Another slant -- it may be your company's marketing strategy. For some of our products our compliance engineering group has determined that the CE mark is sufficient for European markets; however, for marketing reasons (read: "our customers like to see . . . ") we also obtain TUV approval. So some of our expense is strictly marketing related. If the payback is there, go for it!
Don Umbdenstock Sensormatic > ---------- > From: Dan Mitchell[SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 1998 8:26 PM > To: 'emc-pstc' > Subject: Are all these agencies really necessary? > > The company I work for routinely requests that I get certifications > through > the following safety agencies: > UL, VDE, SEMKO, DEMKO, NEMKO, FIMKO, EZU, QAS, GOST and > ad nausium. > > My question is this; Are all these agencies necessary? If you get a base > > safety certification from say, UL, coupled with a CB Report/Cert and a > third party EMC/EMI report to FCC ClassB, and EN50022, why is it necessary > > to get the safety agency for every country you want to sell in? > Why can't this industry come up with an all encompassing mark, lets call > it > the OM (for Overall Mark) that is granted to your product after you get > the > following: > 1. Base safety cert (from your agency of choice) > 2. CB Report/Cert > 3. FCC/Cispr22 cert > THe mark would allow you to sell your product in any country in the world. > > It makes alot more sense than the way it is done now. I can spend up to > 3 > months waiting for a certification to come back from China. > The cost is outragous also. If we spend $30,000 on the certification > process, we count ourself lucky. I believe that alot of these new > agencies > that have been appearing on the scene over the last couple of years are in > > it strictly to make a buck. All they have to do is block your product > from > their market unless you pay their extortion money. > > I know that this is opening up a can of worms, but I would like to know if > > there are other disgruntled safety persons out there that feel the same > way. > > This view is strictly my own. > Daniel W. Mitchell > Product Safety > EOS Corp. > > --------- > This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. > To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] > with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the > quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], > [email protected], or [email protected] (the list > administrators). > --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators).
