The disposition decision
Every returned unit faces a fork: put it back on the (virtual) shelf, sell it through a secondary channel, refurbish it, liquidate it in bulk, or recycle/donate it. The path you choose per unit — and how fast you choose it — sets your recovery rate. This is the framework operators actually use.
The paths, ranked by typical recovery
| Path | Typical recovery vs original value* | What it demands |
|---|---|---|
| Restock as new | 90–100% | Unopened or flawless condition; fast grading; repackaging cost |
| Branded resale (owned channel) | 50–80% | Grading discipline; a storefront; tolerance for channel conflict |
| Refurbish & resell | 40–70% | Repair capability, parts, warranty policy; suits durables/electronics |
| B2B liquidation auction | 10–35% | Lot-building and pallet logistics; zero brand control downstream |
| Recycle / donate / destroy | 0–5% | Compliance documentation; sometimes legally required |
*Planning ranges, not guarantees. Recovery decays with time-in-pipeline — a unit that sits 60 days is worth less on every path.
The three filters
1. Item economics. Resale and refurb only clear their handling cost above a value floor. Below it, liquidation or keep-it logic wins by default.
2. Brand exposure. A premium brand's returns in a liquidation lot photograph badly. Branded resale keeps control; liquidation trades recovery for distance.
3. Velocity. Every week in the pipeline costs recovery. A routing engine that decides at the portal — before the unit ships — beats a warehouse full of pending decisions.
The operator's takeaway
Write the decision as rules, not exceptions: condition × value × category → path, decided as early as possible. Then measure recovery per path monthly. Vendors selling routing engines are selling exactly this ruleset — the framework above is the diligence baseline to hold them against.
Independent reverse-logistics industry analysis — not investment or procurement advice.