Re: Leica M9
2010/5/25 Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com: I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. Can two rites make a ceremony? Dunno. Can two wrights make a play? Can three wrights make a left? If two lights make a green... -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 24 May 2010 05:17, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: This list has too many/much pun_dits... There must be something about two puns and a write but I'm damned if I can think of it. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/24 Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com: This list has too many/much pun_dits... Well, two punishments can fit one crime... -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
I've had lots of experience with breaking technology. MARK ! Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9 Besides, I'm surprised cameras don't have that little dot that turns red when it gets wet. Cells phones all have them. I've immersed two. Oddly, the one I quickly recovered died whereas the one I actually put through a cycle of the washing machine dried out just fine. I've had lots of experience with breaking technology. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:03 AM, eckinator eckina...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/5/22 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com: The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. Amen to that! -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Kenneth Waller http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller - Original Message - From: eckinator eckina...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2010 4:48 PM Subject: Re: Leica M9 2010/5/23 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com: I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. Can two rites make a ceremony? Dunno. Can two wrights make a play? Can three wrights make a left? -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
On 5/23/2010 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: No corporation that consistently cheats it's customers will survive. To do that you need a gun and the unrestricted will to use it. Otherwise customers will flee to another haven. Free markets are free, and the worst offenses happen in the markets that are most controlled. Peter, I can give you a number of counter examples in my country. Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/23/2010 1:01 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: I've never understood that type of policy, generally here it's your responsibility to decide before purchase if the item will suite your needs, it can only be returned if faulty after purchase, never just because you don't like it. You just couldn't run a business here with such open return policies and survive. Rob, just a small point here. You actually assume that when entering a shop, customer would have a fair chance to preview the product before they buy it. In quite many cases (at least here) you don't have such a luxury as a buyer. Add to the mix the rather aggressive sales person behavior trying to convince you that this specific product is what will make your life barely possible (without it you are as good as non-existent). Then, of course, you come home, open the box and reasonably soon discover that you made a mistake. What do you do next? Now, the re-stocking fee is fine. In fact, the only buyer protection we have in Israel is that the shop owner are obliged by law to post clear, big and easily noticeable sign that will describe in detail the return policies of their shop. That's at least logical. Boris -- 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.
Re: Returns (was Re: Leica M9)
On 5/23/2010 6:22 AM, Sandy Harris wrote: I once talked to someone who had been a technician at Acoustic Research, back when AR speakers carried a lifetime warranty. He said they got one or two a year that were burned out in a recognisable way, what you get if you run 110 volt AC into the speaker inputs. They replaced them. Sandy, once upon a time (seems now like 15 years ago) I bought a pair of Sennheiser Porta Pro's that at the time came with the life time warranty. I used it for several years and then one day I broke the plastic so that one of the ear pieces came apart from the frame. I tried to glue it in place, but plastic was such that no glue that I had helped. Having forgotten about the lifetime warranty I've put them on some shelf and forgotten about them for couple of years. One day I recalled that I had a lifetime warranty. At the time their service center was a small, really small, shop in Tel Aviv to which I came. I was willing and ready to pay but I liked the sound of these earphones so I thought I'd give it a try. The guy took them in and came out with the brand new pair. I asked if I still get my warranty and his reply was - sure thing!. A happy customer left the shop. I proceeded recommending the company to my friends and using my earphones. Later on I bought some more Sennheiser products, naturally. One day, few more years later, one of the wires came apart from the ear piece. Bummer. I went to look for their customer service. None existed at the time. Another big company (Samsung or Sansui or whatever) was giving the service. I came in to their local service center. Big, bumming with people. They did not hide their look down at me but they got the earphones fixed for me and free of charge. This time, however, they gave me a piece of paper that indicated that this fix would have a limited in time warranty, something like half a year. The next time the earphones broke I had to throw them to garbage. If I were to look for new earphones, I would surely start with Sennheiser - they have really good sound (to my taste) and I kind of have a fond memories of my first Porta Pro's. Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 23/05/2010, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: Rob, just a small point here. You actually assume that when entering a shop, customer would have a fair chance to preview the product before they buy it. In quite many cases (at least here) you don't have such a luxury as a buyer. Add to the mix the rather aggressive sales person behavior trying to convince you that this specific product is what will make your life barely possible (without it you are as good as non-existent). Then, of course, you come home, open the box and reasonably soon discover that you made a mistake. What do you do next? Now, the re-stocking fee is fine. In fact, the only buyer protection we have in Israel is that the shop owner are obliged by law to post clear, big and easily noticeable sign that will describe in detail the return policies of their shop. That's at least logical. The retailers obligations are set by law and effectively the onus of suitability lies with the purchaser, only if the product does not provide the functions advertised or if it fails or is DOA/broken could the reseller be forced to accept a return. If you want to test an item in the shop you have to search out a retailer that provides demo display items. My most favoured bricks and mortar/mail order photo reseller has stock on shelves for display but generally does not allow batteries to be loaded in the cameras, ie all you get to do is feel. I guess that's why it's so important to have a set of review sites that can be trusted to adequately compare and report on gear such as cameras. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/23/2010 10:48 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: The retailers obligations are set by law and effectively the onus of suitability lies with the purchaser, only if the product does not provide the functions advertised or if it fails or is DOA/broken could the reseller be forced to accept a return. If you want to test an item in the shop you have to search out a retailer that provides demo display items. My most favoured bricks and mortar/mail order photo reseller has stock on shelves for display but generally does not allow batteries to be loaded in the cameras, ie all you get to do is feel. I guess that's why it's so important to have a set of review sites that can be trusted to adequately compare and report on gear such as cameras. This is not how it is in Israel. But even if it were. Consider this. Presently we're dealing with the case of rather unscrupulous buyer. And what you say would protect a decent seller from such a buyer. But, OTOH, what you say effectively provides an opening for unscrupulous seller to convince a buyer to buy something, and once the box is open - voila, the pure profit is made and buyer is left with an item that they might not even need. When faced with request from a buyer to return the mis-sold item, the buyer would parry with you're a grown up person, you should have listened better; it is too late now. I am thinking that the real solution has to take into account interests of both parties and that with the slight (notice, just slight) bias towards the consumer. It is because, in my view, the seller has more power and more accented interest to gain profit whereas buyer may be simply looking for something reasonably good and reasonably cheap. Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 23/05/2010, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: When faced with request from a buyer to return the mis-sold item, the buyer would parry with you're a grown up person, you should have listened better; it is too late now. Here some types of contracts have an integrated cooling off period but generally in retail shops the buyer makes the final decision to part with their cash or not. Can't get more basic really, if I stuff up it's off to eBay the bad purchase goes. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/23/2010 11:10 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: Here some types of contracts have an integrated cooling off period but generally in retail shops the buyer makes the final decision to part with their cash or not. Can't get more basic really, if I stuff up it's off to eBay the bad purchase goes. Evidently your commercial eco-system is rather different than that of mine. Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/23 Tom C caka...@gmail.com: Do they have the right to know the full story? If a mfr. were to make, and a retailer to sell, a shoddy product, do they let me in on it? Or do they hope people buy it and are then stuck with it, and too busy or too chicken shit to raise a stink? And even then they'll hide behind all the legalese. That, in the end is why I have no qualms of conscience about this. A lie was not told when returning the item. The exchange was made, no question asked. I can guarantee you that there's plenty of people on this list who would willing partake in actions on a regular basis, that my conscience would prohibit me from doing. So why doesn't everyone get off their high horse about it? I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. Three lefts do but I doubt that will get anyone a new camera... -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 22/5/10, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed: I can guarantee you that there's plenty of people on this list who would willing partake in actions on a regular basis, that my conscience would prohibit me from doing. Shit - I'm on Youtube? -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- 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.
Re: Returns (was Re: Leica M9)
From: Tom C Interesting. I'm here sticking up for Christian, and I wasn't the guy that returned the camera. :-) But I understand the mindset. It's not about ripping someone off. If any one is doing that it's the mfrs., the vendors, and the retailers that have their hoards of i-dotting and t-crossing attorneys, trying to insure that their own interests are protected in every way possible. And often times any action a corporation wants to take is justified in the name of 'it's our policy'. I'm unsure what would have happened if it was told that a drink had been spilled on the camera. I can imagine one CS clerk saying, no deal it must be sent in for repair, and OTOH, another one saying don't worry about, we'll send it back, here's a new one. If a company, retailer or vendor has a reputation for great customer service, i.e., let's make the customer happy, I suspect they'll make more money though gross sales alone, than they lose, through the small % of customers that actually plan to rip them off. Mostly, it depends on the retailer's policy regarding returns. When I worked at XX the policy was to accept the return if it was within 90 days, the customer had the receipt and all the original contents were in the box. Sometimes the customer would have all the original contents - CD, manual, cords camera, but had discarded the internal cushioning. In that case we still took it back. Customers could get a refund or exchange for a new one. Theoretically, we could refuse a return if the customer had abused the product. Never happened while I was there. I had customers tell me we had the best return policy and the best service. I also had customers screaming at me, and telling me how much worse our policy was than our competitors because for whatever reason they didn't fit within the return policy and I wasn't allowed to accept the return. Whatever. The only thing that bothered me about it was knowing XX management would blame me for giving bad customer service if the customer complained to management. Didn't matter if you were following company policy, and risked being fired if you violated that policy, the customer was unhappy, therefore it was your fault. That was also company policy. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
From: Tom C Do they have the right to know the full story? If a mfr. were to make, and a retailer to sell, a shoddy product, do they let me in on it? Or do they hope people buy it and are then stuck with it, and too busy or too chicken shit to raise a stink? And even then they'll hide behind all the legalese. That, in the end is why I have no qualms of conscience about this. A lie was not told when returning the item. The exchange was made, no question asked. I can guarantee you that there's plenty of people on this list who would willing partake in actions on a regular basis, that my conscience would prohibit me from doing. So why doesn't everyone get off their high horse about it? Tom C. Let me add something else. This part of the discussion began about a return to Best Buy. My EXPERIENCE shopping Best Buy is they knowingly sell defective items and then refuse to honor their own published return policies when the customer attempts to return them. There's a reason I frequently advise contacting your state's Attorney General's office. It's also the reason I don't shop at Best Buy. So, if someone managed to get one over on Best Buy for a change, I say more power to 'em. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: eckinator Subject: Re: Leica M9 I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
From: Rob Studdert On 23/05/2010, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: When faced with request from a buyer to return the mis-sold item, the buyer would parry with you're a grown up person, you should have listened better; it is too late now. Here some types of contracts have an integrated cooling off period but generally in retail shops the buyer makes the final decision to part with their cash or not. Can't get more basic really, if I stuff up it's off to eBay the bad purchase goes. Most retailers have a return policy. The policy is intended to protect the retailer, but it does give the consumer some protection as well. In the case that started this discussion, the return was made in accordance with the retailer's published return policy. The only thing I found odd about the whole thing was knowing the name of the retailer, and based on my own experience with them, they hadn't tried to screw him on the return. -- 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.
