And no, I'm not talking about inflation or shrinkage or self checkout lines, retailers have a return problem.

不，我說的不是通貨膨脹、貨品縮水或自助結帳排隊，零售商都有退貨問題。

There was about $5 trillion worth of retail sales last year, 14.5% of those were returned.

去年零售額約5兆美元，其中14.5%被返還。

That is huge. $743 billion worth.

這金額很龐大，價值 7,430 億美元。

You might have heard some retailers are changing return policies, shrinking return windows, limiting the types of items that can be returned, even charging for returns in some cases.

你可能聽說過一些零售商正在改變退貨政策，縮小退貨窗口，限制可以退貨的商品類型，甚至在某些情況下收取退貨費用。

In fact, 81% of retailers implemented pay-to-return policies in some capacity and 2023.

事實上，到 2023 年，81% 的零售商以某種方式實施了付費退貨政策。

Amazon, Macy's and others have added fees, or they've shortened the window for returning items purchased online.

亞馬遜、梅西百貨和其他公司增加了費用，或縮短了線上購買商品的退貨時間。

Return fraud has caused a number of retailers to tighten their return policies writ large.

退貨詐欺已導致許多零售商收緊退貨政策。

Now, most people assume these crackdowns have to do with fraudulent returns or return scams, and they do to an extent.

大多數人認為這些打擊行動與欺詐性退貨或退貨詐騙有關，而且在某種程度上確實如此。

Retailers expect 16 and a half percent of holiday returns to be fraudulent this year.

零售商預計今年 16%.5 的假期退貨是欺詐性的。

That's 24 and a half billion dollars worth.

金額 24 億美元。

The reality is returns have always been a drag on the bottom line, and the advent of ecommerce accelerated the issue.

現實情況是，退貨一直都拖累利潤，而電子商務的出現加速了這個問題。

As retailers started absorbing the cost of postage, transit, and lost items, it's no wonder big box companies are starting to change their policies, making it harder for fraudsters and cutting down on the cost of returns across the board.

隨著零售商開始承擔郵費、運輸和遺失物品的成本，難怪大型零售商開始改變他們的政策，讓詐欺者更難上當，並全面降低退貨成本。

You changed a little bit of some of your policies on returns and when you actually refund people and you know, you try to make sure you know you got the right product before you actually authorize the refund.

店家更改了一些退貨政策，當店家實際向人們退款時，在實際授權退款之前，店家會嘗試確保知道自己獲得了正確的產品。

But what if I told you this is just the latest effort and cracking down on return losses?

但如果我告訴你這只是打擊退貨損失的最新努力呢？

What if retailers have been quietly tracking your return behavior for years?

如果零售商多年來一直在悄悄追蹤你的退貨行為呢？

First, let's establish what fraudulent return behavior is.

首先，讓我們確定什麼是欺詐性退貨行為。

We have a lot of customers will send back a broken product or try and defraud the retailer by sending back something else in the box.

我們有很多顧客會退回損壞的產品，或試圖透過把其他東西裝進盒子裡來欺騙零售商。

Now, those are pretty easy examples, and often those returners know they're engaging in fraudulent behavior.

這些都是非常簡單的例子，而這些退貨者通常知道他們正在從事詐欺行為。

But there's also times when people take advantage of return policies, things like wardrobing, where a shopper buys a clothing item for an event with the intent of returning after well, you may be following the basics of a return policy.

但有時人們也會利用退貨政策，例如衣櫃，購物者為某個活動購買服裝，並打算在事後退貨，那麼你可能會遵循退貨政策的基本原則。

Retailers viewed this as problematic behavior.

零售商認為這是一種有問題的行為。

It's the people who are misinterpreting are not following the intent or policies are really problematic for retailers.

對於零售商來說，真正有問題的是那些誤解的人沒有遵循意圖或政策。

Now, if you're still thinking, "I'm not a fraudulent returner, I always follow the rules. This obviously doesn't apply to me."

如果你還在想：「我不是欺詐性退貨者，我總是遵守規則。這顯然不適用於我。」

Sure, maybe not. But that doesn't mean you haven't been flagged in the past.

當然，也許不是。但這並不意味著你過去沒有被標記過。

It isn't sort of a binary event. It isn't that either you're a good returner, or bad returner.

這不是一個二元事件。這並不是說你是一個好的退貨者，還是一個壞的退貨者。

Essentially, what retailers are trying to do is ensure that every customer is profitable on their own.

從本質上講，零售商想要做的就是確保每個客戶都能獲利。

A 2018 report by the Wall Street Journal documented what was and still is it largely unspoken policy of big box retailers tracking and profiling, risky return behavior, even going as far as banning customers from returning at the store.

