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 <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/23/10, Tom C <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > 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 [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