Re: Returns (was Re: Leica M9)
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Returns (was Re: Leica M9) The only thing that bothered me about it was knowing XX management would blame me for giving bad customer service if the customer complained to management. Didn't matter if you were following company policy, and risked being fired if you violated that policy, the customer was unhappy, therefore it was your fault. That was also company policy. Any time I found myself in that sort of conflict, if the customer request was so egregious that I couldn't bring myself to go along with it, I'd escalate it to a manager and let them make the decision. I figure one of the things that management is paid for is to decide which situations fall outside of the policy guidelines that they want me to follow. I never got written up for it since I never strayed from policy. Sometimes the individual manager wasn't happy, since he had to make a hard decision rather than write up an associate, but again, they get paid extra to make hard decisions. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Leica M9 In the case that started this discussion, the return was made in accordance with the retailer's published return policy. Not quite. Their return policy definitely states that items that have been damaged through customer use or abuse do not qualify for return. The question seems to be does spilling a drink on a non waterproof camera consitute customer abuse. Answer that and you have answered if the return policy was followed. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Sun May 23 01:11:29 CDT 2010 Boris Liberman wrote: On 5/23/2010 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: No corporation that consistently cheats it's customers will survive. To do that you need a gun and the unrestricted will to use it. Otherwise customers will flee to another haven. Free markets are free, and the worst offenses happen in the markets that are most controlled. Peter, I can give you a number of counter examples in my country. Boris, - one doesn't need to go across the ocean: Most PDMLers know a bunch of NYC-based photo stores that range from bait-n-switch to charge-n-send-nothing-or-crap scammers. Those have existed (or had existed) for many years. Some of them are located in mid-Manhattan, some in Brooklyn. (One can easily spot them here based on reviews: http://photo.net/neighbor/subcategory-index?id=2 ) Resellerratings.com is yet another good source for finding long-living resellers with consistantly bad reviews. Peter: In a large enough market, - the influx of fools feeding crooks is large enough (practically infinite) to support long term stagnation of the latter. (Besides, - strictly speaking, - there are no free markets. - Practically all free markets are regulated to some degree, as truly free markets are not sustainable long term. - But that's a subject for a separate and pointless - within PDML - discussion.) Igor -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Leica M9 In the case that started this discussion, the return was made in accordance with the retailer's published return policy. Not quite. Their return policy definitely states that items that have been damaged through customer use or abuse do not qualify for return. “...[U]se or abuse do not qualify...” Totally clear English. The question seems to be does spilling a drink on a non waterproof camera consitute customer abuse. I’d say yes it did. Abnormal use = abuse. I seriously doubt that camera designers factor in an alcoholic drink being spilled onto their non-waterproof body, and would certify normal performance thereafter. Answer that and you have answered if the return policy was followed. William Robb keith -- 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.
RE: Leica M9
I'd say yes it did. Abnormal use = abuse. I seriously doubt that camera designers factor in an alcoholic drink being spilled onto their non-waterproof body, and would certify normal performance thereafter. I disagree. Abnormal use does not equal - indeed, does not even imply - abuse. The designers of anything have a responsibility to take human factors into account. These include taking your camera into a pub where somebody might spill a drink on it. The designers are not obliged to guarantee that the camera will work afterwards, but I wouldn't class something like that as abuse, I'd call it normal wear and tear. Bob -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/23 William Robb war...@gmail.com: I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. And an airplane can make three lefts, some even four. Things inevitably come full circle. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: eckinator Subject: Re: Leica M9 I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. Can two rites make a ceremony? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/23 mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com: I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make a right. But two Wrights can make an airplane. Can two rites make a ceremony? Dunno. Can two wrights make a play? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Two Wongs can make a chop suey. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/23 Cotty cotty...@mac.com: Two Wongs can make a chop suey. And two fangs can take a bite. In Denmark they can buy Dong Energy. -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Yes but you're describing stupidity and greed on the part of customers.
In spite of that the law should be able to shut down the truly
dishonest, yet it doesn't.
On 5/23/2010 1:52 PM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
Sun May 23 01:11:29 CDT 2010
Boris Liberman wrote:
On 5/23/2010 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote:
No corporation that consistently cheats it's customers will survive. To
do that you need a gun and the unrestricted will to use it. Otherwise
customers will flee to another haven. Free markets are free, and the
worst offenses happen in the markets that are most controlled.
Peter, I can give you a number of counter examples in my country.
Boris, - one doesn't need to go across the ocean:
Most PDMLers know a bunch of NYC-based photo stores that range
from bait-n-switch to charge-n-send-nothing-or-crap scammers.
Those have existed (or had existed) for many years.
Some of them are located in mid-Manhattan, some in Brooklyn.
(One can easily spot them here based on reviews:
http://photo.net/neighbor/subcategory-index?id=2 )
Resellerratings.com is yet another good source for finding long-living
resellers with consistantly bad reviews.
Peter:
In a large enough market, - the influx of fools feeding crooks is
large enough (practically infinite) to support long term stagnation
of the latter.
(Besides, - strictly speaking, - there are no free markets. -
Practically all free markets are regulated to some degree,
as truly free markets are not sustainable long term. - But
that's a subject for a separate and pointless - within PDML - discussion.)
Igor
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/22/2010 8:33 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
On May 22, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 23/05/2010, P. J. Allingwebstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
I've worked in retail, sellling at different times, audio equipment and
cameras, if we couldn't sell again as new, (i.e. the camera, or other gear,
looked pristine and the all of the packaging was as new), we wouldn't give
you all of your money back, and after checking all of the cameras functions,
we'd sure as hell sell it as new. Some places charge a restocking fee as a
matter of course.
I guess that's the difference, here people can sniff out something
that's been repackaged (even carefully) a mile away and will often
demand a discount for taking on shop-soiled items.
That's true here as well. Most packaging today has machine applied tape or
shrink wrap. It's not hard to see if it's been opened. I look for a package
that is still sealed. And if the opened one is the only one left, I ask for a
discount. NIne times out of ten, it's granted.
Paul
Back when I was working retail, packaging wasn't so machine intensive.
Now it appears that large chains have special repackaging equipment.
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
--
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.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/23/2010 4:32 AM, eckinator wrote:
2010/5/23 Tom Ccaka...@gmail.com:
Do they have the right to know the full story?
If a mfr. were to make, and a retailer to sell, a shoddy product, do
they let me in on it? Or do they hope people buy it and are then
stuck with it, and too busy or too chicken shit to raise a stink? And
even then they'll hide behind all the legalese.
That, in the end is why I have no qualms of conscience about this. A
lie was not told when returning the item. The exchange was made, no
question asked.
I can guarantee you that there's plenty of people on this list who
would willing partake in actions on a regular basis, that my
conscience would prohibit me from doing.
So why doesn't everyone get off their high horse about it?
I for one am not on one, I just happen to think two wrongs don't make
a right. Three lefts do but I doubt that will get anyone a new
camera...
Obviously you've never driven in Boston or Atlanta.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
2010/5/23 eckinator eckina...@gmail.com: 2010/5/23 Cotty cotty...@mac.com: Two Wongs can make a chop suey. And two fangs can take a bite. In Denmark they can buy Dong Energy. I've been thinking... two bongs could fly my kite but it only takes two puns to make me write but the real question is: Does Gary Fong go to Denmark to charge his flashes? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: Leica M9 But two Wrights can make an airplane. Can two rites make a ceremony? Any more than that would be a ceremany William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
This list has too many/much pun_dits... Boris On 5/24/2010 2:08 AM, eckinator wrote: 2010/5/23 eckinatoreckina...@gmail.com: 2010/5/23 Cottycotty...@mac.com: Two Wongs can make a chop suey. And two fangs can take a bite. In Denmark they can buy Dong Energy. I've been thinking... two bongs could fly my kite but it only takes two puns to make me write but the real question is: Does Gary Fong go to Denmark to charge his flashes? -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
2010/5/22 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com: The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. Amen to that! -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Besides, I'm surprised cameras don't have that little dot that turns red when it gets wet. Cells phones all have them. I've immersed two. Oddly, the one I quickly recovered died whereas the one I actually put through a cycle of the washing machine dried out just fine. I've had lots of experience with breaking technology. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:03 AM, eckinator eckina...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/5/22 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com: The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. Amen to that! -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Stealing from big companies doesn't count either: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qEG9EnHnw0 ;-) On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Besides, I'm surprised cameras don't have that little dot that turns red when it gets wet. Cells phones all have them. I've immersed two. Oddly, the one I quickly recovered died whereas the one I actually put through a cycle of the washing machine dried out just fine. I've had lots of experience with breaking technology. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 4:03 AM, eckinator eckina...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/5/22 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com: The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. Amen to that! -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Leica M9 Fine Bruce... don't start out though believing the system itself is noble. You can read it as justification if you want to. I read it as an accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working. That's like saying that any car that suffers a minor accident should always still be drivable. Most times it will be, but sometimes it won't be. Would it not be more honest to go through ones insurance company when one causes an accident? William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
As Christian pointed out some companies do have a very lenient return policy. Does the fact that the owner didn't say it was spilled upon make him dishonest? I don't think so. Was the customer service clerk happy to give him a new camera, without the need for an explanation? Yes he was. I don't see the problem here. I don't see how this is very different from a situation where I buy a camera, use it for two weeks and then decide I don't like it, or discover a model I like better. If that happened I would bring the camera back to the store, tell them I didn't like it and get a full refund. The store would be left holding a camera that they can no longer sell as new and will take a hit as they'll likely resell it as a used/opened item at a discount. In fact that scenario is actually worse for the retailer. In the first scenario, retailer gets a full credit from vendor or mfr. In the second, they absorb the cost. In both cases they are willing to do so in the name of customer service. I'm not advocating, what you mention Bill, where people return an 11ft board, or all their old deck lumber, or pieces of a product that they used to assemble a whole. That's fairly ridiculous and I can't really fathom why any business would allow that kind of return. But if the retailer makes the rules, and I abide by those rules (notice the rules do not require an explanation of why the item is not working), then I don't see a problem. What I see happening here is that there's an idea being expressed that an individual has to own up to each and every mistake they make, otherwise they're dishonest and not trustworthy. Is that reality for any one of us? Let's say there's a police officer sitting at an intersection and you run the red light, but he's looking down and doesn't see you. Do you stop and turn around and say Please Mr. Police Officer, I ran a red light, write me a ticket? By all rights you should get a ticket and those funds go to supporting the community infrastructure, but since you escaped notice now there is not as much money in the till. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 12:14 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Leica M9 Fine Bruce... don't start out though believing the system itself is noble. You can read it as justification if you want to. I read it as an accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working. That's like saying that any car that suffers a minor accident should always still be drivable. Most times it will be, but sometimes it won't be. Would it not be more honest to go through ones insurance company when one causes an accident? William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 23/05/2010, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see how this is very different from a situation where I buy a camera, use it for two weeks and then decide I don't like it, or discover a model I like better. If that happened I would bring the camera back to the store, tell them I didn't like it and get a full refund. The store would be left holding a camera that they can no longer sell as new and will take a hit as they'll likely resell it as a used/opened item at a discount. In fact that scenario is actually worse for the retailer. In the first scenario, retailer gets a full credit from vendor or mfr. In the second, they absorb the cost. I've never understood that type of policy, generally here it's your responsibility to decide before purchase if the item will suite your needs, it can only be returned if faulty after purchase, never just because you don't like it. You just couldn't run a business here with such open return policies and survive. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
The store would be left holding a camera that they can no
longer sell as new...
