Bruce Dayton wrote: > > Keith, > > So reply back to her reply with your feelings. At least you would > find out if these are purely auto-replies or if there is actually a > person on the other end selecting them.
Already did. We'll see if I get an answer at all. > Maybe you could get a response from Canon on the 10D and then send her > both replies and ask her which camera she would buy based on company > response... I'm not interested in the Canon. But...I do get your point. Depending on what - if any - answer I get back, I may search out the Canon response, for balance! Thanks for the heads up. > Bruce keith > Thursday, March 6, 2003, 4:27:51 AM, you wrote: > > KW> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >> > On 5 Mar 2003 at 17:25, Keith Whaley wrote: > >> > > >> > > Her answer sounds like the camera was being made FOR Pentax to > >> > > distribute and sell ~ not that it was designed and manufactured for > >> > > sale by Pentax... Hmmm. Very interesting. One can read a lot into that > >> > > non-answer. > > >> > Maybe they just don't know, they probably haven't been briefed beyond what we > >> > can all read on the press release. > > >> Seemed to me like an automatic response without reading the > >> question. > > KW> Perhaps so, but it's also likely the response came from a series of > KW> pre-prepared answers, leaving the person who did answer little choice > KW> but to select the least obnoxious one possible. > > KW> On the other hand, such a response from the U.S. national arm for > KW> public relations for a world-wide company shows a decided lack of > KW> caring what sort of answer is given, nor what the customer thinks > KW> about that answer. > KW> No thought given at all. > KW> It's that 'don't really care' attitude that is appalling to me... > > KW> And most folks just say, "Oh well." As tho' they've seen this stuff so > KW> often, one more non-answer is par for the course. So, no one speaks up. > KW> Maybe so, but that lack of caring ought to bite 'em on the butt once > KW> in a while. > > KW> keith whaley