《華爾街日報》 2018 年的一份報告記錄了大型零售商追蹤和分析風險退貨行為，甚至禁止顧客在商店退貨的基本不言而喻的政策。

Customers who seemingly have done nothing wrong because of their return score.

從退貨分數來看，顧客似乎沒有做錯任何事。

But what's the return score? Who's keeping track? And what do they know about me?

但退貨分數是什麼？誰在追蹤？他們對我了解多少？

Let's use an example.

讓我們來舉個例子。

Say, I went into my local big box tech store and bought a laptop last year.

假設，我去年到當地的大賣場買了一臺筆電，

I take it home and decide this isn't for me, I'm going to return it.

我把它帶回家，決定這不適合我，我要退貨。

So I go back to the store and return the item; within the proper time period. I have my receipt, it's in the original packaging.

於是我回到商店，把它退了回去。在規定時間內、有收據、原包裝。

But this is a pretty expensive item, so I'm asked to show an ID.

但這是一件相當昂貴的物品，所以我被要求出示身份證。

Hey, no big deal. I give them my ID and the card I made the purchase with, all good.

嘿，沒什麼大不了的。我把身份證給了他們和我購買時使用的卡，都很好。

I get my money back and leave the store.

我拿到錢了，然後離開商店。

Fast forward to today. I got to buy a flat screen TV at that same big box store.

快進到今天。我在同一家大賣場買了平板電視。

But oh, I get it home and it isn't the right size.

但是，哦，我把它帶回家了但尺寸不合適。

You know what? I'm just going to order it online. So I go back to that big box store and return the TV within the proper timeframe.

我上網訂好了。於是，我又回到那家大賣場，在適當的時間內退貨。

I have my receipt, it's in the packaging and wait, what do you mean I can't return it.

我有收據、還在原包裝裡，等等，你說我不能退貨是什麼意思？

I'm following company return policy, aren't I?

我遵守貴公司的退貨政策，不是嗎？

I'm then handed a sheet that tells me I need to reach out to a third-party company to find out why my return was refused.

我收到了一張表格，告訴我需要聯絡第三方公司以找出我的退貨被拒絕的原因。

Turns out this store has been sending my data out to a third-party loss prevention service provider and unbeknownst to me, this company has been building a profile on me for years.

事實證明，這家商店一直將我的資料發送給第三方防損服務提供商，而在我不知情的情況下，這家公司多年來一直在建立我的個人資料。

They have access to my name, address, phone number, ID number, even my loyalty account information.

他們有我的姓名、地址、電話號碼、身分證號碼，甚至我的常客計畫帳戶資訊。

Basically any personal data I've handed over to this retailer.

基本上我已經交給這家零售商的所有個人資料。

Now, this is all hypothetical, but loss prevention companies and this exact practice is very real.

現在，這都是假設的，但防損公司和這種確切的做法是非常真實的。

The most prominent being a company called The Retail Equation.

其中最著名的是一家名為 The Retail Equation 的公司。

According to The Retail Equation's website, it works with individual retailers outline what the retailer deems as potentially fraudulent behavior.

根據 The Retail Equation 的網站，它與個別零售商合作，概述了零售商認為潛在的詐欺行為。

From there, The Retail Equation software tracks customer return behavior and assigns a score to returners who may exhibit potentially fraudulent behavior.

從那裡，The Retail Equation 軟體追蹤顧客的退貨行為，並為可能表現出潛在詐欺行為的退貨者分配分數。

According to The Retail Equation, it software normally tracks factors such as frequency of the specific transaction types transaction value, whether the customer has a receipt in purchase history at that retailer,

根據 The Retail Equation，它的軟體通常會追蹤諸如特定交易類型交易價值的頻率、客戶在該零售商的購買歷史記錄中是否有收據等因素，

but what does that look like in practice?

但實際情況如何呢？

Well, according to the Wall Street Journal, it could be a lot of things, bringing back several returns in a short amount of time.

根據《華爾街日報》的報導，它可能有很多種，像是在短時間內退貨很多次、

Returning a large portion of your purchase, maybe you forgot a receipt, returning an expensive item returning a frequently stolen item, even returning an item close to closing time.

退回大部分購買的商品，也許忘記了收據，退回昂貴的商品，退回經常被盜的商品，甚至退回接近關門時間的商品。

These are just a few examples of things that could hurt your return score.

這些只是可能影響你的退貨分數的幾個例子。

Meaning in theory, even a shopper who is operating within the bounds of a return policy could get penalized.