I've worked in retail, sellling at different times, audio equipment and
cameras, if we couldn't sell again as new, (i.e. the camera, or other
gear, looked pristine and the all of the packaging was as new), we
wouldn't give you all of your money back, and after checking all of the
cameras functions, we'd sure as hell sell it as new. Some places charge
a restocking fee as a matter of course.
On 5/22/2010 6:01 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
On 23/05/2010, Tom Ccaka...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see how this is very different from a situation where I buy a
camera, use it for two weeks and then decide I don't like it, or
discover a model I like better. If that happened I would bring the
camera back to the store, tell them I didn't like it and get a full
refund. The store would be left holding a camera that they can no
longer sell as new and will take a hit as they'll likely resell it as
a used/opened item at a discount. In fact that scenario is actually
worse for the retailer. In the first scenario, retailer gets a full
credit from vendor or mfr. In the second, they absorb the cost.
I've never understood that type of policy, generally here it's your
responsibility to decide before purchase if the item will suite your
needs, it can only be returned if faulty after purchase, never just
because you don't like it. You just couldn't run a business here with
such open return policies and survive.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
From: Steven Desjardins The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. Alternatively, you might take the popular view amongst corporate apologists that, as Milton Friedman stated in The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits (The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.), a corporation's ONLY responsibility is to increase profit by any means fair or foul, and Devil take the hindmost. Couple that with a fundamental misrepresentation of the nature of Adam Smith's Free Market by those same corporate apologists and you have the foundation for the the massive fraud that is the heart, the fundamental mission, of any modern multinational corporation. Their sole purpose for existing is to achieve an imbalance in the so called free market that allows the corporation to take everything and give nothing in return. That we customers receive anything at all in the transaction is due only to their inability to achieve the perfection of their aims. Given the state of affairs that corporations have no responsibility to act ethically in dealing with their customers, on what basis do you suggest we, the customers, are obliged to give them any more respect than they afford us? A little balancing of the scales of justice is in order I think. -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
On 5/22/2010 6:38 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
From: Steven Desjardins
The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way
they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they
can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially
true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way
not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat
an inanimate object.
I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into
this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality.
You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of
doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm
psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction.
Alternatively, you might take the popular view amongst corporate
apologists that, as Milton Friedman stated in The Social
Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits (The New York
Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.), a corporation's ONLY
responsibility is to increase profit by any means fair or foul, and
Devil take the hindmost.
Couple that with a fundamental misrepresentation of the nature of Adam
Smith's Free Market by those same corporate apologists and you have
the foundation for the the massive fraud that is the heart, the
fundamental mission, of any modern multinational corporation.
Their sole purpose for existing is to achieve an imbalance in the so
called free market that allows the corporation to take everything
and give nothing in return. That we customers receive anything at all
in the transaction is due only to their inability to achieve the
perfection of their aims.
Given the state of affairs that corporations have no responsibility to
act ethically in dealing with their customers, on what basis do you
suggest we, the customers, are obliged to give them any more respect
than they afford us?
A little balancing of the scales of justice is in order I think.
No corporation that consistently cheats it's customers will survive. To
do that you need a gun and the unrestricted will to use it. Otherwise
customers will flee to another haven. Free markets are free, and the
worst offenses happen in the markets that are most controlled.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
On 23/05/2010, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I've worked in retail, sellling at different times, audio equipment and cameras, if we couldn't sell again as new, (i.e. the camera, or other gear, looked pristine and the all of the packaging was as new), we wouldn't give you all of your money back, and after checking all of the cameras functions, we'd sure as hell sell it as new. Some places charge a restocking fee as a matter of course. I guess that's the difference, here people can sniff out something that's been repackaged (even carefully) a mile away and will often demand a discount for taking on shop-soiled items. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On May 22, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 23/05/2010, P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote: I've worked in retail, sellling at different times, audio equipment and cameras, if we couldn't sell again as new, (i.e. the camera, or other gear, looked pristine and the all of the packaging was as new), we wouldn't give you all of your money back, and after checking all of the cameras functions, we'd sure as hell sell it as new. Some places charge a restocking fee as a matter of course. I guess that's the difference, here people can sniff out something that's been repackaged (even carefully) a mile away and will often demand a discount for taking on shop-soiled items. That's true here as well. Most packaging today has machine applied tape or shrink wrap. It's not hard to see if it's been opened. I look for a package that is still sealed. And if the opened one is the only one left, I ask for a discount. NIne times out of ten, it's granted. Paul Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
From: Rob Studdert On 23/05/2010, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see how this is very different from a situation where I buy a camera, use it for two weeks and then decide I don't like it, or discover a model I like better. If that happened I would bring the camera back to the store, tell them I didn't like it and get a full refund. The store would be left holding a camera that they can no longer sell as new and will take a hit as they'll likely resell it as a used/opened item at a discount. In fact that scenario is actually worse for the retailer. In the first scenario, retailer gets a full credit from vendor or mfr. In the second, they absorb the cost. I've never understood that type of policy, generally here it's your responsibility to decide before purchase if the item will suite your needs, it can only be returned if faulty after purchase, never just because you don't like it. You just couldn't run a business here with such open return policies and survive. I dunno. BH has been doing business that way for years. = At BH, our goal is to ensure your complete satisfaction with your purchase. If, for whatever reason, you are dissatisfied with your purchase, you can return it to BH within 15 days of receipt of item(s). Claims for missing items or items damaged in transit must be received within two business days of receipt of merchandise. You have the option of exchanging the item(s) or receiving a refund for the full amount of the original purchase price. Refunds on returned items will be issued in the same payment form as tendered at the time of purchase. If payment was made by credit card, once we receive the product we will credit your account. Please allow 7-10 days for a credit to appear on your credit card statement. If payment was made by check, the refund check will be issued after 10 business days from the date of purchase. = I think they don't get so many returns they lose money on it. -- 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.
Returns (was Re: Leica M9)
On 5/23/10, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: As Christian pointed out some companies do have a very lenient return policy. I once talked to someone who had been a technician at Acoustic Research, back when AR speakers carried a lifetime warranty. He said they got one or two a year that were burned out in a recognisable way, what you get if you run 110 volt AC into the speaker inputs. They replaced them. -- 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.
Re: Returns (was Re: Leica M9)
Interesting. I'm here sticking up for Christian, and I wasn't the guy that returned the camera. :-) But I understand the mindset. It's not about ripping someone off. If any one is doing that it's the mfrs., the vendors, and the retailers that have their hoards of i-dotting and t-crossing attorneys, trying to insure that their own interests are protected in every way possible. And often times any action a corporation wants to take is justified in the name of 'it's our policy'. I'm unsure what would have happened if it was told that a drink had been spilled on the camera. I can imagine one CS clerk saying, no deal it must be sent in for repair, and OTOH, another one saying don't worry about, we'll send it back, here's a new one. If a company, retailer or vendor has a reputation for great customer service, i.e., let's make the customer happy, I suspect they'll make more money though gross sales alone, than they lose, through the small % of customers that actually plan to rip them off. Tom C. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Sandy Harris sandyinch...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/23/10, Tom C caka...@gmail.com wrote: As Christian pointed out some companies do have a very lenient return policy. I once talked to someone who had been a technician at Acoustic Research, back when AR speakers carried a lifetime warranty. He said they got one or two a year that were burned out in a recognisable way, what you get if you run 110 volt AC into the speaker inputs. They replaced them. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 12:44:07PM -0600, Tom C wrote: As Christian pointed out some companies do have a very lenient return policy. Does the fact that the owner didn't say it was spilled upon make him dishonest? I don't think so. Was the customer service clerk happy to give him a new camera, without the need for an explanation? Yes he was. I don't see the problem here. Do you really think, having read their returns policy, that that the store (and thye claerk) would have happily exchanged the camera if they knew the full story? But if the retailer makes the rules, and I abide by those rules . . . Again, I don't believe this exhange *was* abiding by the sotre's rules. (notice the rules do not require an explanation of why the item is not working), then I don't see a problem. But they do spell out the conditions under which an item is returnable. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Do they have the right to know the full story? If a mfr. were to make, and a retailer to sell, a shoddy product, do they let me in on it? Or do they hope people buy it and are then stuck with it, and too busy or too chicken shit to raise a stink? And even then they'll hide behind all the legalese. That, in the end is why I have no qualms of conscience about this. A lie was not told when returning the item. The exchange was made, no question asked. I can guarantee you that there's plenty of people on this list who would willing partake in actions on a regular basis, that my conscience would prohibit me from doing. So why doesn't everyone get off their high horse about it? Tom C. On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 11:13 PM, John Francis jo...@panix.com wrote: On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 12:44:07PM -0600, Tom C wrote: As Christian pointed out some companies do have a very lenient return policy. Does the fact that the owner didn't say it was spilled upon make him dishonest? I don't think so. Was the customer service clerk happy to give him a new camera, without the need for an explanation? Yes he was. I don't see the problem here. Do you really think, having read their returns policy, that that the store (and thye claerk) would have happily exchanged the camera if they knew the full story? But if the retailer makes the rules, and I abide by those rules . . . Again, I don't believe this exhange *was* abiding by the sotre's rules. (notice the rules do not require an explanation of why the item is not working), then I don't see a problem. But they do spell out the conditions under which an item is returnable. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: eckinator Subject: Re: Leica M9 Personally, I pay 2.5% p.a. on the amount I want to receive for any insured item in the event that it becomes unusable for any reason whatsoever, theft, loss, damage, failure, coffee spill etc. no questions asked. I suspect this is available with some credit card purchases. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Leica M9 Not trying to be argumentative. I just think the condemnation I'm hearing regarding the G11 return is rather unwarranted. He just as easily could have gotten a defective one from the store and would have had to return it. There was no visible damage to the camera otherwise BB would have bulked. BB will do exactly the same thing with this camera as they would with any other returned as not working. BB willl receive the credit from Canon or their distrubutor. they will refurbish and resell. What I'm reading from what you are saying, in general terms, is that it is OK to try to decieve to one's advantage in business; and that it is wrong to get caught, since it is possible that at some point one might actually be in the situation that one is not in now. Or something.. I'm not trying to be argumentative either, just trying to clarify. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Leica M9 On 5/21/2010 12:32 AM, John Sessoms wrote: Not at Best Buy... That's kind of a horror story to me. To buy something in order to return it and get some money in the process out of thin air, effectively... OMG... *sigH* To bring this back somewhat to on topic (relevent to photography, if not Pentax), many years ago I was told of a local photographer who specialized on food and lifestyle photography. She shopped at the local higher end stores, buying place settings, cutlery, glasswear, linens, whatever was needed for the project she was working on at the time. When she was done, it all went back for a refund. Or so I was told, anyway. William Robb -- 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.
