Sos, many of your points are well-taken. But I still contend that:
A) The distributor in this case was responsible for agreeing to the initial criteria - laid down by him - under which the customer was to bring his unit in for upgrading, and he should have followed through on that agreement as did Ernie.
B) It is ultimately EC's problem about the gray-market goods. The manufacturer and distributor must find a way to accomodate US customers who wound up with these units unknowingly, without making them into the fall guys. Remember, we aren't talking about warranty service here, but a paid upgrade. EC was never out anything for those units, and they and Mr. Warshaw are going about protecting his distributor's franchise in the wrong manner, IMO. Penalizing the Danish dealer is one thing, but penalizing US market second-hand owners is unconscionable, and I think the members' displeasure on display above is understandable. |
The distributor is mainly at fault here; EC only provisionally and by extension until Ernie contacts them and gets some sort of response. The distributor blatantly reneged on his stated arrangement with the customer, much to Ernie's inconvenience and expense. A distributor in a foreign country ought to function as a local representative of the manufacturer as far as possible. To US EC customers, this importer/distributor should *be* EC, to the extent of his and their capabilities to function in that capacity, and this upgrade is clearly within those capabilities.
This distributor has no real way of knowing whether Ernie's unit was gray-market or not, and it shouldn't matter anyway. Ernie is a second-hand owner, and is not responsible for the unit's prior history. For all anyone knows, the piece was originally bought at retail by the first owner in Scandinavia, and later sold used overseas via Audiogon. So what? Unless the thing was stolen off some loading dock while awaiting shipment from the factory, EC and one of their resellers have made their money on this unit. The US distributor now needs to function as EC's local representative, and earn some more money for the both of them by performing the paid upgrade. If EC needs to kick a little more back the distributor's way to get it done when he wasn't the original importer, then this is what they have to do, rather than leave owners in the lurch or make them ship their gear to Norway for updates. If they can't present a unified US front to *all* their owners and potential customers here - used and new - then EC either needs to pack it up or find a distributor who can get it done for and with them.
The distributor has already let his end down, but EC needs to take the lead and the ultimate responsibility for issues like this. Particularly if the US distributor is charging the high mark-up alluded to above, failing to support the second-hand market will obviously have serious consequences for EC's primary market US sales in the long run. This distributor apparently needs to ask himself whether it is his pricing policies, and not his service policies, which need to be more conservative if he is suffering from a gray-market problem as implied. Deflating EC's US used market desirability by refusing to perform upgrades on many second-hand units will only serve to further increase his vulnerability to current-spec product brought in through other channels at lower prices. None of this is good for EC, and they should do what it takes to keep Ernie the happy owner he wants and deserves to be. In his case, that would now begin with comping him the shipping expenses to get done the work he should already have been enjoying for his efforts. |
Sean: Re your compliment to Jctubes about his response to Sos' post, I think I could say the same thing to you about your response as compared to mine! Sometimes, direct is better than polite. And yes, we are saying the same thing. :-)
Ernie, although it is clear that F&S are trying to bend over backward to save you some pain in this matter (even if the two of you cannot ultimately reach an agreement that works), I still think you need to get EC involved and aware of your situation and position regarding this issue. I believe that the only entirely satisfactory solution (your inconvenience so far notwithstanding) is for you to have the upgrade mod performed at the normal price with the factory's blessing, without addtional shipping charges, whether this be done by the distributor or by some qualified and approved technician or dealer closer to your location. IMO, you may have let Mr. Warshaw off the hook too easily on Xmas day, but you've really got to stand up for yourself with EC now, even if it means alerting them to the presence of this thread (and even if it means saying thanks but no thanks to the honorable F&S). You'll be striking a blow not only for yourself, but also for any of those members for whom your previous posts about this player may have been an influence to purchase one. In particular (and if true), EC's supposed position that an apparently unreachable and ethically questionable Danish dealer must forevermore be responsible for any and all service - including paid upgrades, and to any and all subsequent owners - for these alleged gray-market units world-wide is totally untenable and outrageous, not to mention without justification and just plain bad business. |
Well, for once I must actually disagree with my friend Bob B. :-) Audiogon has an international audience, and I would think that anyone with a proprietary interest in the high end market, such as a manufacturer or distributor, would at least have a passing familiarity with it's existence by now. I also don't think that "permanent damage" has necessarily been done yet. Although Ernie's story has an undeniable touch of the dramatic about it, and it's generated a fair amount of heat around here, I for one will be happy to state for the record that - depending on the ultimate resolution reached by the parties involved - nothing which has transpired so far is in my mind so incorrectable as to cause me to pre-emptively disregard or be unduly wary of the EC brand in the future. All things are still possible in this situation for the time being, and I trust Ernie would second that.
