|
Post by twichy on Aug 11, 2018 23:20:11 GMT
From a purely equity point of view, I would say that the fact that you previously accepted a compensation package for the non-conforming aspects of the original product bars you from using any of those nonconformities in any further negotiations. There's no equitable reason why you should be due double the indemnity considering that you were initially satisfied with the original indemnity.
So the real issue is: Should Sonny compensate you for the introduction of a "value package" not available at the time you made your purchase. Well, we only need to look at standard retail practices for that answer: no. If I buy something on Monday, and the same item goes on sale at a later date, does the retailer or manufacturer owe me the savings of the sale? Of course not. Now, if the item was still within the return period (usually 30 days, maybe 60) I can return the item for a refund, and then "repurchase" it or a different "deal" item with my refund (I believe this was offered to you). If the item is past the return period but under "warranty" I'm pretty much guaranteed that defects will be "rectified" and sometimes "refunded" (rarely) but rarely will I be allowed to take advantage of a "discount deal or bundle" under warranty terms.
As for the hours you put into fixing the blade, most vendors/manufacturers would probably consider that action that voids warranty, as opposed to you somehow wanting indemnity for it. If I purchase a defective washing machine, spend 10 hours fixing it, and call the manufacturer up asking for a wage in addition for them to finish fixing the machine, am I likely to get what I'm asking for? No. More likely, they'll refuse to pay you your arbitrary and unagreed upon wage for your work and refuse to fix the product because your tinkering voided warranty.
Now I understand you dont think you got "fair value" for your purchase, but in light of standard business practices and what you're due from an equity standpoint, it seems like Sonny offered you pretty much everything a reasonable business owner would offer as a resolution to your issues. Reasonable is the key point here and if you take a step back and think about your requests objectively you'll probably see why I consider your offer and request unreasonable. You seem to be kind of stuck on asking why opposing party isn't agreeing to your terms. Well, when negotiating, you really should be asking is "why should he?" In this case, given what you are owed from both a contractual and warranty standpoint, and having exhausted all the standard "compensation remedies" and offers that are standard to sales of goods and services in this day, age, and society, why, indeed, should he offer you more?
As for customer satisfaction... well, it's a balancing act between the goodwill generated by giving you your 100% satisfaction and the financial cost of upholding that standard of satisfaction for 100% of his customers (since inconsistent levels of effort put into customer satisfaction in itself generates ill will). For instance, you are maybe 80% satisfied with your product if it's up to advertised quality on a scale of 0% being a nonfunctional wallhanger and 100% being say, an Albion museum line with no defects. If he had sent you a cold steel quality blade you might be at a 20%. The blade you DID receive nets maybe a 60% due to defects and he pays you compensation, bringing you to a 70%. Would a reasonable person go the extra mile to get you to 80% or 90% (assuming 100% would be beyond your expectations and more value than you thought you'd be getting for your money). Most people who run a business know when to cut the line knowing that any complaints, such as this one, won't really effect their business in a huge way because the average customer sees their actions as reasonable. In every business and for every product, you get customers that end up being what are commonly referred to as "eggshell clients". These clients are less accepting of nonconformities and expect a higher level of service than your standard customer, and unless such clients are considered authorities of the industry it's rarely if ever worth bending over backwards to accommodate. This is, after all, why more sophisticated organizations have specific guidelines and regulations that prescribe a set level of customer service. The idea of customer service is to provide a reasonable and equitable remedy to issues that arise, not to give you everything you want.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Aug 11, 2018 23:30:35 GMT
As for the hours you put into fixing the blade, most vendors/manufacturers would probably consider that action that voids warranty, as opposed to you somehow wanting indemnity for it. That's actually a good point. There was a spat on Facebook last year when someone antiqued a Windlass sword, and put a bunch of work into modifying it only for the temper to be faulty. When it broke and they requested a refund/replacement, the seller flatly told them no as modifying the product voided the warranty.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,649
|
Post by stormmaster on Aug 11, 2018 23:39:03 GMT
thats my exact point, its not that you dont deserve compensation but that you already got compensated for work that no one asked you to do and you were satisfied with it, you cant just go asking for compensation again after the fact just because something changes outside the scope of your own order that makes you feel like you deserve more, thats just unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by Wes Cameron on Aug 12, 2018 0:40:28 GMT
You two must be Sonny acolytes or something. The sword was not modified to something not conforming to it's physical shape or structure - caps for emphasis - AGAIN NO MODIFICATION TOOK PLACE - only repairs ie. remove extensive rust on guard and pommel, remove scuffs, remove horizontal grind marks along full length of fullers, remove grind marks on pommel, shape bottom two inches of fullers to conform with overall shape of fullers, glue rain guard closed, other cosmetic repairs to scabbard are not able to be done. You speak of business law but that varies from state to state and country to country and I don't think either of you are a corporate lawyer to speak with any degree of authority on the subject. You both still don't get it. I don't know if your not fully reading my posts or what, but whatever. Full caps for emphasis - THE FURTHER COMPENSATION REQUESTED WAS FOR THE SCABBARD NOT THE SWORD, again - THE FURTHER COMPENSATION REQUESTED WAS FOR THE SCABBARD NOT THE SWORD.