RE: Leica M9
To bring this back somewhat to on topic (relevent to photography, if not Pentax), many years ago I was told of a local photographer who specialized on food and lifestyle photography. She shopped at the local higher end stores, buying place settings, cutlery, glasswear, linens, whatever was needed for the project she was working on at the time. When she was done, it all went back for a refund. Or so I was told, anyway. That's quite a common practice in that type of photography. I first heard of it happening in London in the early 80s. Some of the stylists do actually borrow stuff legitimately to use in a shoot, and credit the lender accordingly. Worst of all is a practice I heard about from a fashion 'designer' who copied catwalk designs and dumbed them down for the mass market. She used to go to stores and buy stuff that she was going to 'adapt for the market' then return it for a refund. On one occasion she needed to cut up the underwear she was copying. The rags went into a shopping bag, which her assistant later inadvertently picked up and took back to the shop for a refund. I believe in this instance it was unsuccessful, but embarrassing for the assistant. B -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
My Father had similar experiences in his business, particularly in the shoe department where ladies would purchase fashion shoes before a big local social event, wear them once and return them for a refund. Phil Northeast www.northeastmedia.biz northeastme...@bigpond.com Original Message - From: William Robb war...@gmail.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 3:57 PM Subject: Re: Leica M9 - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Leica M9 On 5/21/2010 12:32 AM, John Sessoms wrote: Not at Best Buy... That's kind of a horror story to me. To buy something in order to return it and get some money in the process out of thin air, effectively... OMG... *sigH* To bring this back somewhat to on topic (relevent to photography, if not Pentax), many years ago I was told of a local photographer who specialized on food and lifestyle photography. She shopped at the local higher end stores, buying place settings, cutlery, glasswear, linens, whatever was needed for the project she was working on at the time. When she was done, it all went back for a refund. Or so I was told, anyway. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
From: Bruce Dayton Having followed this thread, and being a father of 4, I have to say this would be a poor way to teach my children to behave. What goes around comes around - teach them to abuse the system and where will they be in the future. Seems to smack of the entitlement attitude so prevalent in our society. Whether you can justify the dishonesty by passing the buck on to others than yourself, it is still a character issue. Would you want to be treated this way? Would you want your loved ones to behave this way? I would hope not. If they had asked what happened, would you have told them the truth? And if you did, would you expect a refund? And if you wouldn't have expected a refund, why would you attempt to return it? Seems you would be going expecting to abuse the system, because you knew you could. Is this morally right? The very fact that justifications are needed to feel 'good' about it is telling. I don't justify it. Such blatant dishonesty pissed me off. And it pissed me off any more that the store management wouldn't fight it. They were always giving the employees a hard time about productivity and keeping costs down, but they wouldn't take action to stop outright thievery that certainly was increasing those costs. And compared to the blatant dishonesty I witnessed, returning a camera that stopped working and not volunteering that it stopped working after getting splashed doesn't really rate. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On May 21, 2010, at 1:57 AM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: Boris Liberman Subject: Re: Leica M9 On 5/21/2010 12:32 AM, John Sessoms wrote: Not at Best Buy... That's kind of a horror story to me. To buy something in order to return it and get some money in the process out of thin air, effectively... OMG... *sigH* To bring this back somewhat to on topic (relevent to photography, if not Pentax), many years ago I was told of a local photographer who specialized on food and lifestyle photography. She shopped at the local higher end stores, buying place settings, cutlery, glasswear, linens, whatever was needed for the project she was working on at the time. When she was done, it all went back for a refund. Or so I was told, anyway. William Robb A lot of photographers, set designers and wardrobe people work that way. The pros usually develop relationships with certain stores. The retailer knows that a few items will be purchased -- disposables and clothing that might be abused. The rest is returned. But it's generally done with an understanding. For example, to dress several people for a television commercial, the wardrobe consultant might bring thirty different outfits to a review session -- all with pricetags hanging. Three will be chosen, the rest returned. 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Bill can you explain this, please - I just don't seem to catch your reference? TIA Ecke How about the ones who buy two single device boxes, take the side plates off so as to make a two gang box and then bring the side plates back for a full refund? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Leica M9 And compared to the blatant dishonesty I witnessed, returning a camera that stopped working and not volunteering that it stopped working after getting splashed doesn't really rate. So it's OK to beat your wife as long as the bruises aren't visible? William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: paul stenquist Subject: Re: Leica M9 For example, to dress several people for a television commercial, the wardrobe consultant might bring thirty different outfits to a review session -- all with pricetags hanging. Three will be chosen, the rest returned. But will those three be returned after the shoot or will they be kept by the wardrobe department? William Robb -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: eckinator Subject: Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9 Bill can you explain this, please - I just don't seem to catch your reference? In North America, a device box is something that a wall mounted switch (a light switch for example) would be contained by. Due to the way they are constructed, things like UPC stickers are put on the side of the box, but the sides can be removed to allow two boxes to be attached together. So, a person will buy two single device boxes, take one side off of each one and attach the two boxes together to make a bnox that will hold two light switches. This leaves them with two side plates, which if they have done what they are doing correctly, will both have a UPC sticker attached. They bring the side plates back, hopefully get someone at the returns desk that isn't familiar with this particular scam or what a box should look like, and, if all goes well, they get a refund on the boxes for the side plates that they are returning. William Robb How about the ones who buy two single device boxes, take the side plates off so as to make a two gang box and then bring the side plates back for a full refund? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
From: William Robb From: Boris Liberman On 5/21/2010 12:32 AM, John Sessoms wrote: Not at Best Buy... That's kind of a horror story to me. To buy something in order to return it and get some money in the process out of thin air, effectively... OMG... *sigH* To bring this back somewhat to on topic (relevent to photography, if not Pentax), many years ago I was told of a local photographer who specialized on food and lifestyle photography. She shopped at the local higher end stores, buying place settings, cutlery, glasswear, linens, whatever was needed for the project she was working on at the time. When she was done, it all went back for a refund. Or so I was told, anyway. William Robb Yeah, I've known people who did that sort of thing. It's one of those gray area things. I guess they're within the letter of the law if the stores allow it, and I won't say they're dishonest doing it, but I couldn't do that myself. No one's 100% honest all the time. Certainly I can't pretend to be, but that's just not the way I'm bent. I've developed a fine eye for second-hand goodies to use when I need props. I spend some idle time wandering the thrift shops, Goodwill and the like. If I find something and it's not too expensive, I'll buy something to use it. And afterwards, if it's just going to clutter up the place and I'll never have further use for it, I might sell it again ... or even donate it back. Plus, I have, on occasion, rented stuff from thrift shops for a shoot. -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
From: eckinator Bill can you explain this, please - I just don't seem to catch your reference? TIA Ecke How about the ones who buy two single device boxes, take the side plates off so as to make a two gang box and then bring the side plates back for a full refund? Yeah, I'll second that. I understand what the single gang boxes are and about doubling to make a two gang box (although why not just buy a two gang box?), but I don't understand how you get a refund - or could expect one - from returning just the side plates? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Bruce, The question in my mind became in this instance: Did spilling a single drink on the camera make the owner at fault for the subsequent failure of the object? My wife has a G9 and I have a G10, the predecessors to the G11. Knowing their build quality and that I use the G10 in wet and windy conditions when skiing, I would not think that spilling something on any modern camera should immediately make it inoperative. Back to the moral issues since that seems to be what we're talking about. I'll say what I think and am willing to take the brunt of it. Big picture, not just this incident - Does being honest *always* require telling everything you know? If the answer is yes, then I'm afraid one will find themselves at a severe disadvantage as there are certain types of people who will capitalize on that to their own advantage and to other's disadvantage. There is honesty but there's also discretion, both are admirable attributes and serve one well. If it were me with the G11 drink spill, I would have likely done the same as occurred. If asked, I would have told the truth that I spilled something on it. If not asked, I would figure they did not deem the reason important and were simply happy to give me a replacement. Had I been asked, I'd have made the claim that I certainly wouldn't expect a spill to cause the camera to immediately become non-functional. Let's see, will it work at SeaWorld when splashed? What about at Yosemite in the spray of Bridal Veil Falls, a rainy day? Do you know how many extended warranties are purchased to cover this sort of thing that are never used? Now there is a scam. The majority of them, never utilized, goes straight to the bottom line. A hugh profit center preying on people's insecurities. A little story. About eight years ago, through a totally stupid act of my own doing, I accidentally set off the fire suppression system in my hotel room (I could make this story very funny if I gave you all the details). Though buck naked at the time... No... I pulled on some pants, threw my laptop bag out into the hallway, and bounded down two flights of stairs to the office, just as those nauseating alarms and flashing lights started going off all over the hotel. I told them what I'd done that set the sprinklers off. Guess what? They did not know how to turn the fire supression system off. They did not have a procedure manual at the hotel. They called another hotel in the same chain to see if they knew how. Yes, but different system. Fire department calls to see if there's a fire. No there's a flood, so you needn't come. I go back to my room and the maintenance guy is standing in two inches of water with a shop vac trying to vacum up the water while it's still coming out of the ceiling. I immediately told him to get out of there before he gets himself electrocuted. Still trying to figure out the suppression system, I am running and relaying information from the office to the maintenance guy back at the control panel which is in the basement/pool level of the hotel. Still bare chest, pair of pants, bare feet. As I'm running past the pool I see water dripping out of the ceiling into the pool! From 3 floors above! Oh crap and a bunch of other things! The local Fire Department finally shows up sirens blaring. They go down and just as they're about to stem the flow of water, the system exhausts itself. Apparently, it's a finite pressurized supply. So all the water that would have been used for the entire hotel, went out into my room, over a period of about 30 minutes. Oh crap and a bunch of other things! The hotel graciously assigned me another room. I went and bought dry clothes and went into work. I lurked back in through the side door that evening around 8:00. Carpets were pulled up all over the place with big blowers running. Wow I think, several weeks later, they haven't sued me. Not quite that lucky. Months later, after having stayed at the hotel for the next four months, out of a misplaced sense of guilt, I receive a letter. It's from the hotel chain's, insurance company's, risk management company. They're demanding payment of $27,000 in damages, including my room, the 3 floors below, and lost income because other hotel residents left (the alarm system kept malfunctioning and going off intermittently for the next 8 - 10 hours). I finally got some advice and called my home owners insurance to see if I was in some way covered through it. Yes. So they took up the litigation in my defense. My argument was, that while I was indeed responsible for having set the system off, I was not responsible for the hotel not knowing how to control it and turn it off. I would have thought they should be able to turn it off in under 5 minutes. So I figured I was responsible for no more than 1/6 of the damages. Under Washington State law, a tenant is only responsible for their room. The arbitrator also agreed with the argument that the hotel itself was to blame for
RE: Leica M9
And compared to the blatant dishonesty I witnessed, returning a camera that stopped working and not volunteering that it stopped working after getting splashed doesn't really rate. So it's OK to beat your wife as long as the bruises aren't visible? Burqa and sunglasses - that should do the trick. -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9 I understand what the single gang boxes are and about doubling to make a two gang box (although why not just buy a two gang box?), but I don't understand how you get a refund - or could expect one - from returning just the side plates? 1) Be dishonest. 2) Find a store that has trained it's people to take refunds without question on the theory that the bad refunds are a very small % of the total. Of course this leads to 3) watch your bad refund % grow as word gets around that it is possible to get away with this. True stories: I was putting a cart of returned 16' deck boards back on the rack. There were a lot of them, probably close to 60. Below the second layer of new boards, the rest were used boards, complete with years of weathering and two screw holes every 16 inches. I had a 12' 2x4 come back on a cart. Except it was no longer 12', it was closer to 11'. And it had a screw sticking out of it. The only justice in this one was that it was an ACQ treated board, and the screw was on coated for ACQ, so probably by now their deck has fallen apart. Yesterday, a return cart of teleposts. No boxes, missing support plates and scew jacks. This one will be another write off of several hundred dollars when I get to it. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On May 21, 2010, at 12:34 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: paul stenquist Subject: Re: Leica M9 For example, to dress several people for a television commercial, the wardrobe consultant might bring thirty different outfits to a review session -- all with pricetags hanging. Three will be chosen, the rest returned. But will those three be returned after the shoot or will they be kept by the wardrobe department? The stuff that is actually used is paid for. Billed to the job, so they go to the client. Sometimes the clients say to give them to the actors. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: P N Stenquist Subject: Re: Leica M9 For example, to dress several people for a television commercial, the wardrobe consultant might bring thirty different outfits to a review session -- all with pricetags hanging. Three will be chosen, the rest returned. But will those three be returned after the shoot or will they be kept by the wardrobe department? The stuff that is actually used is paid for. Billed to the job, so they go to the client. Sometimes the clients say to give them to the actors. Then what you are talking about is completely unrelated to what I wrote. The photographer in question would buy what was required for her shoot, use the product for profit, and then clean it up, box it up and return it all for a refund. This is significantly different from taking product oput of the store on spec to be reiviewed by a production crew and then returning, unused, the unsuitable product. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/21/2010 12:33 PM, William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Leica M9
And compared to the blatant dishonesty I witnessed, returning a
camera that stopped working and not volunteering that it stopped
working after getting splashed doesn't really rate.
