Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2011 17:14:26 GMT
I, personally, generally dislike it when people take a problem between two people and start posting about it on the sword forums. Part of me feels like this sort of stuff should be kept between the two, though I guess sometimes it does serve a purpose to start a thread about it. The problem is that, to me, it seems like everyone is always quick to point fingers at the person providing the service and siding with the customer before waiting for more info. Of course, in this particular instance everyone is now siding with Tinker after some [essentially] irrefutable evidence supporting him came up (among other things). But what about all the other threads in the past where people have made pretty serious allegations? These sorts of threads can be really damaging to one's reputation, and it worries me that (some?) people seem to have such a huge sense of entitlement these days. The whole... one-sided pointing fingers thing is starting to become a problem, don't cha think?
...Just my opinion, of course.
|
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Mar 1, 2011 17:32:49 GMT
I agree that Mr. Fletcher and Tinker shoulda kept their bizz between themselves... but Mr. Fletcher shot that in the foot when he posted it in public forum. He invited discussion and opinion by doing so. He also made some pretty damning statements/claims... and refused to support those claims with any evidence... and THAT really bugged me.
I think people need to feel able to air the results of a bad experience with vendors and makers in our forums... its at least part of the reason they exist, to help inform perspective collectors. However... I also think that people have some unrealistic expectations these days... that sense of "entitlement" you mention... and consumers need to be a little more level headed and explore all their avenues before publicly lambasting a vendor/maker. They should also provide honest and as unbiased evidence of their grievance as they can manage when bringing a bad experience to light.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 1, 2011 18:29:57 GMT
That is true. Customer service is a two-way street, and you can't expect sellers to be happy when a customer makes a stink about their products. For example: I used to work at a Taco Bell. If a customer came up to the counter and was all "Your food sucks, I demand an instant refund and then some!" we'd have given him his money back and been glad to see the back of him. But if he came up and was more like "Excuse me, I have a little problem with x dish, I opened it and saw that you put sour cream on it when I asked for no sour cream..." we'd have been more like "very sorry sir! we'll fix that right away" and obliged. Been less likely to spit into it for sure  not that we ever did anything like that, of course! Just goes to show that you don't want to PO people who handle your food, though... Anyway, it's obvious what kind of customer Mr. Fletcher is being. However, we as customers ourselves have to remember that a little appreciation of the services of the people we buy from goes a long way. No, we don't have to be nice about products that we don't like... but they are NOT obligated to sell to us in the first place (even if they haven't had a customer in months and need the money). We are NOT entitled to anything from them unless we have given them money to purchase a product, and if that product is not to our satisfaction, then it's our responsibility to seek satisfaction in a polite manner. If the seller then refuses to compensate you by replacing or fixing the product, then we are entitled to make that known publicly, but until then it's between you and them. That's how I see it. That's what Harry Fletcher didn't do; instead, he chose to make a public fuss about it because he felt he was entitled to service above and beyond what Tinker had given him. Is it any wonder we've largely come down on Tinker's side? We all should take that case to heart as a way NOT to conduct business... |
|
|
|
Post by D'artagnan on Mar 1, 2011 19:42:16 GMT
But we have to agree that asking for something and not getting it doesn't constitute great expectations? After all, the customer asked for something and didn't receive it, and was thus quite upset, wouldn't we all be upset after spending that amount of money and it came out looking less than we expected? You can't truly blame him for being upset.
With the example/metaphor of Taco Bell, if you order a Double Beef Burrito and receive a taco fresco, you are going to be a little miffed that you didn't get what you ordered, I'm sure it's happened to everyone who's ever gotten fast food. Now make that taco cost 1400 dollars and you'd be a little upset. He though it looked like a production piece, and if you actually look at the pictures it does quite resemble it, so he was within his rights to voice his speculation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 1, 2011 20:03:37 GMT
Granted, but Tinker had to post the pictures himself. Fletcher didn't. This is one of the issues in the thread actually, Fletcher had not posted evidence of his own to counter those pictures as of the last time I looked (about a week ago). Gus Trim offered supporting evidence in favor of Tinker, that the sword that was sent to Fletcher was a good sword. I don't know about you but I think Gus knows what he's talking about.
So the ball is in Fletcher's court and quite frankly he's not doing a great job of backing up his case. He ordered a sword quite similar to a Hanwei GSOW, and he got a sword quite similar to a Hanwei GSOW, and decided he didn't like it even though up until then he'd been okay with the minor changes Tinker made.