這意味著從理論上講，即使是在退貨政策範圍內進行操作的購物者也可能會受到處罰。

For some they may never know they even had a score or that it was impacted.

對某些人來說，他們可能永遠不知道自己有分數或分數受到影響。

For others, this could look like a warning handed out at the return counter or being outright banned from returning at that retailer.

對其他人來說，這可能看起來像是在退貨櫃檯發出的警告，或者被徹底禁止在該零售商退貨。

According to customer complaints lodged with the Better Business Bureau, customers reported feeling blindsided by the return blocks of major US retailers.

根據向商業改進局提交的顧客投訴，顧客表示對美國主要零售商的退貨封鎖感到措手不及。

Several complaints go as far as claiming the penalize behavior and the report was misreported, and I had no way of seeing it until after they were given a warning or the return was already blocked.

有幾起投訴甚至聲稱存在處罰行為，報告被誤報，直到他們收到警告或退貨已被阻止後，我才看到這一情況。

It's complaints like these that prompted several now dismissed class action lawsuits against The Retail Equation between 2020 and 2023.

正是此類投訴引發了 2020 年至 2023 年間針對 The Retail Equation 的幾起集體訴訟，現已被駁回。

Plaintiffs in each suit alleged this software often gets information wrong, and give shoppers little recourse when it comes to accessing or correcting the data The Retail Equation collects.

每起訴訟中的原告都聲稱，該軟體經常會獲取錯誤的信息，並且在訪問或糾正 The Retail Equation 收集的數據時幾乎沒有給予購物者追索權。

The lawsuit goes on to claim that this data is supplied to The Retail Equation without the knowledge or consent of consumers.

該訴訟還聲稱，這些數據是在消費者不知情或未經消費者同意的情況下提供給 The Retail Equation 的。

The problem is these types of complaints are hard to backup.

問題是這些類型的投訴很難得到證實。

Often these policies are outlined where most of the fine print is buried in retailers' Terms of Service or return policy.

通常，這些政策的概述中大部分細則都隱藏在零售商的服務條款或退貨政策中。

It isn't something you can opt out of because if they have decided to outsource their return logistics to a third party, and you're agreeing to purchase from them in that purchase agreement,

你不能選擇退出，因為如果他們決定將退貨流外包給第三方，並且你同意在購買協議中向他們購買，

you're also implicitly opting into accepting the third-party logistics provider for returns.

您也隱含地選擇接受第三方物流提供者的退貨。

At the time of The Wall Street Journal report, The Retail Equation said it worked with 34,000 stores.

截至《華爾街日報》報導時，The Retail Equation 表示已與 34,000 家商店合作。

The 2021 class action suit named several retailers as defendants including Dick's Sporting Goods, Best Buy and Advance Autoparts.

2021 年的集體訴訟將多家零售商列為被告，其中包括 Dick's Sporting Goods、Best Buy 和 Advance Autoparts。

Other retailers like Home Depot and TJ Maxx have also been identified as past users of The Retail Equation services.

其他零售商如 Home Depot 和 TJ Maxx 也被認定為 The Retail Equation 服務的過去用戶。

And this leads back to our bigger question.

這又回到了我們更大的問題。

If retailers have been implementing these targeted policies for a while, why implement broad policy changes now?

如果零售商實施這些有針對性的政策已經有一段時間了，為什麼現在要實施廣泛的政策變革呢？

Now that interest rates have also risen, what you have is retailers thinking, look, there's a piece of cost here that isn't necessary.

現在利率也上升了，零售商會想，看，這裡有一項不必要的成本。

Basically, it's a lot more expensive to be a retailer right now.

基本上，現在成為零售商的成本要高得多。

Meaning to turn a profit, they're having to tamp down on areas that have historically been money-drained.

為了獲利，他們必須壓制那些歷來資金枯竭的領域。

According to The Retail Equation's own numbers, the US retail industry lost over $101 billion to return fraud and abuse in 2023.

根據 The Retail Equations 自己的數據，2023 年美國零售業因退貨詐欺和濫用行為而損失超過 1,010 億美元。

And that's not counting the cost of all the regular non-fraudulent returns.

這還不包括所有常規非欺詐性退貨的成本。

Most of the returns that come back, it cost up to 40% of the return or the original retail price to put that item back on the shelf, and there's no guarantee they can sell it for what they originally asked for it, so they're looking losing money on both ends.

大多數退貨的費用高達退貨價格或原始零售價的 40% 才能將商品放回貨架上，而且不能保證他們能按照最初的要求出售商品，因此他們雙方都在虧損。