Hi Len,
The easiest way to keep inventory requirements down and stay legally
compliant is to price parts and labor so exorbitantly that few if any will
opt for repair over replacement.
Dan Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Len wrote:
>Does that mean that Pentax is not allowed to have the parts?
>Are they considered to be operating illegally if they keep parts
>available for more than ten years?
>
>Or, does it mean that they have no responsibility to have parts
>available after ten years? And, therefore, get to refuse to
>service our cameras, thereby forcing us to buy newer models?
>
>Since Pentax just sold a mew batch of LX'es, does that mean that
>they are "on the hook" to service all of the LX'es for ten more
>years?
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
