 |
Full Topic |  |
| Joined: | Sun Sep 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Akron, USA |
| Posts: | 28138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Since when has it become wrong for several watch companies to share the same case design? WIS have seen this going on since the beginning and yet for no reason other than forum politics this design has garnered the wrath of the unknowing newb led by the few who proclaim their self expertise upon them.
Did SAS know another company was about to release a similar watch?,Yes they must have known, thus the many posts by SAS just prior to the release of how they rejected 300 cases ( because of a 1mm distance between the lug holes and case).Which at a later date was fixed (CRUX)by merely using a thinner lug screw that was more the industry standard, rather than the thicker screw the watch came with, just because one vendor refused the final case does not mean it was a reject due to some terrible imperfection but only that it did not meet his specific design.
Now for those in the dark about watch manufacturing there are 2 rules that are the same throughout the watch manufacturing industry.
1:a down payment must be made of at least 30% before a case prototype is produced,which btw could take months of back and forth e-mails between the vendor and manufacturer if not on location before a case proto is actually made,at which point when all is said and done the proto is manufactured and sent to the vendor for approval.
2: once approved and manufactured, the case or entire watch is sent to the vendor for inspection.This is the time the vendor should catch any and all imperfections such as the 1mm distance that SAS did not care for to be changed and as many found out later the issue with the bracelet. Not until the vendor gives a 100% approval of the revised design does the manufacturer proceed with the finished product which requires final payment at that time.
Now is it possible the manufacturer didn't make any changes per the vendor on the final product ?,sure it is possible but wouldn't you believe that if these changes were written or discussed between the vendor and the manufacturer of the needed changes to the case and bracelet that they wouldn't own up to it and correct the issue?...would you send back 300 cases that were not correct to your specific order?...I know I would,especially if I had made specific changes on how they were to be made, which to me would have been an acknowledgment from the manufacturer that they would be made,without that acknowledgment I would have never proceeded.Cross your T's and dot your I's and leave nothing to blind interpretation when dealing in matters of business.
This reoccurring issue of who did what will continue to raise it's ugly head until someone posts the the 100% truth backed by facts.Until then this is nothing more than a case of he said she said.Will the truth hurt the vendors who are using this case? No, probably not since the defamatory accusations have already been made at the hands of the person claiming the design.So when and if the truth is posted who will suffer? ...usually the one who claims foul to begin with....imho SAS could have handled this in a more reputable way instead of slinging mud and sitting back watching the commotion they created...