P.S. - I am interested in learning, Ernie: How many views so far on this thread with around 90 responses as of now (albeit by many fewer than 90 members)? |
Sean is still reading my mind, just a little more bluntly. While I appreciate Sos' efforts to come into the discussion with a different perspective, I continue to find their focus on the issue of warranties to be somewhat off-topic. Obviously, almost everyone reading on this forum will be copacetic with the idea of buying used, and that usually means no warranty. In Ernie's case, the supposed fact that his unit may have originally been gray-market shouldn't have had any impact on the situation, since as a second-hand owner he wasn't seeking warranty service anyway.
I don't think anybody could really argue with a manufacturer who stated a policy saying that products not purchased through their domestic authorized dealer network would be ineligible for normal warranty service by that market's distributor. There should certainly be a provision for offering paid non-warranty service however, and maybe even a discounted rate for paid in-warranty service offered to original owners of merchandise bought from non-domestic authorized dealers (gray-market). Whether or not to offer transferrable warranties to second-hand owners is a separate question, but again I don't think anyone would balk if a company stated that such a policy could not be extended to second-hand purchasers of gray-market units, or at least not without some sort of discounted rate or reinstatement fee being charged. But again, that's not the issue here.
I think that pretty much this whole participating forum has agreed that:
A) In this case the distributor did not do right by the customer in Mr. Warshaw's handling of Ernie's situation.
B) Ernie ought to be able to purchase this upgrade, at the very least, for the regular full-boat price and no more. He quite possibly should even get it at the discounted price he originally arranged to have it done for, since no one (that is, neither the dealer nor the distributor) thought to check for the gray-market eventuality prior to agreeing on Ernie's price and course of action. But even if Ernie doesn't ulimately get the discounted rate, he certainly shouldn't have to pay to ship his player anywhere, simply by virture of the distributor's mishandling of the process so far.
To sum up, what Ernie and we (and F&S) are going to find out, is whether EC and their US representative place the customer's interests first, or not. So far, their policies seem to indicate that they even put their unscrupulous Danish dealer's interests ahead of those of the customer, but we shall see. Regardless, Mr. Warshaw's actions heretofore clearly indicate that he puts his own interests ahead of the customer's. As for the issue of whether Ernie ought to defer to F&S, as the dealer involved, in interceding on his behalf with the distributor and manufacturer, I respectfully submit that the situation has already gone too far for them to be his best advocate. Ernie's dealing has really been more with the distributor than with the dealer; Mr. Warshaw has already superceded F&S's wishes and authority in this matter, and only EC themselves can effect a remedy, barring a change of heart on Mr. Warshaw's part. While F&S's efforts are both necessary and reassuring - and should be continued - regardless of whether or not they are successful in persuading Mr. Warshaw to reverse course, I think Ernie should let them know that he will be contacting EC personally about what has transpired up 'til now, as is his perfect right (and duty, IMO). As has been stated, and is evident to anyone reading, this question as it regards EC in America is now (and in truth must have been before) an issue bigger than one second-hand customer's upgrade trials and tribulations. |
Onhwy61, I have reread your post of 1/1, and see nothing there to ameliorate my impressions of your positions on this matter, but you of course have your right to your opinions. What you basically say is that Mr. Warshaw doesn't strike you as being the "smoothest" of businessmen, that he should have stated his restrictive policies up front (duh!), but that you're not sure that Ernie really has "anything legit to complain about". Not exactly a searing indictment of the distributor's actions and policies. You obviously feel that Ernie made his own bed, and that he has not been enough wronged to warrant some sort of palliative remedy. We are still most emphatically not in agreement here. |
Same level of service yes, Onhwy61, but I think we realize we may sometimes have to pay for it. No level of service at all is a totally different story.
Ozfly, I must agree with Leftistelf's basic contention (if I may paraphrase) that the notion of the dealer having to somehow persuade the distributor that the customer should be #1, and the distributor then having to do the same with the manufacturer, would be completely f***ed up if it were true. If a manufacturer can't be customer-driven enough to figure out and adhere to this philosophy on their own without being pressured from below, then they richly deserve their undoubted ultimate fate.
Ernie my friend, I'm afraid I have to say that your reluctant statement about maybe having to "quietly submerge (your) unit back into the open market" is, in light of this thread, beginning to look almost as wishful in its thinking as your provisional hope that you might find "a sympathetic dealer to sell (you) a new unit near cost".