Read other's posts here including a those of a manufacturer. They are being logical and fair.
Sonny gave me a small amount for the work I did on the sword, work that needed to be done right away so the rust would not cause further damage. I appreciated the token gesture refund, but he could have and customer appreciation wise should have offered more. He should have done both of these without me having to say anything - from a good business perspective. There was no call for him to get smart $emprini with me, as I was polite with him throughout.
Bloody hell, get it straight already.
|
|
|
Post by Verity on Aug 12, 2018 0:54:24 GMT
Bloody hell, get it straight already. People have it straight. They are giving you feedback I get the sense that you simply don’t like or agree with. Please keep things civil.
|
|
|
Post by Wes Cameron on Aug 12, 2018 0:59:11 GMT
There was no uncivilized behaviour. I do not think they have it straight, and no I don't agree with it. That is obvious and goes without saying.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Aug 12, 2018 1:06:21 GMT
Then you should have requested compensation for the scabbard in the first flipping place. You made a deal and later decided you weren't very happy with that deal. That's no one's fault but your own. Should the sword have gone out of the shop in the condition it was in? No. Should you have had to spend 10 hours working on it? Again, no. But you were fairly compensated for that work and refused other forms of compensation.
"Should have offered more". Well he did - send the sword back, and you'll get a refund when it sells again. Sounds fair to me since you already received compensation for work no one but yourself asked you to do on it.
You should have sent it back in the first place. You made a deal instead though, after already working on it with no assurance of compensation for your time (which you did receive) and then went back on that deal when you realized that a line of swords was reintroduced to the market, and you believed you payed too much for what you received despite very clear differences in both construction and material needing to be taken into account.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Aug 12, 2018 1:07:26 GMT
There was no uncivilized behaviour. I do not think they have it straight, and no I don't agree with it. That is obvious and goes without saying. Calling people followers or servants of a manufacturer for suggesting you may be somewhat (but as stated over and over again, not entirely) out of line for defending a maker in a particularly volatile market is civil? Not mentioning the insult given to the maker as well.
|
|
|
Post by Wes Cameron on Aug 12, 2018 1:15:08 GMT
Stating what it appears to me. Why do you consider that an insult. I'm being factual, nothing more. What insult to the manufacturer? Read emphasized sentences again because you still don't understand.
|
|
|
Post by Wes Cameron on Aug 12, 2018 1:16:28 GMT
I'm going to request moderators to lock this review. Replies are getting way out of hand.
|
|
|
Post by Verity on Aug 12, 2018 1:18:16 GMT
I'm going to request moderators to lock this review. Replies are getting way out of hand. I already requested they keep an eye on this thread before I replied. 😊 I also would note this thread is far from a “review” conforming to the practices of such, tho some material therein would be fitting in a proper review.
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,649
|
Post by stormmaster on Aug 12, 2018 1:23:11 GMT
A quick update. Sonny contacted me. There was a problem with his email server and he had a backlog of emails. He's not sure how the oxidation happened but thought it might be from bluing, but I didn't have that done, so at this point it is still a mystery. He mentioned that they oil the guard and pommel before shipping, but there was no oil on mine (there was on the blade)...but still though the lack of oil should not have cause this oxidation on the guard and pommel imo. He apologized and promised to make it right for me. He said to send it back to him at no cost to me so he would fix it up and send it back. But, as it is fixed now there is no need to do that, and I really like this sword now that it is as it should be. The grip is just perfect for myh hand and it handles so well. I'm pleased to say that Sonny does stand behind his work and will correct things if needed. Leviathansteak - The scar gives it a battle feel, lol, but it really should not be there for the price now charged for the scabbard. This was not addressed in the email, but it is not a big deal to me as the scabbard is of secondary importance to me when compared to the sword. u said u were fine with it after you fixed it, then sonny sent u compensation for work that he would have done for u for free and I believe that should have been the end of it, what I think is not right is that just because the signature edition line comes back you ask him for more compensation, and he offers to take it back and refund you in full after he sells it, how much more above and beyond does he need to go, you say he will still make like $590 dollars after he compensates you for the scabbard but thats like half the sword's original price, if you take into account how many hours it takes to make the sword and scabbard and price of materials you should be able to understand why that is not viable for a small 2 man forge like sonny's look dude, im not defending sonny or VA they screwed up and its totally fine that you asked for compensation or had gotten the sword fixed for free but I just think its not right that you already received compensation and because of outside factors like the Signature edition line coming back you feel you deserve a 2nd compensation
|
|
|
Post by Wes Cameron on Aug 12, 2018 1:24:03 GMT
When a sword is reviewed it is also a review of the manufacturer as a natural part of the process. I have already requested this be shut down.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Aug 12, 2018 1:27:05 GMT
Stating what it appears to me. Why do you consider that an insult. I'm being factual, nothing more. What insult to the manufacturer? Read emphasized sentences again because you still don't understand. You two must be Sonny acolytes or something. Not insulting? Acolyte - definition; a person assisting the celebrant in a religious service or procession. an assistant or follower. synonyms: assistant, helper, attendant, aide, minion, underling, lackey, henchman. Another term could be shill? Ah yes, we religiously follow those who slander our master of religious ceremony, Sonny of VA. We understand the issue and why you are upset, we simply disagree on that you are totally justified. Insult to manufacturer; implying knowing and malicious deceit on their part in not telling you that another line is being reintroduced. You keep saying this isn't a moral or legal matter, but rather a matter of "customer appreciation" which is a term I haven't heard since I worked at Wal-Mart. Customer appreciation doesn't mean bending over backwards. The man gave you compensation for work no one but yourself asked you to do. He literally payed you more than a days wage for working on a replica sword.