He ordered a double beef burrito without sour cream, Tinker told him he could do it and then came back and said that he was out of beef, he could do chicken instead... Fletcher said okay, and then after he got his burrito, he's complaining that it doesn't have beef. That's what it amounts to.
|
|
|
|
Post by D'artagnan on Mar 1, 2011 20:18:10 GMT
I'm not saying Fletcher played his end perfectly. We have a saying in law school "no one is innocent in a lawsuit" and that stands true. Two to tango and all that. And you have to take Gus' professional opinion with a grain of salt. While he certainly knows what he is talking about, your friend's aren't always considered valid character witnesses because of potential bias, you just have to keep the relationship between those two manufacturers in mind I think in order to be objective. Why this Fletcher paid 1400 for a sword that looked like a far cheaper sword, and why he didn't just buy the GSOW baffles me. But that's besides the point. The manufacturer knew it was going to be a close call, and should've planned for such. Everyone missed my point in my first post.
He knew he had to make a close replica of the GSOW. However wouldn't one think he'd have the foresight that "I have a picky customer in My. Fletcher, so perhaps I should make it clear that this IS indeed a custom piece." Wouldn't you think that he would have made it such that there was no room for questioning it, which clearly he didn't? Then he would have saved himself this trouble. Now there is people taking sides, where as in he made it clearly a custom piece, with no room for thoughts otherwise, there would have been no room to make accusations.
I agree we have to treat our manufacturers with respect, but we also need to hold them up to their word and policies, and have a right to expect to get what we ask for.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 1, 2011 20:30:58 GMT
Fair enough. I do agree that perhaps Tinker could have worked a little harder to make the sword more distinct from the standard GSOW, and Fletcher had to be on something if he expected it to look dramatically different or whatever.
The problem isn't so much holding Tinker to what he said he'd do, as it is that Mr. Fletcher made such a stink about it immediately. The way it read to me, he received the sword from Tinker, wasn't happy with it, called Tinker, and when Tinker said his policy was no refunds on custom orders, decided to post the story on MyArmoury. It doesn't look like he *tried* to work things out beyond that.
It's also worth pointing out again that Tinker contacted Fletcher about the differences between what Fletcher had ordered and what he was making, and Fletcher told him that it was okay ("we don't have beef, we can do chicken"). The only real mistake Tinker made was not peening the pommel as Fletcher had requested, and he offered to fix that for free; the rest of it, Fletcher had said he was okay with.
It's not Tinker's fault that Fletcher can't tell the difference between his custom job and a standard GSOW. Should Tinker have made the difference more obvious? Maybe, yeah. But he delivered a product that Fletcher had approved, made under circumstances which Fletcher had said he was okay with (grinding an existing blade rather than heat-treating a new one), and sent it to Fletcher at his own expense.
|
|
|
|
Post by 14thforsaken on Mar 1, 2011 20:32:33 GMT
Actually, if he is being asked to make a reproduction of the piece with some minor changes, the sword should look as close as humanly possible to the production version except with the minor changes the buyer asked for. That was the whole point, he wanted a custom that basically matched the production version. If that is not what he wanted, he should have been more clear about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by D'artagnan on Mar 1, 2011 21:22:09 GMT
@ 14th- That's true, but I'd sincerely hope you it would be obvious to the customer who spent 1400 that though it was a reproduction of the GSOW, I'd hope by sheer craftsmanship and quality of work he could tell the difference, if only by the apparent time spent between an expensive custom piece and the original. Do you get where I'm coming from?
@ Elheru- There is also the matter of lack of cummunication on Tinker's part. Yeah he doesn't do the in-progress photos, and yes he sent the finished piece, but a picture and the real thing are extrememly different. Fletcher shouldn't have okayed it on the basis of a picture, and perhaps Tinker should change that policy of in progress pictures and he could help avoid the situation. Then there was the whole him spending the money the minute he got it, and the timeliness factor too. Just pointing out there were mess-ups on both ends.
And if no, perhaps Fletcher should have picked a different smith. Though Tinker is a talented individual, press like this makes one wonder. Just put yourself in his shoes, I can't honestly say I'd jump at the chance for a custom job there, just because I'd be afraid of winding up in the same mess. And I have been, I tried comissioning a supposedly well-to-do custom swordmaker but then got bogged down by what he "couldn't" do. And no one as a customer, especially when trying to make a dream sword wants to hear the words "I can't do that" coming from the artist. Just as you don;t want to have the person at Taco Bell say "Well, I can make you the beef taco, the exact size you want it, BUT I can't give you taco sauce".
|
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Mar 1, 2011 21:55:03 GMT
I bet you the difference in craftsmenship between a stock GSoW and this custom piece would be obvious... to me, and anyone who had handled any number of swords. I don't think Mr. Fletcher has a clue what he is talking about. He asked for a custom version of the GSoW with a shorter grip... and that's what he got. He was told that he could have it an inch shorter then he liked, or he could wait an extra few weeks... and he ok'ed that.