As we surmised above, it's all up to Electrocompaniet now - let's hope they see the light and do the right thing. At the very least though, this is already a great thread for the ages - nice work, everybody! (And thanks to Ernie in particular for dilligently staying on top of keeping us abreast in detail, despite his handicaps of ill health, compromising medications, and lousy typing technique, not to mention general frustration. Hang in there buddy, and best regards for your impending surgery - get well soon. :-) |
Y'know, I do feel compelled to add that if Mr. Warshaw or the folks at EC ever consent to view this thread, they shouldn't just stop there, they should also read the archived one entitled "Companies who have gone above and beyond", where I don't recall them ever being mentioned. My experiences I relate there, and those of so many other memebers, stand in stark contrast to what we've seen so far in this case. |
Onhwy61, the manufacturer's customer is the consumer. The distributor's customer is the consumer. The dealer's customer is the consumer. Audiophiles are the consumers - if the consumers stop buying the product from the dealers, then the distributor and the manufacturer are out of business.
The manufacturer's policies concerning aftermarket service are directed toward the consumer. The manufacturer is in the business of attracting and satisfying customers, so that they will attract even more in the future. Those customers are the audiophile consumers; the manufacturer is not in the business of trying to attract ever more distributors. If they direct all of their energies toward satisfying the distributor, it does not mean he will purchase any greater amount of product for distribution. If, on the other hand, they direct none of their energies toward satisfying the consumer, that does mean that eventually the distributor will be purchasing less product.
You say that Ernie has a problem because he purchased what had originally been a gray-market unit. That is not accurate, because it is circular reasoning. Make no mistake: Ernie has a problem because the manufacturer's and distributor's policies are set up to give him one. Ernie had no problem with his unit because of its provenance. It is the manufacturer and especially the distributor who apparently have a problem with Ernie's unit because of its provenance. The unit's provenance is not Ernie's fault, and it shouldn't be his problem.
Merely saying that the rules are the rules doesn't make the rules smart or fair, and if the companies involved don't make rules that are smart and fair, the consumers will retaliate with the power of their pocketbooks. Then the manufacturer and the distributor will be left with just their rules, instead of customers. It is not Ernie who needs to rethink his decision to buy his CDP as being a mistake, it is the distributor and the manufacturer who need to rethink their decision not to offer their services for sale as being a mistake.
Ozfly, agree to what extent we may, nevertheless your second-to-last sentence implies that in this case, it was free warranty service that was the issue. It was not, though on your last sentence I think we can all agree, and for more than merely "some hint". |
Anthony/Chichiuno: If I might presume to take a rather large liberty here and respond for Ernie, who is probably unable to do so himself at this time, while your heart is in the right place and you are *very* generous, Ernie already has himself a perfectly good CDP, and I'm sure he would thank you, but say that your money can be put to much more important and appropriate use donated elsewhere in the world.
Onhwy61, you and I are obviously just gonna have to agree to disagree about this issue, as I am firmly of the belief that you are missing the forest for the trees, as well as conveniently ignoring the flip-flops in 'policy' evinced by the distributor's actions. 84audio has it right: How could Ernie have been expected to "know" anything about such a load of arbitrary, contradictory BS? I say to hell with the franchise agreement, this situation is much simpler and clear-cut than the distributor's position you so valiantly defend would have us believe. The guy has screwed Ernie over, and is now screwing up his market as well, which means he is screwing over not only the consumers, but also his dealers (and quite possibly the manufacturer as well, though it seems as if they may be complicit in this whole scam, or at least overly tolerant of the distributor's apparently less than stellar record and highly questionable motives/ethics - something that seems may also be the case regarding their Danish reseller).
Rationalize it any way you like, blame the victim if it gives you a sense of propriety, but your contention that Ernie was operating in a free market with open information - especially as far as aftermarket service is concerned - is laughable. The whole point here is that the company and distributor are intent on creating a closed market, apparently at any cost in customer good-will. It is they who will need protection from the downsides of their bad decisions. To paraphrase a couple of well-worn cliches using a mixed metaphor, the 'rules' in this case are both the last refuge of a scoundrel, and the hobgoblins of small minds. Ernie is being penalized for nothing he's done, and most of us clearly aren't copacetic with that. Barring any last-minute heroics, maybe you can buy his CDP from him and be EC's last customer among the members of this forum, since you're so comfortable with their policies as long as you know them in advance - and we damn sure all know them now (and I know yours and you know mine.) There's too many other good alternatives in the marketplace for the rest of us to have to tolerate, much less condone, this sort of game-playing crap. Sorry, but that's the deal as most here see it. (Now, why don't you tell us what your beef with Sony is about, instead of just asking us to participate in a boycott without any reasons being given?) Respectfully but resolutely yours, Z. |
Didn't notice that the thead was temporarily closed if it was, but I'm glad it's not now - that would be as irresponsible at this stage as what the distributor did. Fingers still crossed... |
