New bike day goes wrong
07-13-23, 10:08 PM
#76
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
Not yet.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
07-13-23, 10:49 PM
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
Not yet.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
Likes For tomato coupe:
07-14-23, 02:12 AM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 6,961
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked 3,837 Times
in
2,430 Posts
You must be having a laugh right? I made 1 very simple assumption which doesn't involve GM swapping engines or some dodgy LBS salesman.
07-14-23, 02:40 AM
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 6,961
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3557 Post(s)
Liked 3,837 Times
in
2,430 Posts
Not yet.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
07-14-23, 05:39 AM
#80
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,482
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4639 Post(s)
Liked 1,471 Times
in
959 Posts
I agree 100%. I typically buy local as I have with all of my previous bikes. I would have paid full price for the bike fit regardless of the outcome. It just doesn’t make sense to knowingly try to make the wrong size work. It was just a knee jerk reaction in a moment of frustration. I only went with the Canyon because they are a reputable company and I felt this spec Endurace was a great value. (Carbon, 105 Di2 for 2699 plus shipping).
you misread one of my posts. I ordered a small and the box and bike that showed up were medium. I am quite confident it was a mistake.
you misread one of my posts. I ordered a small and the box and bike that showed up were medium. I am quite confident it was a mistake.
07-14-23, 06:15 AM
#81
Newbie
OP, sorry to hear about your disappointment with Canyon, hopefully the return goes smoothly. I have a lower level Giant Defy (Aluminum frame) and I love it.
Having worked in distribution for 30 years I can say that even with a big focus on Lean principles, mistakes happen. I have no idea how Canyon’s operation works. It could be something as simple as when completed boxes of bikes are finished they get put in bays labeled with size and component group. When the order pickers come to grab a bike for an order, they grab one from the appropriate bay and ship it without really looking at what they are shipping. They just assume that what is in the bin is correct. If the wrong item was put in the bin, the wrong item gets shipped. This was one of our most recurring causes for wrong products being shipped.
That could also account for a large batch of mediums being shipped as smalls.
Having worked in distribution for 30 years I can say that even with a big focus on Lean principles, mistakes happen. I have no idea how Canyon’s operation works. It could be something as simple as when completed boxes of bikes are finished they get put in bays labeled with size and component group. When the order pickers come to grab a bike for an order, they grab one from the appropriate bay and ship it without really looking at what they are shipping. They just assume that what is in the bin is correct. If the wrong item was put in the bin, the wrong item gets shipped. This was one of our most recurring causes for wrong products being shipped.
That could also account for a large batch of mediums being shipped as smalls.
07-14-23, 11:10 AM
#82
Ride 2 wheels
Thread Starter
I know in my area, and I checked a random FL zipcode, you can take delivery of a Canyon via Velofix? Was this option not available to you? That said, I don't know whether if they show up at your door with the wrong size, it's still your problem, or whether it would be handled much differently.
OP, sorry to hear about your disappointment with Canyon, hopefully the return goes smoothly. I have a lower level Giant Defy (Aluminum frame) and I love it.
Having worked in distribution for 30 years I can say that even with a big focus on Lean principles, mistakes happen. I have no idea how Canyon’s operation works. It could be something as simple as when completed boxes of bikes are finished they get put in bays labeled with size and component group. When the order pickers come to grab a bike for an order, they grab one from the appropriate bay and ship it without really looking at what they are shipping. They just assume that what is in the bin is correct. If the wrong item was put in the bin, the wrong item gets shipped. This was one of our most recurring causes for wrong products being shipped.
That could also account for a large batch of mediums being shipped as smalls.
Having worked in distribution for 30 years I can say that even with a big focus on Lean principles, mistakes happen. I have no idea how Canyon’s operation works. It could be something as simple as when completed boxes of bikes are finished they get put in bays labeled with size and component group. When the order pickers come to grab a bike for an order, they grab one from the appropriate bay and ship it without really looking at what they are shipping. They just assume that what is in the bin is correct. If the wrong item was put in the bin, the wrong item gets shipped. This was one of our most recurring causes for wrong products being shipped.
That could also account for a large batch of mediums being shipped as smalls.
07-14-23, 11:42 AM
#83
Senior Member
Being a bike retailer, I mostly side with the dealer on these subject, but in this case, they shipped the wrong size, so something the OP did not order. If they cannot ship the correct item within a reasonable time, a refund should be issued. If they refuse I would get with the CC company and dispute (Amex is great with this, they will issue you a credit while they investigate). The only fault I see with the customer here, is opening and assemblying a bike that was labeled on the box, but roadies get that "new bike star eyed" thing, so it's kinda understandable.