He got the photo and he ok'ed the sword to be sent.
All of Tinker's rules for buying a custom sword are clearly spelled out on his website... if Mr. Fletcher didn't want to abide by them and buy a sword from Tinker... he SHOULD have gone elsewhere. Not complain about stuff that was laid out in front in the first place after the fact. You speculating about how Tinker should change the way he does biz in this fashion is besides the point at hand. The point at hand is this: Mr Fletcher cried sour grapes on a lot of points that were ALL his own fault.
Tinker only made two mistakes...
1. He forgot to peen the sword as requested... which he offered to fix. This has happened to me as well. Just recently I bought a sword I wanted peened, payed over 600 dollars for... and it was not peened. I sent e-mail to the maker and mentioned it, he said send it back next time I send him something else for work (I do lots of biz with the guy) and he will fix it. No muss, no fuss. That is what Mr. Fletcher should have done in this case.
2. He was a tad late on shipping the item. However... to make up for that, he shipped it at his own expense, and did not charge Mr. Fletcher for the shipping. I think that is a more then reasonable way to make up for a slight delay in shipping the sword. The delay was less then 10 or so days as I understand... the whole project was done in less then a month. That is WAY faster then just about any custom smith I've ever done biz with. Whats the hurry? A few days late vs free shipping? I know which one I would chose.
No... I'm sorry D'artagnan but in this case I agree with a couple others who said that it looks like Mr. Fletcher was LOOKING for a way out of his purchase... and and decided to be an $emprini about it and publicly defame a guy who did not deserve it.
I have no dog in this fight... I only own one Tinker custom... and I got that second hand, not from Tinker himself. However... when I discovered the guard on my Tinker custom was a bit lose and I asked Tinker for advice on how I should fix it... he said 'Send it to me, I'll fix it for ya, no charge, and I'll even ship it back to you at my own expense.'
Now THAT is good customer service... and a craftsman who stands behind his product. People like that are few and far between in this world... so if someone is going to come out and call a guy like that a cheat and a liar... they had BETTER back that accusation up with some evidence... otherwise THEY are the douchebag.
In this case, Mr. Fletcher is the Douchebag.
|
|
|
|
Post by 14thforsaken on Mar 1, 2011 22:08:51 GMT
He never said that it didn't handle differently, just that the blade dimensions themselves were like a production one. Which is what he asked for. I bet if he spent more than the hour it took him to open it up, compare to a production sword, go back to the post office and mail it, he probably would have noted a handling difference. Mind you I'm going by what Mr. Fletcher said about the amount of time he had it for.
|
|
|
|
Post by D'artagnan on Mar 1, 2011 23:06:07 GMT
Sean- You can't speculate as to if the customer could afford it or not. And while I have great respect for you bra, calling Fletcher a D-bag is to me just going to his level. Saying he returned it cuz it was "out of his league" is about as unbased as Fletcher's claim of his sword being a copy. You can disagree with me, but if you say Fletcher can't speculate, then neither can you about why the guy returned it. If you don't have a dog in the fight, why bother? I was suggesting a way for tinker to maybe help avoid this in the future, you don't have to bash it bra.
I'm just trying to point out that it isn't ALL Fletcher. Making sure everyone knows this came from both sides. It's ugly to be sure, and it took both sides. Like I said, I can't stand only one side represented in an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by chuckinohio on Mar 2, 2011 1:19:10 GMT
Your points are valid, but as I said earlier, my view concerning the purchaser were jaundiced by his spurious claim. After that claim was voiced, everything following smacked of sour grapes. To me at least.
As far as speculating that he could not afford the piece, he admitted as much in his posting. It is not speculation.
Great expectations? A comment on one being sure that what they ask for is really what they want.
Perhaps him not being able to tell the difference between the production piece and the custom is due to the quality of the H/T pieces?
|
|
Sébastien
Senior Forumite
Retired Moderator
Posts: 2,967
|
Post by Sébastien on Mar 2, 2011 2:57:11 GMT
I just read the most recent posts of that myarmory thread. Mr. Fletcher has sent the sword back to Mr. Pearce, and Mr Pearce will now sell the sword and send the money earned to Mr. Fletcher. AFAIK, this will probably end this messed up story. Like one forumnite said on myarmory, any further debate on that subject will be like beating a dead horse... My two cents on that, take 'em as such.
|
|
Lunaman
Senior Forumite
Posts: 3,974
|
Post by Lunaman on Mar 2, 2011 3:06:59 GMT
|
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Mar 2, 2011 3:39:11 GMT
Love the office space one...  |
|
not that we ever did anything like that, of course! Just goes to show that you don't want to PO people who handle your food, though... 
Herron's Flight by Brendan of Fable Blades
