Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 1208
Location: Ontario, Canada
| Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 4:58 pm Post subject: more image deflation | |
|
Found this on a totally non-related forum. Interesting how the 20-20 crew keyed in on the Sears involvement as opposed to a minor mention of Walmart and only slightly more information about Goodyear, a tire manufacturer and distributor.
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4826897 While the whole theory of tire best before dates is suspect, could this be the next nail in the Sears coffin? Do we suppose that Sears purposely buys 'outdated' tires for resale to boost the profit level? Maybe someone in Automotive can do a bit of inventory research, and tell us what's what in the empire. 
|
|
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 68
| Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:18 pm Post subject: Re: more image deflation | |||
They chose to focus on Sears because it makes for a better story. I hate to sound like a SHC cheerleader, but I honestly don't believe Sears is more guilty here than any other retailer or manufacturer. We get tires from the TDC based on FEN levels, and when they sell we get more. Some tires in popular sizes are turned over constantly. More unusual sizes sit a while before they're sold. This is the case with every retailer, and I don't know of anyone sending tires back because of manufacturing date. In fact, if we need to return a tire for whatever reason, the manufacturers won't accept them after a certain amount of time past DOT (2-4 years depending on company). The whole "best by" date is not really an issue as far as I'm concerned. The real issue is how the tires are stored. There are old tires in our warehouse that I'd be perfectly comfortable putting on my car. There are old tires on a clearance rack which sits by a window and the tires bake in the sun, turning brown all over and brittle near the bead. These I would throw away if it were my decision. The manufacturers are no less guilty. A couple months ago we special ordered tires from Goodyear for a customer, and they ended up cancelling. Goodyear initially refused to take the tires back because they were almost three years old per the DOT. After pointing out that they had been shipped directly to us by Goodyear not two weeks prior, they quickly changed their tune and issued an RGA with a smile. Very little would surprise me with regards to what deals Sears makes with suppliers (and that holds true for any retailer), but I don't see the manufacturers selling older tires any cheaper. Their position is that tires have no expiration date, so they'll sell a tire for the same price regardless of age. |
|||
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 143
| Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: | |
|
I worked in the automotive department and I remember being personally required by management to go thru and check tires to ensure that we did NOT sell outdated tires. All outdated tires that we (i) found were returned to the vendor.... and this was BEFORE the 20/20 story....
I believe the main cause for this so-called scandal is merely a case of management at tire shops not doing what they should be doing with inventory - a simple case of carelessness. The mere notion that sears would intentionally buy outdated tires is just stupid - tire manufacturers would refuse to comply and Sears would loose money from customer come-backs. |
|
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 71
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: | |
|
If you paid careful attention to the 20/20 piece, you'll recall numerous mention of the European standard for tire age. Since we (Sears) and the rest of the US are voluntary adherents to the Rubber Manufacturers of America's guidlines and suggestions, the comparison is ridiculous. US retailers are not subject to European guidlines, but it sure makes for sensational reporting to say Germany won't sell this tire because of age, but Sears will. It's media sensationalism at its finest!
As far as going through the inventory to find outdated tires, I've never done it, never required my folks to do it, and never been required by higher authority to do it. We do have to work the Special Order Inventory Violation report from time to time. That report can identify tires that have been in the warehouse for a while. If the manager's doing his job, they are returned way before they are "old" or are sold at a reduced price. Similarly, XOM and VOM tires that are not in saleable condition can be marked out and returned through Lakin for some small credit. Currently, we are required to draw a line across every tire at least quarterly. That gives you a real quick look at what's selling and what's not. Also, if there are several tires with a single line through them and several with a few lines - well then sell the ones that have been there longer. Makes inventory management real easy. |
|
Joined: 15 Dec 2006
Posts: 68
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 1:30 am Post subject: | |
| Never seen management requirements to send back "outdated" tires either. What constituted outdated? | |
Joined: 08 Jul 2003
Posts: 4793
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 3:59 am Post subject: What report | |
|
I'm sure at least half of the Auto managers practice many or most of the procedures arty csm ret outlined.But just like anything else with this company the other half of these Auto coaches are just trying to keep up feeding their bosses what was most recently demanded.
Onething from the special,I thought they showed at least one Sears Tire sale where the associate mentioned and knew the tire was OLD.That tells me the manager knew about but didn't want to get rid of it.Probably pressure to hold down markdowns and markouts.If your disposing of any VOM any dept it shows you're not keeping up(could be for valid reasons but as far as corporate is concerned it's bad) It still comes down to a VOM,the lines are sorta like rotating stock but with all that there still seems to be a procedure lacking for the outdated tires and not just old stock.You would think they would at least mark the year of manufacture like 01 02 etc. And old and older tires ARE out there at other places than Sears.I bought tires from a Firestone Dealer on 2006-I recently checked,they were manufactured in 2001.Zero mention of age when buying. For more comments http://www.retail-worker.com/forum/about9131.html |
|
Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 1208
Location: Ontario, Canada
| Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 2:34 pm Post subject: | |
|
Thanks for the link DR. I must have been inactive during the time period of the original post, sorry for cross posting another...
As I stated in my original post, the whole issue of tire best before dates is suspect. I am sure there are more than just Sears out there selling old tires, and certainly, using the iconic name of Sears is sensationalism on the reporters part. But why key in on Sears the way they did? Could it be that Sears practices this selling technique more than the other retailers, or could it be that Sears did nothing to hide the fact that they were selling old tires, hell, they even admitted to knowing they were old.... It seems like Sears played right into the investigators hand, and MADE the story for them. But, it was also interesting, but not surprising, that the comments show Sears policy on tire ages is all over the map. There is no consistency in how they deal with it. Definitely Sears and the associates selling tires know SOMETHING about tire age, one associate even admitted that the tire shouldn't be used as a daily driver, 'just a spare'. While the industry doesn't PUBLICLY adhere to the six year age limit, it sounds from the posts and the video that they do in fact take returns on the old tires. Is it just another American Capialist greed story? Or is there a problem with supply and production capacities in North America? While the lawyer for the industry says the British (not the German's) made their decision on no scientific evidence, what scientific evidence does the NA industry have to say that tire ages are NOT adverse effects on quality?? Ignorance is no excuse if it kills people. And if the industry has warned wholesalers/retailers about the issue, then they do in fact believe there is some merit, or some degree of concern over the issue. However, in my eye, the issue on the 20-20 expose is that they really keyed in on the Sears involvement. Eddie, with his dog house full of legal beagles should be all over that, if it wasn't warranted. What this 'empire' doesn't need, is bad publicity, but we continue to give anyone that is remotely interested prime opportunities to sling mud. |
|