So it's OK to beat your wife as long as the bruises aren't visible?
William Robb
I suppose that would all depend upon your wife.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:02 AM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: What I'm reading from what you are saying, in general terms, is that it is OK to try to decieve to one's advantage in business; and that it is wrong to get caught, since it is possible that at some point one might actually be in the situation that one is not in now. Or something.. I'm not trying to be argumentative either, just trying to clarify. William Robb Bill, No. That's not what I'm saying (not sure which of my posts you were referring to actually, but I know that was not my intent). The statement's been made that the owner of the non-working camera deceived and/or lied, and/or abdicated responsibility about the reason for the return. I don't see it that way, frankly. He made a simple statement that was truthful and was not asked Why? or What happened?. Nor do I think the customer service person should be asking those questions, because it's essentially accusing and blaming the customer up front, which is bad policy. (nor do I think the camera should have stopped working after one spill) He said he would have told what happened, if he was asked. The statement he made was honest and he said he would have answered additional questions honestly. Do you or anyone else you know go around telling on themselves the vast majority of the time about relatively minor things? We all make mistakes, and even do things that can in the very strictest sense be viewed as unethical. Do you stand around at work and chat with co-workers for extended periods occasionally instead of doing real work? Do you note that on your time card so that your employer does not have to pay you for those wasted minutes? Do I sometimes browse the web instead of doing real work? Do I keep track of it and likewise let my employer know? In both instances I'll surmise the answer is No. Does that make us fundamentally dishonest and untrustworthy individuals? I'd say no. Our employers also apparently do not think so, because they keep us knowing that we are fulfilling the #1 thing they hired us for. Getting the job done in a satifactory, if not superior manner. We can nitpick and look at people with a microscopic view or we can stand back and look at the bigger picture. Tom C. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Everything I read indicates justification for that which you inherently know is wrong - doesn't make it right, just allows you to go with the flow so you can take advantage as the next guy. I'm saying this is part of what is wrong with our society - instead of teaching morals and values we end up teaching how to beat and manipulate the system. I think this is a slow downward spiral that leads to a bad ending. As everyone becomes savvy to what you know, then they all start screwing the system and then the retailers/manufacturers pad the products even more. It becomes a viscous cycle. The only loser is us - the retailer and manufacturer just pass it on. Society goes downhill and we all learn how to mistrust each other and pay more for stealing from each other. Much a long term no-win scenario. Go back to think about what you would want to teach your own children. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 10:20:53 AM, you wrote: TC Bruce, TC The question in my mind became in this instance: TC Did spilling a single drink on the camera make the owner at fault for TC the subsequent failure of the object? My wife has a G9 and I have a TC G10, the predecessors to the G11. Knowing their build quality and TC that I use the G10 in wet and windy conditions when skiing, I would TC not think that spilling something on any modern camera should TC immediately make it inoperative. TC Back to the moral issues since that seems to be what we're talking TC about. I'll say what I think and am willing to take the brunt of it. TC Big picture, not just this incident - Does being honest *always* TC require telling everything you know? If the answer is yes, then I'm TC afraid one will find themselves at a severe disadvantage as there are TC certain types of people who will capitalize on that to their own TC advantage and to other's disadvantage. There is honesty but there's TC also discretion, both are admirable attributes and serve one well. TC If it were me with the G11 drink spill, I would have likely done the TC same as occurred. If asked, I would have told the truth that I spilled TC something on it. If not asked, I would figure they did not deem the TC reason important and were simply happy to give me a replacement. Had TC I been asked, I'd have made the claim that I certainly wouldn't expect TC a spill to cause the camera to immediately become non-functional. TC Let's see, will it work at SeaWorld when splashed? What about at TC Yosemite in the spray of Bridal Veil Falls, a rainy day? TC Do you know how many extended warranties are purchased to cover this TC sort of thing that are never used? Now there is a scam. The majority TC of them, never utilized, goes straight to the bottom line. A hugh TC profit center preying on people's insecurities. TC A little story. TC About eight years ago, through a totally stupid act of my own doing, I TC accidentally set off the fire suppression system in my hotel room (I TC could make this story very funny if I gave you all the details). TC Though buck naked at the time... No... TC I pulled on some pants, threw my laptop bag out into the hallway, and TC bounded down two flights of stairs to the office, just as those TC nauseating alarms and flashing lights started going off all over the TC hotel. TC I told them what I'd done that set the sprinklers off. TC Guess what? TC They did not know how to turn the fire supression system off. TC They did not have a procedure manual at the hotel. TC They called another hotel in the same chain to see if they knew how. TC Yes, but different system. TC Fire department calls to see if there's a fire. No there's a flood, TC so you needn't come. TC I go back to my room and the maintenance guy is standing in two inches TC of water with a shop vac trying to vacum up the water while it's still TC coming out of the ceiling. TC I immediately told him to get out of there before he gets himself electrocuted. TC Still trying to figure out the suppression system, I am running and TC relaying information from the office to the maintenance guy back at TC the control panel which is in the basement/pool level of the hotel. TC Still bare chest, pair of pants, bare feet. TC As I'm running past the pool I see water dripping out of the ceiling TC into the pool! From 3 floors above! Oh crap and a bunch of other TC things! TC The local Fire Department finally shows up sirens blaring. TC They go down and just as they're about to stem the flow of water, the TC system exhausts itself. Apparently, it's a finite pressurized supply. TC So all the water that would have been used for the entire hotel, went TC out into my room, over a period of about 30 minutes. Oh crap and a TC bunch of other things! TC The hotel graciously assigned me another room. I went and bought dry TC clothes and went into work. TC I lurked back in through the side door that evening around 8:00. TC Carpets were pulled up all over the place with big blowers running.