Likes For wheelreason:
07-14-23, 11:53 AM
#84
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
07-14-23, 11:57 AM
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Québec, Canada
Posts: 1,810
Bikes: SL8 Pro, TCR beater
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 806 Post(s)
Liked 475 Times
in
360 Posts
Well I will keep the thread updated with the return process but I will not be purchasing another Endurace for the time being. I looked at 4 LBS’s today and came home with a Giant Defy Advanced 1. Not nearly the value of the Endurace but the shop that I purchased from offered amazing customer service and the bike was really impressive on the test ride.
Canyon lost a sale (and probably a customer) by dealing with this the way they did. I get that they can't trust people and that the bike has to be new and unridden for them to accept the return, but most people only have 1 bike, can't afford to pay twice pending reimbursement and/or don't have time to waste while waiting because the summer is not endless. Anyways, I still think you made a good decision with the Defy.
07-14-23, 03:19 PM
#86
Ride 2 wheels
Thread Starter
Congrats. You can't go wrong with a Giant Defy, that's for sure. It's an excellent endurance road bike. In fact, you can't go wrong with any Giant bicycles. Hopefully it's the 2023 with 105 DI2 instead of the 2022 with mechanical Ultegra!
Canyon lost a sale (and probably a customer) by dealing with this the way they did. I get that they can't trust people and that the bike has to be new and unridden for them to accept the return, but most people only have 1 bike, can't afford to pay twice pending reimbursement and/or don't have time to waste while waiting because the summer is not endless. Anyways, I still think you made a good decision with the Defy.
Canyon lost a sale (and probably a customer) by dealing with this the way they did. I get that they can't trust people and that the bike has to be new and unridden for them to accept the return, but most people only have 1 bike, can't afford to pay twice pending reimbursement and/or don't have time to waste while waiting because the summer is not endless. Anyways, I still think you made a good decision with the Defy.
Being a bike retailer, I mostly side with the dealer on these subject, but in this case, they shipped the wrong size, so something the OP did not order. If they cannot ship the correct item within a reasonable time, a refund should be issued. If they refuse I would get with the CC company and dispute (Amex is great with this, they will issue you a credit while they investigate). The only fault I see with the customer here, is opening and assemblying a bike that was labeled on the box, but roadies get that "new bike star eyed" thing, so it's kinda understandable.
07-14-23, 05:29 PM
#87
Full Member
I know in my area, and I checked a random FL zipcode, you can take delivery of a Canyon via Velofix? Was this option not available to you? That said, I don't know whether if they show up at your door with the wrong size, it's still your problem, or whether it would be handled much differently.
- OP contacted Canyon.
- They acknowledged the error.
- They are taking the bike back and issuing a refund.
Not sure how it could be handled in a more satisfactory manner.
All the other scenarios floating about are just speculations made by the nattering nabobs.
07-14-23, 08:20 PM
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
07-15-23, 07:17 AM
#89
Advocatus Diaboli
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 8,482
Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4639 Post(s)
Liked 1,471 Times
in
959 Posts
In case you weren't following along, here are the Cliff Notes:
- OP contacted Canyon.
- They acknowledged the error.
- They are taking the bike back and issuing a refund.
Not sure how it could be handled in a more satisfactory manner.
All the other scenarios floating about are just speculations made by the nattering nabobs.
- OP contacted Canyon.
- They acknowledged the error.
- They are taking the bike back and issuing a refund.
Not sure how it could be handled in a more satisfactory manner.
All the other scenarios floating about are just speculations made by the nattering nabobs.
I am interested in knowing though how a Velofix facilitated purchase may differ in experience if the bike in some manner isn't correct (something broken, wrong size or model, etc)? Does a Canyon purchase hit your CC upon checkout, shipping, fulfillment?
07-15-23, 08:03 AM
#90
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
So Canyon is completely justified in doing a thorough inspection of the wrong bike they innocently shipped out before deciding whether or not they can issue a refund, but inspecting the contents of the box before they shipped it out to make sure that it matched the order is somehow asking too much?
Likes For Polaris OBark:
07-15-23, 08:13 AM
#91
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
Likes For tomato coupe:
07-15-23, 08:21 AM
#92
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
Clearly, in this case, the time for Canyon to have done an inspection of the contents of the box was before they shipped it out and charged the OP for something he did not order.
For them to turn around and tell the OP that the refund is contingent upon the inspection of the contents once they returned is a tad hypocritical, and probably illegal under CA consumer protection law.
For them to turn around and tell the OP that the refund is contingent upon the inspection of the contents once they returned is a tad hypocritical, and probably illegal under CA consumer protection law.
Likes For Polaris OBark:
07-15-23, 08:27 AM
#93
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
Clearly, in this case, the time for Canyon to have done an inspection of the contents of the box was before they shipped it out and charged the OP for something he did not order.
