On Oct 2, 2010, at 5:02 AM, eckinator wrote: > 2010/10/2 John Sessoms <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com>: >> >> Well, to the extent that they reduce a business cost, but what I mean is >> Pentax doesn't make X number of Dollars, Euro, Yen ... profit off of each >> repair as was implied. >> >> It's just a bad business practice to manufacture shoddy goods, and then >> expect to make money off of repairing defects, especially if you don't >> actually repair the defects meaning the item has to be repaired again and >> again. >> >> If Pentax does that, they won't be in business long. They've got their >> faults as a company, but I just don't think they're that stupid. > > agreed. not as a business objective and repairs aren't a profit center > either I hope but I'd think parts are cost (including warehousing and > administration) plus X and I'd think there'd be a kickback of sorts > from CRIS also but can't know for a fact of course. Amen to the shoddy > goods bit though, SDM doesn't cut it - I just hope DC does... > Ecke
What's DC? Have you had trouble with an SDM lens, Ecke? I know Robb and Celio did. Has anyone else on the list had a failure? I'm genuinely curious. I have three that SDM lenses I've used extensively since they were first released, and they work very well. Maybe I got lucky. Or perhaps failures are magnified on the web, because the victims complain loudly, while those of us who are satisfied are mum for the most part. Paul > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