Re: Leica M9
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:13:15PM -0400, Tom C wrote: He said he would have told what happened, if he was asked. The statement he made was honest . . . I disagree. The statement was technically truthful, but the intent was to deceive. That's not honest (or honourable) in my book. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Fine Bruce... don't start out though believing the system itself is noble. You can read it as justification if you want to. I read it as an accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working. Tom C. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Everything I read indicates justification for that which you inherently know is wrong - doesn't make it right, just allows you to go with the flow so you can take advantage as the next guy. I'm saying this is part of what is wrong with our society - instead of teaching morals and values we end up teaching how to beat and manipulate the system. I think this is a slow downward spiral that leads to a bad ending. As everyone becomes savvy to what you know, then they all start screwing the system and then the retailers/manufacturers pad the products even more. It becomes a viscous cycle. The only loser is us - the retailer and manufacturer just pass it on. Society goes downhill and we all learn how to mistrust each other and pay more for stealing from each other. Much a long term no-win scenario. Go back to think about what you would want to teach your own children. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 10:20:53 AM, you wrote: TC Bruce, TC The question in my mind became in this instance: TC Did spilling a single drink on the camera make the owner at fault for TC the subsequent failure of the object? My wife has a G9 and I have a TC G10, the predecessors to the G11. Knowing their build quality and TC that I use the G10 in wet and windy conditions when skiing, I would TC not think that spilling something on any modern camera should TC immediately make it inoperative. TC Back to the moral issues since that seems to be what we're talking TC about. I'll say what I think and am willing to take the brunt of it. TC Big picture, not just this incident - Does being honest *always* TC require telling everything you know? If the answer is yes, then I'm TC afraid one will find themselves at a severe disadvantage as there are TC certain types of people who will capitalize on that to their own TC advantage and to other's disadvantage. There is honesty but there's TC also discretion, both are admirable attributes and serve one well. TC If it were me with the G11 drink spill, I would have likely done the TC same as occurred. If asked, I would have told the truth that I spilled TC something on it. If not asked, I would figure they did not deem the TC reason important and were simply happy to give me a replacement. Had TC I been asked, I'd have made the claim that I certainly wouldn't expect TC a spill to cause the camera to immediately become non-functional. TC Let's see, will it work at SeaWorld when splashed? What about at TC Yosemite in the spray of Bridal Veil Falls, a rainy day? TC Do you know how many extended warranties are purchased to cover this TC sort of thing that are never used? Now there is a scam. The majority TC of them, never utilized, goes straight to the bottom line. A hugh TC profit center preying on people's insecurities. TC A little story. TC About eight years ago, through a totally stupid act of my own doing, I TC accidentally set off the fire suppression system in my hotel room (I TC could make this story very funny if I gave you all the details). TC Though buck naked at the time... No... TC I pulled on some pants, threw my laptop bag out into the hallway, and TC bounded down two flights of stairs to the office, just as those TC nauseating alarms and flashing lights started going off all over the TC hotel. TC I told them what I'd done that set the sprinklers off. TC Guess what? TC They did not know how to turn the fire supression system off. TC They did not have a procedure manual at the hotel. TC They called another hotel in the same chain to see if they knew how. TC Yes, but different system. TC Fire department calls to see if there's a fire. No there's a flood, TC so you needn't come. TC I go back to my room and the maintenance guy is standing in two inches TC of water with a shop vac trying to vacum up the water while it's still TC coming out of the ceiling. TC I immediately told him to get out of there before he gets himself electrocuted. TC Still trying to figure out the suppression system, I am running and TC relaying information from the office to the maintenance guy back at TC the control panel which is in the basement/pool level of the hotel. TC Still bare chest, pair of pants, bare feet. TC As I'm running past the pool I see water dripping out of the ceiling TC into the pool! From 3 floors above! Oh crap and a bunch of other TC things! TC The local Fire Department finally shows up sirens blaring. TC They go down and just as they're about to stem the flow of water, the TC system exhausts itself. Apparently, it's a finite pressurized supply. TC So all the water that would have been
Re: Leica M9
I don't believe the system is noble - it is just responding to the human element. If we don't teach and strive for nobility, what do we become? I would have a real hard time taking my 13 year old son with me to return something in those circumstances because I know darn well what I would be teaching him. I could justify up and down all the reasons why it was ok, but in the end, I am trying to justify something I know is inherently wrong. To say the product was inferior is only a problem of buying the wrong product. To say the product should have handled it, then fine, exercise the warranty. If you feel the manufacturer is screwing you, then don't buy from them anymore, but don't intentionally lower your morals and convictions. I realize we all (myself included) and not perfect and have many issues and faults, but we should at least strive to be our best. Condoning behavior which we know to be less than what it should be is worse than the behavior itself. -- Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 11:33:25 AM, you wrote: TC Fine Bruce... don't start out though believing the system itself is noble. TC You can read it as justification if you want to. I read it as an TC accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working. TC Tom C. TC On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Bruce Dayton TC bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: Everything I read indicates justification for that which you inherently know is wrong - doesn't make it right, just allows you to go with the flow so you can take advantage as the next guy. I'm saying this is part of what is wrong with our society - instead of teaching morals and values we end up teaching how to beat and manipulate the system. I think this is a slow downward spiral that leads to a bad ending. As everyone becomes savvy to what you know, then they all start screwing the system and then the retailers/manufacturers pad the products even more. It becomes a viscous cycle. The only loser is us - the retailer and manufacturer just pass it on. Society goes downhill and we all learn how to mistrust each other and pay more for stealing from each other. Much a long term no-win scenario. Go back to think about what you would want to teach your own children. -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, May 21, 2010, 10:20:53 AM, you wrote: TC Bruce, TC The question in my mind became in this instance: TC Did spilling a single drink on the camera make the owner at fault for TC the subsequent failure of the object? My wife has a G9 and I have a TC G10, the predecessors to the G11. Knowing their build quality and TC that I use the G10 in wet and windy conditions when skiing, I would TC not think that spilling something on any modern camera should TC immediately make it inoperative. TC Back to the moral issues since that seems to be what we're talking TC about. I'll say what I think and am willing to take the brunt of it. TC Big picture, not just this incident - Does being honest *always* TC require telling everything you know? If the answer is yes, then I'm TC afraid one will find themselves at a severe disadvantage as there are TC certain types of people who will capitalize on that to their own TC advantage and to other's disadvantage. There is honesty but there's TC also discretion, both are admirable attributes and serve one well. TC If it were me with the G11 drink spill, I would have likely done the TC same as occurred. If asked, I would have told the truth that I spilled TC something on it. If not asked, I would figure they did not deem the TC reason important and were simply happy to give me a replacement. Had TC I been asked, I'd have made the claim that I certainly wouldn't expect TC a spill to cause the camera to immediately become non-functional. TC Let's see, will it work at SeaWorld when splashed? What about at TC Yosemite in the spray of Bridal Veil Falls, a rainy day? TC Do you know how many extended warranties are purchased to cover this TC sort of thing that are never used? Now there is a scam. The majority TC of them, never utilized, goes straight to the bottom line. A hugh TC profit center preying on people's insecurities. TC A little story. TC About eight years ago, through a totally stupid act of my own doing, I TC accidentally set off the fire suppression system in my hotel room (I TC could make this story very funny if I gave you all the details). TC Though buck naked at the time... No... TC I pulled on some pants, threw my laptop bag out into the hallway, and TC bounded down two flights of stairs to the office, just as those TC nauseating alarms and flashing lights started going off all over the TC hotel. TC I told them what I'd done that set the sprinklers off. TC Guess what? TC They did not know how to turn the fire supression system off. TC They did not have a procedure manual at the hotel. TC They called another hotel in the same chain to see if they knew how. TC Yes, but
Re: Leica M9
I'm with you on this. The difference I have would be mainly this. If the product was defective and should have held up under said conditions, then I believe as a consumer it's fair to receive a brand new replacement camera immediately as opposed to sending it in for a warranty repair (the result of which is often getting someone else's item that was sent in for repair). I first learned that with HP scanners several years back. Sent it in for repair under warranty and discovered I'd received a refurbished model in return. Reading the warranty fine print, strictly legal, but not what one would expect. Tom On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Bruce Dayton bkday...@daytonphoto.com wrote: I don't believe the system is noble - it is just responding to the human element. If we don't teach and strive for nobility, what do we become? I would have a real hard time taking my 13 year old son with me to return something in those circumstances because I know darn well what I would be teaching him. I could justify up and down all the reasons why it was ok, but in the end, I am trying to justify something I know is inherently wrong. To say the product was inferior is only a problem of buying the wrong product. To say the product should have handled it, then fine, exercise the warranty. If you feel the manufacturer is screwing you, then don't buy from them anymore, but don't intentionally lower your morals and convictions. I realize we all (myself included) and not perfect and have many issues and faults, but we should at least strive to be our best. Condoning behavior which we know to be less than what it should be is worse than the behavior itself. -- Bruce -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 2010-05-21 12:33 , Tom C wrote: I read it as an accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working. sure, if you really think the camera was faulty for not withstanding the spill, but frankly, that's unreasonable and sounds like an excuse to make the return seem okay i sometimes push my camera in misty/rainy situations, but i know that i take responsibility for the consequences; so far so good -- my k200d is weather sealed, but the 16-45 is *not* (nor is the G11) Apple has apparently had so many people dunk their iPhones, dry them out, and attempt to return them as it doesn't work that they've put moisture sensors inside and will deny claims when they've been triggered -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Well I do think that actually. :-) I suspect I could take any one of my Pentax DSLR bodies and dump a 16oz or 24oz glass of water on it, and not see any ill effects except for it being cleaner. I've used my non-weather-sealed *istD in the rain numerous times with water all beaded up on the top panel and running down the back panel. Didn't affect it one bit. Maybe I was just lucky. Getting splashed or spilled on is quite different from being dunked or submerged. I would expect a submersion event to yield a non-working camera, but not necessarily a spill or splash. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:40 PM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: sure, if you really think the camera was faulty for not withstanding the spill, but frankly, that's unreasonable and sounds like an excuse to make the return seem okay i sometimes push my camera in misty/rainy situations, but i know that i take responsibility for the consequences; so far so good -- my k200d is weather sealed, but the 16-45 is *not* (nor is the G11) Apple has apparently had so many people dunk their iPhones, dry them out, and attempt to return them as it doesn't work that they've put moisture sensors inside and will deny claims when they've been triggered -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
I can't help but notice that this thread about customer dishonesty began as a thread about Leica foisting an imperfect product on someone. It doesn't surprise me that we have drifted into whatever you can get away with since that attitude in part of as many transactions between consumers and corporations. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:41 PM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: John Sessoms Subject: Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9 I understand what the single gang boxes are and about doubling to make a two gang box (although why not just buy a two gang box?), but I don't understand how you get a refund - or could expect one - from returning just the side plates? 1) Be dishonest. 2) Find a store that has trained it's people to take refunds without question on the theory that the bad refunds are a very small % of the total. Of course this leads to 3) watch your bad refund % grow as word gets around that it is possible to get away with this. True stories: I was putting a cart of returned 16' deck boards back on the rack. There were a lot of them, probably close to 60. Below the second layer of new boards, the rest were used boards, complete with years of weathering and two screw holes every 16 inches. I had a 12' 2x4 come back on a cart. Except it was no longer 12', it was closer to 11'. And it had a screw sticking out of it. The only justice in this one was that it was an ACQ treated board, and the screw was on coated for ACQ, so probably by now their deck has fallen apart. Yesterday, a return cart of teleposts. No boxes, missing support plates and scew jacks. This one will be another write off of several hundred dollars when I get to it. William Robb -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
Steven Desjardins wrote: I can't help but notice that this thread about customer dishonesty began as a thread about Leica foisting an imperfect product on someone. It doesn't surprise me that we have drifted into whatever you can get away with since that attitude in part of as many transactions between consumers and corporations. Okay. What’s your point? What do you agree with or what do you take issue with? keith -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
OK now I get it - TY Bill The benefits of cheap labor, I guess... Cheers Ecke 2010/5/21 William Robb war...@gmail.com: - Original Message - From: eckinator Subject: Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9 Bill can you explain this, please - I just don't seem to catch your reference? In North America, a device box is something that a wall mounted switch (a light switch for example) would be contained by. Due to the way they are constructed, things like UPC stickers are put on the side of the box, but the sides can be removed to allow two boxes to be attached together. So, a person will buy two single device boxes, take one side off of each one and attach the two boxes together to make a bnox that will hold two light switches. This leaves them with two side plates, which if they have done what they are doing correctly, will both have a UPC sticker attached. They bring the side plates back, hopefully get someone at the returns desk that isn't familiar with this particular scam or what a box should look like, and, if all goes well, they get a refund on the boxes for the side plates that they are returning. William Robb How about the ones who buy two single device boxes, take the side plates off so as to make a two gang box and then bring the side plates back for a full refund? -- 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.
Re: Returning defective goods : was RE: Leica M9
The way people do business reflects their own perception of the way they are treated. If you think that companies will do anything they can to cheat you, they you will reply in kind. This is especially true if they believe that big companies are in some fundamental way not a person and do not merit ethical treatment. You can't cheat an inanimate object. I have no love for corporations but if you allow yourself to slip into this way of thinking then you only degrade your own sense of morality. You can begin to treat other individuals in this impersonal way of doing business. My position is that you do yourself more harm psychologically/spiritually than you gain in the material transaction. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Keith Whaley keit...@dslextreme.com wrote: Steven Desjardins wrote: I can't help but notice that this thread about customer dishonesty began as a thread about Leica foisting an imperfect product on someone. It doesn't surprise me that we have drifted into whatever you can get away with since that attitude in part of as many transactions between consumers and corporations. Okay. What’s your point? What do you agree with or what do you take issue with? keith -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 19 May 2010 15:41, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Steven Desjardins It should still bother him. A Leica should be a dream purchase. They charge top dollar and they are competing with some of the best pro cameras. The very idea that it just wouldn't work right is almost inconceivable. Maybe I'm just being naive here but why else would anyone buy a Leica if not for superb if maybe eclectic performance? I think there's something in the contract you sign when you get accepted into Dental School. You are thinking of Ducati. Or maybe Lamborghini. -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
I can get a Ducati under $10K ;-) It will be interesting to see how well Pentax does with their new dream camera, the 645D. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:33 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 19 May 2010 15:41, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Steven Desjardins It should still bother him. A Leica should be a dream purchase. They charge top dollar and they are competing with some of the best pro cameras. The very idea that it just wouldn't work right is almost inconceivable. Maybe I'm just being naive here but why else would anyone buy a Leica if not for superb if maybe eclectic performance? I think there's something in the contract you sign when you get accepted into Dental School. You are thinking of Ducati. Or maybe Lamborghini. -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/20/2010 5:33 AM, mike wilson wrote:
On 19 May 2010 15:41, John Sessomsjsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote:
From: Steven Desjardins
It should still bother him. A Leica should be a dream purchase.
They charge top dollar and they are competing with some of the best
pro cameras. The very idea that it just wouldn't work right is
almost inconceivable. Maybe I'm just being naive here but why else
would anyone buy a Leica if not for superb if maybe eclectic
performance?
I think there's something in the contract you sign when you get accepted
into Dental School.
You are thinking of Ducati. Or maybe Lamborghini.
I think contract requires all three, as well as indicators of success.
Recruitment requires certain standards.
--
{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0\deflang1033{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Courier
New;}}
\viewkind4\uc1\pard\f0\fs20 I've just upgraded to Thunderbird 3.0 and the
interface subtly weird.\par
}
--
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.
Re: Leica M9
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 08:13:43PM +0200, eckinator wrote: 2010/5/19 Christian Skofteland pterali...@aim.com: I bought my G11 a few weeks ago at BestBuy in Virginia. While in New York on business I accidentally spilled a collegues cocktail all over it. Needless to say it stopped working. I went back to BestBuy on my return, after gathering the original receipt and packaging, and told the return clerk that the camera stopped working after a week. He appologized and replaced the camera without asking any further questions. Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. -- 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. No. I disagree. I was in customer service for a decade or so. The customer is always right and you never say no. There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. The guy at BestBuy could have asked what happened but as a good customer service person he did not. I'm a terrible liar and I would have confessed if asked if it got wet. I totally take responsibility for wrecking the camera as I've admitted to what happened here and to all my friends and family. i made an attempt to recover my loss and was successful. My conscience is clear. -- Christian - http://404notfound.blogspot.com http://birdofthemoment.blogspot.com -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
I could buy a Lambo for under £10K. But I'd probably have more success commuting on the 645D. On 20 May 2010 13:18, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote: I can get a Ducati under $10K ;-) It will be interesting to see how well Pentax does with their new dream camera, the 645D. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:33 AM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 19 May 2010 15:41, John Sessoms jsessoms...@nc.rr.com wrote: From: Steven Desjardins It should still bother him. A Leica should be a dream purchase. They charge top dollar and they are competing with some of the best pro cameras. The very idea that it just wouldn't work right is almost inconceivable. Maybe I'm just being naive here but why else would anyone buy a Leica if not for superb if maybe eclectic performance? I think there's something in the contract you sign when you get accepted into Dental School. You are thinking of Ducati. Or maybe Lamborghini. -- 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. -- Steve Desjardins -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 20 May 2010 14:48, Christian Skofteland pterali...@aim.com wrote: On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 08:13:43PM +0200, eckinator wrote: 2010/5/19 Christian Skofteland pterali...@aim.com: I bought my G11 a few weeks ago at BestBuy in Virginia. While in New York on business I accidentally spilled a collegues cocktail all over it. Needless to say it stopped working. I went back to BestBuy on my return, after gathering the original receipt and packaging, and told the return clerk that the camera stopped working after a week. He appologized and replaced the camera without asking any further questions. Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. -- 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. No. I disagree. I was in customer service for a decade or so. The customer is always right and you never say no. There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. The guy at BestBuy could have asked what happened but as a good customer service person he did not. I'm a terrible liar and I would have confessed if asked if it got wet. I totally take responsibility for wrecking the camera as I've admitted to what happened here and to all my friends and family. i made an attempt to recover my loss and was successful. My conscience is clear. Very interesting perspective. Is this common practice? -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
I once or may be even more than once had a friendly chat with one of my Israeli friends (I mean locals, not immigrants like myself) regarding the low quality of customer service in Israel. It has been pointed out to me, that in some cases the companies, stores and otherwise service providers would attempt to shield themselves from overly smart customers. At times it would mean at expense of regular guys who genuinely have problems with faulty equipment or bad service. This is in no way directed at Christian. Just an abstract point that I'd like to make. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Very interesting perspective. Is this common practice? -- Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Companies that are looking at the big picture ensure they have outstanding customer service, because they realize that a huge % of their business comes from repeat customers and to a smaller extent word of mouth. Even if they had to suffer a small loss on some item, smart companies will gladly do that, to ensure that the same customer walks back in and purchases from them again. In the end, taking a small loss ends up being an overall win for them. That's why BH's behavior when they were at fault... going back to that discussion several months ago, was so onerous. Tom C On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote: I once or may be even more than once had a friendly chat with one of my Israeli friends (I mean locals, not immigrants like myself) regarding the low quality of customer service in Israel. It has been pointed out to me, that in some cases the companies, stores and otherwise service providers would attempt to shield themselves from overly smart customers. At times it would mean at expense of regular guys who genuinely have problems with faulty equipment or bad service. This is in no way directed at Christian. Just an abstract point that I'd like to make. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:40 PM, mike wilson m.9.wil...@ntlworld.com wrote: Very interesting perspective. Is this common practice? -- Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: Leica M9 Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. No. I disagree. I was in customer service for a decade or so. The customer is always right and you never say no. There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. The guy at BestBuy could have asked what happened but as a good customer service person he did not. I'm a terrible liar and I would have confessed if asked if it got wet. I totally take responsibility for wrecking the camera as I've admitted to what happened here and to all my friends and family. i made an attempt to recover my loss and was successful. My conscience is clear. Very interesting perspective. Is this common practice? It seems to be fairly common in North America, where the vast majority seem to feel that lacking integrity is a virtue. Add to that the tired old horse about the customer always being right (he isn't) and it adds up to some interesting times for retailers. The same people who do what Steve did, which is essentially stealing, are also the first to bleat about high prices, seemingly witless about the fact that prices are padded to take this sort of behaviour into account, and so they are adding to the very thing they are sawing off about. And then they whine because manufacturing jobs are sent overseas so that companies can try to save a few dollars here and there to stay competitive. It's an odd game. I scrap close to a thousand dollars a week in unsalable product that customers return, having screwed something up and have decided to try to do precisely what Steve did, which is hide the evidence and hope no one asks, or who have found a loophole in the system that allows them to steal from us. And I am merely one department in a small home improvement store. I'm all for giving good customer service, and I'll bend over backwards to give it, but the assholes who knowing steal from us under the theory that the customer is always right make it very difficult. The customer is always right as long as the customer is also always honest. As soon as the customer fails at his end of that contract, he has become a petty shoplifter. But, knowing that giving bad customer service is the greater of the two evils, good retailers let themselves get stolen from in this manner because the bad PR from not doing so is worse. The only reason the system works is because the vast majority of customers are honest, it is a small minority whose conscience can allow them to rip off a store and stay clear. The honest ones pay a little more for everything to make up for the losses that we suffer because of the dishonest ones. William Robb -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
I have to differ a bit with you on this Bill. Mostly agree. There are customers who set out to rip off retailers. Those who purchase an item for the time they need to use it and then return it, for example. It was not Steve it was Christian with the G11, according to the way I read. :-) IMO, there was no dishonesty involved. He brought the item back stating it stopped working. That was true. He was not asked anything further. Best Buy simply returns the item as defective, Canon refurbishes, and yes somewhere, somehow, on this individual item profit is diminished, but then again as you point out... maybe not since the pricing of the item was in place before the camera was purchased and returned. That being the case, one could reasonably argue there's no loss suffered at all, as Canon has a rough statistical idea of how many cameras will be returned, regardless of reason. Sears, as you know has made it a practice on their Craftsman hand tools to replace items, no receipt, no questions asked, regardless of how the item was abused. Do we pay for that policy at the get go when purchasing a Craftsman hand tool? Yes we do. But I, for one, like the idea that I can use a flat blade screwdriver for a crowbar and when it breaks I simply walk in and say 'it broke'. Salesman says 'Oh, OK go get another'. It's proven to be a successful policy, as far as I can tell. The system also works because that extra nickel, dime, dollar, that's tacked on by the mfr. and/or retailer is so often not used up, and extra profit is generated by it. So who's benefiting? Tom C. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:49 AM, William Robb war...@gmail.com wrote: - Original Message - From: mike wilson Subject: Re: Leica M9 Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. No. I disagree. I was in customer service for a decade or so. The customer is always right and you never say no. There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. The guy at BestBuy could have asked what happened but as a good customer service person he did not. I'm a terrible liar and I would have confessed if asked if it got wet. I totally take responsibility for wrecking the camera as I've admitted to what happened here and to all my friends and family. i made an attempt to recover my loss and was successful. My conscience is clear. Very interesting perspective. Is this common practice? It seems to be fairly common in North America, where the vast majority seem to feel that lacking integrity is a virtue. Add to that the tired old horse about the customer always being right (he isn't) and it adds up to some interesting times for retailers. The same people who do what Steve did, which is essentially stealing, are also the first to bleat about high prices, seemingly witless about the fact that prices are padded to take this sort of behaviour into account, and so they are adding to the very thing they are sawing off about. And then they whine because manufacturing jobs are sent overseas so that companies can try to save a few dollars here and there to stay competitive. It's an odd game. I scrap close to a thousand dollars a week in unsalable product that customers return, having screwed something up and have decided to try to do precisely what Steve did, which is hide the evidence and hope no one asks, or who have found a loophole in the system that allows them to steal from us. And I am merely one department in a small home improvement store. I'm all for giving good customer service, and I'll bend over backwards to give it, but the assholes who knowing steal from us under the theory that the customer is always right make it very difficult. The customer is always right as long as the customer is also always honest. As soon as the customer fails at his end of that contract, he has become a petty shoplifter. But, knowing that giving bad customer service is the greater of the two evils, good retailers let themselves get stolen from in this manner because the bad PR from not doing so is worse. The only reason the system works is because the vast majority of customers are honest, it is a small minority whose conscience can allow them to rip off a store and stay clear. The honest ones pay a little more for everything to make up for the losses that we suffer because of the dishonest ones. William Robb -- 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