For them to turn around and tell the OP that the refund is contingent upon the inspection of the contents once they returned is a tad hypocritical, and probably illegal under CA consumer protection law.
For them to turn around and tell the OP that the refund is contingent upon the inspection of the contents once they returned is a tad hypocritical, and probably illegal under CA consumer protection law.
07-15-23, 08:34 AM
#94
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
However, your tenacity defending the helpless corporation against the all-powerful consumer is very touching.
BTW, I am not suggesting that the refund should be issued before the item is returned. I am objecting to the idea that the refund is contingent upon the very same type of inspection that Canyon apparently couldn't be bothered to do before shipping the item out. It takes a special type of apologist not to recognize that double-standard.
Likes For Polaris OBark:
07-15-23, 08:51 AM
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
You live in a dream world. Every online retailer makes mistakes, and the vast majority have similar policies for dealing with returns and exchanges.
07-15-23, 08:54 AM
#96
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
And this stupid argument started when I had the temerity to suggest that "the bank never makes a mistake in your favor."
Likes For Polaris OBark:
07-15-23, 09:07 AM
#97
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
Originally Posted by Polaris OBark
Once a bank (or, more accurately, its ATM) made a mistake in my favor. But a more realistic (cynical) interpretation is that they sold something they didn't have, so they did a substitution with the hope that the buyer wouldn't care, or wouldn't make a fuss out of it.
Likes For tomato coupe:
07-15-23, 09:12 AM
#98
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
But it makes no difference to the OP. The relevant fact is that Canyon shipped the wrong bike, and thus violated the sales contract. It is on them to make it right, not the OP. Did Canyon compensate the OP for lost time for re-packing and delivering the box to Fed Exp? Is Canyon willing to pay interest on the payment for the goods it failed to deliver?
Likes For Polaris OBark:
07-15-23, 09:22 AM
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,378
Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3549 Post(s)
Liked 6,454 Times
in
2,608 Posts
The relevant fact is that Canyon shipped the wrong bike, and thus violated the sales contract. It is on them to make it right, not the OP. Did Canyon compensate the OP for lost time for re-packing and delivering the box to Fed Exp? Is Canyon willing to pay interest on the payment for the goods it failed to deliver?
07-15-23, 09:33 AM
#100
ignominious poltroon
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 3,578
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked 3,024 Times
in
1,589 Posts
Once a bank (or, more accurately, its ATM) made a mistake in my favor. But a more realistic (cynical) interpretation is that they sold something they didn't have, so they did a substitution with the hope that the buyer wouldn't care, or wouldn't make a fuss out of it.
Not only are they not apologizing, they are treating it as a routine return/refund request, with the implication they can deny it if they find a scratch on the frame.
That isn't how one deals with an honest mistake.
It isn't even consistent from how they treated me (well) with a recall of a frame component several years ago.
That isn't how one deals with an honest mistake.
It isn't even consistent from how they treated me (well) with a recall of a frame component several years ago.
The motive would be to sell a bike now, rather than later. I'm not suggesting that actually happened. I am speculating that it could have happened, in exactly the same way a LBS can push someone to buy a bike that is not their size so that they can move the inventory. (Canyon, to their credit, strongly discourages buying a bike that is not the recommended size.)
Nonetheless, Canyon made a mistake (or whatever), not the OP. That much is completely unambiguous. They should do something more than simply allow him to return the bike, get on a waiting list, and meanwhile have him hope that they don't find a scratch on the frame or some other reason to deny him a full refund.
Nonetheless, Canyon made a mistake (or whatever), not the OP. That much is completely unambiguous. They should do something more than simply allow him to return the bike, get on a waiting list, and meanwhile have him hope that they don't find a scratch on the frame or some other reason to deny him a full refund.
Not yet.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
We can take this further.
We know two things:
(1) The OP had an order mix-up
(2) Canyon told the OP that there were other instances of this.
If there were one or two mix-ups, then I agree that the most parsimonious explanation is that it was just a random, innocent mistake.
However, if there were a whole bunch of mis-fulfilled orders, we can start to suspect other explanations.
If the latter is the case, then with a bit more information, we could test the hypotheses, i.e.,
If it was a random, no-fault innocent series of mistakes, then one might expect a random distribution of mislabeled boxes (eg, for every M labeled S, there should be an S labeled M).
If something else was going on (involving intent on the part of even a single individual -- no conspiracy necessary), one might expect a systematic skewing, such that all of the mix-ups were of the form M substituted for S. If that is the case, Occam's Razor comes down rather unambiguously on the side of something else going on.
[As stated, you're living in a fantasy world if you think Canyon (or any other online retailer) is going to compensate someone for the time it takes to re-pack an item and ship it back. Your understanding of contracts and how it applies to this situation is dismal.
Likes For Polaris OBark:
