[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > On 5 Mar 2003 at 17:25, Keith Whaley wrote: > > > > > Her answer sounds like the camera was being made FOR Pentax to > > > distribute and sell ~ not that it was designed and manufactured for > > > sale by Pentax... Hmmm. Very interesting. One can read a lot into that > > > non-answer.
> > Maybe they just don't know, they probably haven't been briefed beyond what we > > can all read on the press release. > Seemed to me like an automatic response without reading the > question. Perhaps so, but it's also likely the response came from a series of pre-prepared answers, leaving the person who did answer little choice but to select the least obnoxious one possible. On the other hand, such a response from the U.S. national arm for public relations for a world-wide company shows a decided lack of caring what sort of answer is given, nor what the customer thinks about that answer. No thought given at all. It's that 'don't really care' attitude that is appalling to me... And most folks just say, "Oh well." As tho' they've seen this stuff so often, one more non-answer is par for the course. So, no one speaks up. Maybe so, but that lack of caring ought to bite 'em on the butt once in a while. keith whaley