Re: Leica M9
On 2010-05-20 07:48 , Christian Skofteland wrote: On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 08:13:43PM +0200, eckinator wrote: Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. No. I disagree. [...] There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. so you agree you were full of shit, but since Best Buy followed a certain principle you don't agree that it was a ripoff? basically you passed the cost of your accident onto others ... -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
I'd point out again, that if Christian had received a defective camera from Best Buy, they would not reimburse him for his time, or his mileage to return it, but why not? It was a loss he incurred. Further, if he went on a week long trip to Timbuktu, and lost all his photos or opportunities because of defective gear, they would certainly not reimburse him for that. I'm not trying to rationalize any form of dishonesty, and again I personally don't think he was. He was under no obligation to state why it was not working and they really didn't want to know. Auto manufacturers offer a warranty. Is not that warranty built into the price of the vehicle? Yes, it's a mind game. Instead of customers thinking, what a POS, this stinking car, they take it to the dealer, the dealer replaces the defective part, and the customer leaves happy because their vehicle was repaired for free? Was it. No, the customer actually paid for it up front. The point I'm making is that manufacturers and retailers want to dip into your pocket any way they can. They are not the benevolent entities we'd like to believe. The good customer service Christian received was not merely a case of a clerk not asking the right questions. It was training in customer service and given with the aforeknowledge that, in the end, making the customer happy will add to the bottom line. Tom C. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:21 AM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: On 2010-05-20 07:48 , Christian Skofteland wrote: On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 08:13:43PM +0200, eckinator wrote: Can't believe you did that. Hate to step on your or anyone's toes but instead of taking responsibility you ripped them off and knew so. No. I disagree. [...] There are stories of retail clothing stores taking snow tires in exchanges from customers. I worked in the hotel business and never said no even though I knew the hotel guests were full of shit and I pounded it into my employees head that they should never say no. so you agree you were full of shit, but since Best Buy followed a certain principle you don't agree that it was a ripoff? basically you passed the cost of your accident onto others ... -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 5/20/2010 7:19 PM, Tom C wrote: Best Buy simply returns the item as defective, Canon refurbishes, and yes somewhere, somehow, on this individual item profit is diminished, but then again as you point out... maybe not since the pricing of the item was in place before the camera was purchased and returned. That being the case, one could reasonably argue there's no loss suffered at all, as Canon has a rough statistical idea of how many cameras will be returned, regardless of reason. Indeed, there is a food chain here - the manufacturer, the shop, the customer. It is probably rather more complex too... Boris -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
On 2010-05-20 10:46 , Tom C wrote: I'd point out again, that if Christian had received a defective camera from Best Buy, they would not reimburse him for his time, or his mileage to return it, but why not? few manufacturers offer a warranty for damages incurred from a defective product; this is clearly spelled out in every warranty i've read; the sellers responsibility is covered by their policies (see below) plus local laws (e.g. lemon laws) which in the U.S. rarely cover damages; people who do high-value work with equipment know they are responsible for managing the risk of equipment failure, whether by redundancy, support plans, additional insurance, or some other plan I'm not trying to rationalize any form of dishonesty, and again I personally don't think he was. He was under no obligation to state why it was not working and they really didn't want to know. the Best Buy return policy states that _non-returnable_ items include Items that are damaged or abused; IMO Christian was dishonest by returning it in the first place; that he didn't have to state a lie, and that Best Buy accepted the return, doesn't alter that http://www.bestbuy.com/olspage.jsp?type=pagecontentId=1117177044087id=cat12098 -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
- Original Message - From: Tom C Subject: Re: Leica M9 I have to differ a bit with you on this Bill. Mostly agree. There are customers who set out to rip off retailers. Those who purchase an item for the time they need to use it and then return it, for example. It was not Steve it was Christian with the G11, according to the way I read. :-) IMO, there was no dishonesty involved. He brought the item back stating it stopped working. That was true. He was not asked anything further. Best Buy simply returns the item as defective, Canon refurbishes, and yes somewhere, somehow, on this individual item profit is diminished, but then again as you point out... maybe not since the pricing of the item was in place before the camera was purchased and returned. That being the case, one could reasonably argue there's no loss suffered at all, as Canon has a rough statistical idea of how many cameras will be returned, regardless of reason. Sears, as you know has made it a practice on their Craftsman hand tools to replace items, no receipt, no questions asked, regardless of how the item was abused. Do we pay for that policy at the get go when purchasing a Craftsman hand tool? Yes we do. But I, for one, like the idea that I can use a flat blade screwdriver for a crowbar and when it breaks I simply walk in and say 'it broke'. Salesman says 'Oh, OK go get another'. It's proven to be a successful policy, as far as I can tell. The system also works because that extra nickel, dime, dollar, that's tacked on by the mfr. and/or retailer is so often not used up, and extra profit is generated by it. So who's benefiting? Tom C. How about the ones who buy two single device boxes, take the side plates off so as to make a two gang box and then bring the side plates back for a full refund? The customer is always right, and so they get their refund, which means they have effectively gotten their purchase for free. Or the guy who cuts a board on the wrong side of the line and so returns it for a refund, even though there was nothing wrong with the product, it was as advertised. Regarding the pricing, if this sort of thing never happened, prices would be somewhat lower since the supply chain would not have to pad prices to pay for it. The one and only time I tried to have a Craftsman tool replaced, I was given somewhat of a hard time by the sales clerk. She wanted a bill of sale, etc. This for a socket that had cracked under normal use (I didn't put the thing onto an impact driver). I know how the system works, it just galls me that so many people use the threat of bad mouthing a store to take advantage of the system. They get an immediate advantage, but everyone ends up paying for it. William Robb -- 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.
RE: Leica M9
[...] Sears, as you know has made it a practice on their Craftsman hand tools to replace items, no receipt, no questions asked, regardless of how the item was abused. Do we pay for that policy at the get go when purchasing a Craftsman hand tool? Yes we do. But I, for one, like the idea that I can use a flat blade screwdriver for a crowbar and when it breaks I simply walk in and say 'it broke'. Salesman says 'Oh, OK go get another'. It's proven to be a successful policy, as far as I can tell. I used to work for Selfridges many years ago when they had a no-questions-asked returns policy, even for stuff that was clearly bought in a different shop, eg Marks Spencer. One year someone bought a silver dinner service, used it over Christmas, then returned it for a full refund. People would also bring in shoes they'd obviously been wearing every day for a year, and get a full refund. Incredible really, but it seemed not to damage the shop's profits B -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
We have home contents insurance which covers computers and cameras etc. When Stef poured tea over the keyboard of a brand new 13 MacBook (bless him, the only time it's ever happened) the insurance company wrote a cheque for 799 quid without question for a replacement. When I asked what they wanted me to do with the dead MacBook, they guy said bin it. I ebayed it and got 300 quid back (screen untouched). Our premiums remain unchanged. We've claimed maybe 3 or 4 times in 20 years... -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche -- http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
One year someone bought a silver dinner service, used it over Christmas That might explain that sign that I saw last year in Canadian Tire, stating that Christmas ornaments can't be returned after Dec. 24... On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: [...] Sears, as you know has made it a practice on their Craftsman hand tools to replace items, no receipt, no questions asked, regardless of how the item was abused. Do we pay for that policy at the get go when purchasing a Craftsman hand tool? Yes we do. But I, for one, like the idea that I can use a flat blade screwdriver for a crowbar and when it breaks I simply walk in and say 'it broke'. Salesman says 'Oh, OK go get another'. It's proven to be a successful policy, as far as I can tell. I used to work for Selfridges many years ago when they had a no-questions-asked returns policy, even for stuff that was clearly bought in a different shop, eg Marks Spencer. One year someone bought a silver dinner service, used it over Christmas, then returned it for a full refund. People would also bring in shoes they'd obviously been wearing every day for a year, and get a full refund. Incredible really, but it seemed not to damage the shop's profits B -- 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. -- http://www.flickr.com/photos/ferand/ -- 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.
Re: Leica M9
Of course all that stuff's stated in the warranty. It's how THEY get out of REALLY taking responsibility for incidental damages, which are as real as the product itself. I may have posted this on the list before... Was I dishonest or not? When Circuit City was still around, they had a DVD Recorder/VCR combo I wanted. I saw it advertised online for a price with the statement that the price was also good in the store. Call it $300. I went to the store. It was marked at $400. Call floorperson over and explain. No he's sure that price is only good online. We walk over to PC and open web browser so he can show me he's right. OK, I'm right. So he proceeds to right up a sales ticket for -- $200 -- What to do? I'm pretty sure it'll get caught at the point of sale. Walk over to register. Checkout girl rings it in. Needs a manager override for the price change. Call and wait for manager. Manager comes over. Looks at the screen for 20 seconds. Types in the override code. Done. Transaction complete. OK, was I honest or dishonest? 1. They did not have the price marked correctly 2. I had to go though the hassle of price lookup with the floor person 3. Floor person either not trained well enough or not observant enough to right down the correct price 4. Manager clearly has the opportunity to decide yes or no, and likely could see at least what the original selling price was vs. the price I would get it for 5. OK'd it anyway Whereas in some cases I might have corrected the error, I'd been inconvenienced enough and was convinced that the whole problem was that their store staff did not receive proper training, or just were inferior workers. Moreover it's not my responsibility to enforce their policies or prices. And, how many people walked into the store not realizing the item was on sale and paid the full price? Because of my belief in the proper operation of cause and effect, I let it go. Even with Best Buy's policy of not accepting returns on items that are damaged, it is not Christians's responsibility to enforce their policies for them. Tom C. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:42 AM, steve harley p...@paper-ape.com wrote: few manufacturers offer a warranty for damages incurred from a defective product; this is clearly spelled out in every warranty i've read; the sellers responsibility is covered by their policies (see below) plus local laws (e.g. lemon laws) which in the U.S. rarely cover damages; people who do high-value work with equipment know they are responsible for managing the risk of equipment failure, whether by redundancy, support plans, additional insurance, or some other plan I'm not trying to rationalize any form of dishonesty, and again I personally don't think he was. He was under no obligation to state why it was not working and they really didn't want to know. the Best Buy return policy states that _non-returnable_ items include Items that are damaged or abused; IMO Christian was dishonest by returning it in the first place; that he didn't have to state a lie, and that Best Buy accepted the return, doesn't alter that http://www.bestbuy.com/olspage.jsp?type=pagecontentId=1117177044087id=cat12098 -- 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.
