OneBlade for one ninety nine deal is back

 As I was browsing the OneBlade website, I came across this page, and had to screencapture it just for future reference. Stansberry here talks about a full  100% refund — no special conditions are mentioned. Shipping fees I would of course understand.

Before we go looking for a rope and find a tree, lets look at this closer.

First, suppose a manufacturer offers something, anything today, and then changes the offer. Is that legal?  How about they offer a product for $200 then it goes on sale for $150? Is that legal? Are the people who bought at $200 got a leg to stand on complaining about it?  Ok, now lets look at this.

Here is the current webpage. https://www.onebladeshave.com/ Click on refunds on the bottom of the  page https://www.onebladeshave.com/shipping-gurantee-refund/ What does it say? It says if you didn't use it, then full refund. If you used it, then it cost you $99 because they can't resell it. That doesn't make sense? How can they sell a product as "new" when its used?   Now lets look at the page you saved. Its still online https://www.onebladeshave.com/our-story/ It DOES say 100% back refund. But it ALSO says click on the link to order. There are two links but to the same page https://www.onebladeshave.com/special/ It clearly tells you the refund policy, the NEW policy. You use it and it costs you $99 to return it.

So, it appears their refund policy has, in fact, changed. And the original "story" page not updated although it links to the new policy. What happened? Some guesses:

1. They didn't realize they needed to change the "my story" page and missed it

2. They realized they can't sell used razors as new, got returns, took some losses.

Stuff happens, policies change, etc.  They were selling a luxury product in an industry where some people complain about quarter blades and $20 soaps. Once established, maybe they figured out it was too generous? I don't know the   answer.   Lets look at some other razors

Ikon 35% restocking fee http://ikonrazors.com/terms-conditions/

AOS - UNOPENED, UNUSED http://www.theartofshaving.com/customerc...lt,pg.html

ATT - will refund https://www.abovethetie.com/pages/faq

Edwin Jagger - UNUSED https://www.edwinjagger.co.uk/returns-refunds

How about resellers?

Maggards - UNUSED http://www.maggardrazors.com/about/

WestCoast - UNUSED http://www.westcoastshaving.com/Shipping..._41-1.html

Royalshave - UNUSED http://www.royalshave.com/returns

Thats enough. ATT seems to be the exception. Everyone else, you use it,  you own it. Seems like ATT is the most reasonable. OneBlade not bad.

grim  I don't have a dog in this fight don't own one as as of today don't plan on getting one (never say never) but is there anyway to say that the return policy was actually changed all you can see is the letter and the current return policy. It may never have been a full refund that is just speculation. If I missed something I apologize.

For me, the restocking fee isn't the issue. What I don't like is that they say 'money back guarantee' in big letters, which infers something that doesn't match the fine print.

I don't dislike the OneBlade company. As I have said many times, I think they invented a better mouse trap and am glad they are in business. Because of behavior such as the issue of the money back guarantee, I don't have loyalty to them. I believe the razor is worth a premium price, though I don't buy other things from them.

Yes, when you see "MONEY BACK GUARANTEE", you would expect a full refund if you don't like the product, which could only be determined if you actually use it. It doesn't say "2/3 OF YOUR MONEY BACK GUARANTEE". And grim, since when is a $99 restocking fee "not bad". It's horrible...

I was under the impression getting one of these is risk free. Didn't even know that $99 they are asking for when you return them. Yikes.

That's my issue - the advertising is misleading.

I was under the impression getting one of these is risk free. Didn't even know that $99 they are asking for when you return them. Yikes.

For a long time it was. I guess when they introduced the new $99 fee, they didn't thoroughly comb their site to fix any previous statements.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Before we go looking for a rope and find a tree, lets look at this closer.
…
So, it appears their refund policy has, in fact, changed. And the original "story" page not updated although it links to the new policy.
…
Stuff happens, policies change, etc. They were selling a luxury product in an industry where some people complain about quarter blades and $20 soaps. Once established, maybe they figured out it was too generous? I don't know the answer.

grim , I agree with you that the policy has probably changed at some point. OneBlade has most likely failed to update their “story” page, as you and andrewjs18 surmised. In fact, after wondering about the matter in post #34 on this thread, I later said in post #41:

Now that I think about it, I haven’t been on the “other side” of an operation like this. Above the Tie and Timeless probably mostly sell to people who already know how to shave with a DE razor and know what they want. So hopefully the amount of returned razors is low.