|
|
|
Post by twichy on Aug 12, 2018 2:12:00 GMT
Eh like I said, some people are more eggshell than others. But the issue is that in business practices and equity disputes the standard is usually how the average, reasonably discerning customer will react... not the fringe customer (fringe as in either direction).
Some customers would have simply ignored the imperfections in the product and accepted it as is (Didn't someone have to mention the fullers to you before you noticed the imperfection yourself?). That's one extreme. Others demand a level of perfection and performance beyond the generally accepted standards at the price point. That's the other extreme. The middle ground is where the rest of the world lives: we find the errors of substance and ask that they be corrected within the industry standard.
Ya, I get it. You paid for a craftsman line weapon, which costs maybe 50% more than special edition. Does that mean you're going to get 50% more quality? No. The cost to quantity relationship isn't linear. If I order an Albion Museum Line Cluny am I going to get a sword that's 4 times the quality and performance as a VA? Twice the quality and performance of an Albion Principe? No. Is Albion going to "fix" the Cluny Sword when a customer complains that hey... my old Principe cuts better than this thing that cost twice as much? Should Albion pay the client the difference in price between the Cluny and the Principe due to the difference in performance? no.
We're not blindly defending the manufacturer. I think a lot of people are reading your issues and coming to the conclusion that you have unrealistic expectations of customer service. I haven't seen your sword close enough to determine if you have an unrealistic expectation of the product so I'm not going to comment on that. Suffice to say that both you and Sonny determined that you had legitimate complaints about the quality and came to an arrangement. When you have issues with a product and want a partial or complete refund you don't accept a refund for one issue and reserve the right to contest the other. This issue is precisely why there are theories of law behind the inspection and acceptance of goods and services. If you receive compensation for issues you have with initial construction that's it. You're received compensation and the transaction is complete. You are now a Warranty customer. Did the vendor offer to "fix" your issues within his "warranty policies"? Yes, you yourself said he did. Does it matter that his manner of fixing the issue doesnt suit you? No. When has a warranty claim for anything not inconvenienced the owner of the item?
In short, we're not defending the vendor's product. Nor are we contesting that there was an issue that needed to be resolved. We (pretty much everyone in the thread in one way or another) are defending the vendor's business practices. Just take a moment to reflect... if literally everyone is telling you that your requests and expectations are unreasonable, there's a good chance that they are. I dunno.. maybe you're that guy who sends back a steak at a steakhouse because you ordered medium rare and the steak they served was arguably medium. Maybe you think that entitles you to a free glass of wine. Most of us eat the steak, maybe with a comment to the chef via the server. It's a question of whether your expectations fall in line with what the norm is.
Likewise I dont think there's an issue with Wes reviewing the business practices of the bladesmith in his review of the blade itself. In the ordering of a custom or semicustom sword, I think the business practices of the smith is integral in your overall experience and the product you end up with. So I think if he has an issue with the VA, there's nothing wrong with Wes discussing it here in this thread. It's useful information to the rest of us looking to buy a sword and considering where to source one from. I happen to disagree with his assessment of the smith's business practices and I think he's taking things a little personally with people disagreeing with him, but that's understandable too, since he's undoubtedly disappointed in a product he's anticipated for a long time. But that's what's good about discussion... readers get a more comprehensive and objective view of the picture from both subjective and more objective standpoints. Yes, it sucks that you aren't satisfied with your sword and your experience with VA, and it sucks that you posted expecting people to commiserate with you and it turns out that we don't necessarily agree with your assessment. But hey that's life and the discussion is informative (and somewhat entertaining) to read. Rather than everyone being VA cronies, I think the fact that you have an active, 4 page thread with some sort of drama/excitement causes people to drop their 2 cents. Trainwreck phenomenon, you know?
|
|
|
Post by Curtis_Louis on Aug 12, 2018 2:35:12 GMT
I'm going to request moderators to lock this review. Replies are getting way out of hand. Locked at the request of the OP.
|
|