I can never understand why people get all twisted around by the deposit issue. No one is forced to fork over any money if they don't want to. In markets where no deposit is accepted the power of who gets a watch and who doesn't rests in the hands of the retailer, they determine who will get a watch and who doesn't, the list they keep is not worth the paper it's printed on. It's non-binding, it's an illusion. It may be do to some legal issues but the main reason they don't take deposits is they want to control the distribution, not the customer. So if a better customer suddenly asks for a watch he will get it even though he isn't on the magical list and the guy on the list loses out. In the US a deposit system has been used and it works well, and it puts the power into the customer's hands. He/she has committed to the piece and put down money, the retailer really doesn't want to say 'sorry, you don't get a watch, here is your money back'. In my view that is a more modern way of doing business, the power rests with the customer. That's why the internet sales work well, the power rests with the customer. Some of the older, staider markets just don't want to give up the old system where the retailer deems somebody worthy. For me a deposit system works well and is a win/win. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...