scammers.
That's why they are dying (those who tell you to take a hike). Why would I buy from a small business without a possibility to return if I can buy from Amazon with guaranteed 30 days? It's your choice. Honestly, I bought enough stuff from small to medium companies and most of them allow returns. If not, it's my choice not to buy. Not everything should be a law, and laws are not free, somebody has to pay (just like for 30 day return). Guess who pays? Well, it's ... you.
One of the major reasons US consumers shop with megacorp over small business is because of the no hassle returns.
Exactly my point. In Germany I can order from the smallest of webshops without even reading their return policy, because I am guaranteed favourable terms by law.
In the US, if the remote merchant doesn't accept a return (or is non responsive), a credit card chargeback would be in order.
The customer almost always wins those. And the merchant always has to pay a fee for the chargeback, even when they win, so they're incentivized to avoid them.
The merchant agreement isn't as effective as a well enforced law, but it's pretty close.
This isn't without downsides though: As somebody with a niche technical hobby, it is hard for me to order from many suppliers because they understandably don't want to deal with consumer protection laws and thus exclude B2C transactions outright ("Verkauf nur an Gewerbetreibende").
I would be fine with waiving my right to returns but this is not possible on purpose, so my only options are to shop somewhere else (often not possible) or found a company (not possible because it would be Liebhaberei - "Running a company without intent to make profits").
B2B company in the US rarely sell to consumers either and their return policy is very different. Not necessary "no return", but only if damaged, not per spec etc. Since we don't have consumer protection laws here I guess it's based on different company structure and expected revenue. In your case it may also be VAT implications (similar problem here with sales tax).
So the person that wants to sell that ultra-unique item that isn't produced by mega-corp, and the person that wants to buy that ultra-unique item despite unfavorable return policies never gets their needs met.
Why would that be the case? Maybe you’re thinking of customised or commissioned items, which are an exception explicitly called out in the law and require a defect by the seller to return (so you can’t just return eg a painting made for you on a whim, but if it arrives damaged, you can)
What happens after 2 weeks?
You loose the right to change your mind and return the goods without any reason given, but of course you still have warranty of 6 months; if anything breaks with the product in that time, you can request the seller to make up by offering a repair, replacement, or refund (whatever they deem most appropriate), and while the seller can contest that, they are obliged to prove it’s your fault, not theirs. After that timeframe, this obligation reverses.
How easy is it to enforce that warranty?
> Consumer return policies, customer service, etc. tend to be much better in the US than in the EU.
Maybe the ones voluntarily offered by companies, but not the legal ones.
Not sure if that matters much. Only the actual end result does.
The better policies given by US companies is also likely driven by competition, so by definition they wouldn't be something that a government regulation could accomplish (other than to incentivize more competition.)
It does because for one you can go to court. If a company stops playing nice because they think you’re defrauding them if you tell them your package went missing during transit, company niceness doesn’t get you anything. (That’s a random example btw, I don’t know how this is handled legally in the US. The point is that there are situations where you actually want the law on your side).
You don’t have to go to court even - there is usually a regulatory body that will enforce these for you. This is the whole reason why there is an image of America as sue-happy: they have chosen a regulatory system of “so sue them” instead of a functioning consumer protection system (or any authority with the ability to enforce the ADA, for example).
Suing people and companies is a national pastime in America. I really don't think the EU has an advantage there...
Except every two weeks when he gets a bigger paycheck than most senior UK government positions
This is the result of the US embracing capitalism more than Germany. The market has set minimum expectations, but outliers with other benefits can have an opportunity to thrive until they have an opportunity to meet those minimum expectations.
Although, this is rapidly changing. Places like California are putting in similar regulatory barriers and excessive minimum taxation.