On the other hand, OneBlade seems to be aimed at — maybe not the mass market, but — a fairly large audience. Giving a full refund could become a real issue if you have a bunch of people ordering the razor just for kicks, when they know they can return it within a month. Still, the $99 to make the return is steep, and could be a lot more reasonable.

I agree that OneBlade has the right to do anything they want with their policies (as long as they are legal). And I understand that they probably got tired of giving full refunds to guys who clicked a button after six beers on a Friday night, because said guys thought it would be cool to try a $300 dollar razor and then return it later for a full refund.

What I think OneBlade should do, then, is have their entire site reflect their new policy. And I still think a $99 fee is a bit steep, although grim you have shown (and I appreciate the information you found) that percentually it is in line with what many other manufacturers and retailers are charging.

I’m thinking about taking advantage of the current sale, as most of what I have read causes me to believe that the OneBlade might be a good match for me. But I agree with some other people who have posted here — if the razor were somehow unsuitable for me, it would probably make a lot more sense to try to sell it here on DFS than to take that $99 hit.

(Full disclosure: Yes, it is a Friday night. No, I have not had a single beer.)

grim  I don't have a dog in this fight don't own one as as of today don't plan on getting one (never say never) but is there anyway to say that the return policy was actually changed all you can see is the letter and the current return policy. It may never have been a full refund that is just speculation. If I missed something I apologize.

Other people have said they did get a full refund. One example, post #57   celestino claims he got a refund. So any speculation is false.

And grim, since when is a $99 restocking fee "not bad". It's horrible...

With the sample set I looked up, it was second only to ATT. This isn't a case of you got a product, tried it on, it didn't fit, and you send it back. This is a personal care product. There could be blood on it and they probably cannot resell it. In virtually every other example, you use it, you own it.

So YES, compared to the policies of, for example, EJ Jagger, Art of Shaving, Maggards, West Coast Shaving, Royal Shave, and I could go on and on and on and the vast majority of return policies would be simple. You use it, you own it. NO RETURNS.

So yeah, its not bad relative to 99% of other companies.

For a long time it was.  I guess when they introduced the new $99 fee, they didn't thoroughly comb their site to fix any previous statements.

I agree

grim , I agree with you that the policy has probably changed at some point. OneBlade has most likely failed to update their “story” page, as you and andrewjs18 surmised.

Exactly. I think this is the answer. I suspect that many companies don't go back and check all their web pages. A mistake. No conspiracy. They are not out to get anyone. It's just a mistake.

Their Twitter account was updated 5/4/16.
Their FB page was updated 6/13/16
Their Instagram was updated 18 weeks ago. ??? Sometime in May?

Its not like they are doing heavy advertising on social media. The products are constantly on sale. I feel bad for anyone who actually paid $299. All you had to do was a little bit of research and see the constant sales. You don't see them using resellers yet, only direct marketing.

Caveat emptor. Read the fine print.

grim  I don't have a dog in this fight don't own one as as of today don't plan on getting one (never say never) but is there anyway to say that the return policy was actually changed all you can see is the letter and the current return policy. It may never have been a full refund that is just speculation. If I missed something I apologize.

Other people have said they did get a full refund. One example, post #57   celestino claims he got a refund. So any speculation is false.
--------------------------------------------------


I did see those posts and maybe I wasn't very clear in my post. All I meant was that right now all that seems to be available is the article and the current return policy on their web page. As far as I have seen here no one has a screen shot or information as to a possible prior return policy that was posted originally. Just because the policy is there does not mean that they cannot go above and beyond to keep people happy and to avoid bad press.

I agree they probably did change return policy and didn't update everything but unless someone has proof of that or contacts the company to confirm a change was made I think "speculation" is still appropriate.

I also agree buyer beware and contact the company if you have questions.

To those that have purchased a razor did it come with any paperwork or a warranty card. Especially those who purchased very early on.