Bwahaha.... [My Blog! My Blog!]

You're viewing

cathyr19355's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

←

→

Ordered "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" from Amazon.com. They offered it for sale at $17.99 and if you agreed to pay for shipping, promised that your copy would be shipped to arrive on July 16.

It arrived this morning. Bwahaha!

[goes back to reading.]

Mood::

gleeful

←

→

There are 14 comments on this entry. (Reply.)

Mine came in today, too. Free shipping since I also ordered a copy of Sean Stewart's _Perfect Circle_ at the same time. I was surprised that they sent the Stewart book separately and earlier.

[link] [reply]

They sent the other stuff in my order ahead of time too.

I'm so far behind on this project for my new job that I might be able to start on the Harry Potter as early as next Friday.

[link] [parent] [reply]

I'm sorry to hear you won't be able to start the book until you catch up on your work.

Since you do have work, I strongly advise you not to start it until you have enough time free to finish it in one sitting. Rowling has not lost her touch; you'll be hard put to it to put the book down until you finish it. It's a better book than "Order of the Phoenix" was. as well as being significantly shorter.

[link] [parent] [reply]

Amazon had the boxes the Potter books were shipped in coded (they were white instead of the usual brown, with a green stripe on them and the message "do not deliver before July 16"), and they may just have grabbed one and sent it to you instead of delaying shipment of the Stewart book until today (as would also have fit the relevant constraints) just so they didn't need to do any special re-packing.

And now that I think about it I see why they did it. Since you ordered the two together, and Stewart was already available, they would have had to hold THE ENTIRE ORDER until July 16 to avoid sending Potter out early, which would require them to hold the box with your order in it somewhere, or avoid processing your order until the 16th or later (and thereby risk having it fall through the cracks). Therefore, it was easier on them just to send you your Stewart book when it was ready, and to send out your Potter book separately, with all the other Potter orders.

[link] [parent] [reply]

I expect that amazon is good at keeping orders from falling through cracks.

Considering that I got a $1 credit from having ordered the HP book, I think amazon was thinking "We've got tons of money--let's see what we can do to make people love us".

[link] [parent] [reply]

expect that amazon is good at keeping orders from falling through cracks.

What makes you say that? Because they're doing such good business? That's like saying Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar company because they write good software. :-)

Speaking for myself, I have found that Amazon is reliable and speedy only when I'm ordering something that's popular and easy to find elsewhere. If I order something that's hard to find or a specialty item, I end up waiting and waiting and getting wildly optimistic and false estimates of when it will arrive.

I suspect you're right that Amazon offered the $1 additional rebate on HP to see "what [else] we can do to make people love us." Which, IMHO, cuts against your theory that they're good at keeping orders from falling through cracks. :-)

[link] [parent] [reply]

It wasn't just that amazon is big, but that I haven't heard people complaining about unreliability from them.

It sounds as though they don't actually lose orders--they're just bad at estimating delivery times.

[link] [parent] [reply]

I have no idea what their complaint rate is, but our lack of evidence of complaints is not proof that Amazon is unusually, or even averagely, good at tracking orders. However, they are notorious for wildly optimistic estimates of how soon a new book will become available and/or be shipped. :-)

The original point of my comment is that segregating multiple book orders that included HP6 from all other orders would impose increased overhead, which tends to increase the possibility of mistakes.

[link] [parent] [reply]

So illicit Postal Service employees are to blame for the leak?

I KNEW IT.

[link] [reply]

According to Amazon.com, it shipped my copy yesterday to arrive this morning. So *those* Postal employees didn't have it for long enough to cause the leak in question. :-)

[link] [parent] [reply]

I did the same, but mine didn't come in until 5:01 p.m.

[link] [reply]

I guess the UPS delivers to your home later in the day than they did to mine. I was, however, still surprised I got mine so early--I'd thought our UPS delivery time was typically around 2:00 p.m.

[link] [parent] [reply]

Well the leak certainly didn't come from the book's proofreader. (They ran a spellchecker against it, but it had a dozen or so things like "site/sight"...)

Rob

[link] [reply]

I vaguely remember catching one or two of those, but I was so eager to devour the text that any other typos just blew right by me. :-)

[link] [parent] [reply]

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
				1	2	3
4	5	6	7	8	9 1	10 1
11 1	12	13	14	15	16	17 1
18	19	20	21	22	23 1	24
25	26	27	28	29 1	30	31

My Blog! My Blog!

Bwahaha....

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

March