I pulled an Al

Scott Seidman wrote:
"Mike in GA" wrote:
Why would you even try to get equipment replaced because of negligence on
your own part?

Perhaps because this is the specific policy of many of the major rod
companies. Think of it as insurance that you pay that's included in the
price of the rod. You've paid for this-- you're entitled to it. ...

Exactly right. When you pay over $500 for a fly rod part of what
you're paying for is the "no questions asked warranty." For the
major rod companies it's good cutomer relations because they're
a lot like the drug companies. That first rod off the line, like
the first pill, cost millions in research and development, but
the second one costs pennies. No way does a piece of graphite with
some cork and thread cost $500 to build, you're paying for the
whole enchilada and that includes free replacement.

This doesn't apply to "custom rod builders" of course. They don't
really build rods, they just glue on some cork and wrap some
thread on a blank that some rod company built.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Scott Seidman wrote:
"Mike in GA" wrote:
Why would you even try to get equipment replaced because of negligence on
your own part?

Perhaps because this is the specific policy of many of the major rod
companies. Think of it as insurance that you pay that's included in the
price of the rod. You've paid for this-- you're entitled to it. ...

Exactly right. When you pay over $500 for a fly rod part of what
you're paying for is the "no questions asked warranty." For the
major rod companies it's good cutomer relations because they're
a lot like the drug companies. That first rod off the line, like
the first pill, cost millions in research and development, but
the second one costs pennies. No way does a piece of graphite with
some cork and thread cost $500 to build, you're paying for the
whole enchilada and that includes free replacement.

This doesn't apply to "custom rod builders" of course. They don't
really build rods, they just glue on some cork and wrap some
thread on a blank that some rod company built.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Bob La Londe wrote:
Thats gonna leave a mark.

Oops, didn't mean that as a slam on "custom rod builders",
just pointing out that they have to pay the rod company
for the blank so it's not the same situation for them as
it is for the major rod companies.

When you're talking about high end fly rods, Winston, Sage,
Thomas & Thomas, it's almost impossible for a custom builder
to "build" a fly rod on those blanks for much less than the
factory models. That's because the rod companies price their
blanks that way. And when you buy from a custom builder you
usually don't get, nor should you expect, the "no questions
asked warranty."

--
Ken Fortenberry

Maybe he's still "lurking"....

" ...this is the specific policy of many of the major rod companies. Think
of it as insurance that you pay that's included in the price of the rod.
You've paid for this-- you're entitled to it," said Mike. This is 100% on
target, and this is 100% of the whole damn problem.

Bob LaLonde is a man of total integrity and was absolutely right in the way
he handled his returns. He knew that he had paid at the time of purchase for
full entitlement to the manufacturer's return policies, whatever they may
be, and he would have been a fool not to have taken full advantage of them.

Those manufacturers who build the "abuse insurance" into the original
purchase price are the villains here and should be treated as such. They are
taking the cheap and sleazy way out to protect their own butts and to try to
look like heroes in the process. The buying public should never be tricked
into paying for other's mistakes, and true manufacturing defects should
never cost the buyer a penny to correct.

--
Bob Rickard
(AKA Dr. Spinnerbait)
www.secretweaponlures.com
--------------------------=x O')))


"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
.4...
"Mike in GA" wrote in news:bCurd.428910
$wV.5924@attbi_s54:

Why would you even try to get equipment replaced because of negligence
on
your own part?



Perhaps because this is the specific policy of many of the major rod
companies. Think of it as insurance that you pay that's included in the
price of the rod. You've paid for this-- you're entitled to it.

About three months ago, my wife trashed a fairly new tire on a curb. I
brought it in to the shop where I bought it, fully expecting to buy a new
tire at full price. The guy behind the counter told me that part of the
price of the original tire was insurance, and that the tire was
replaceable
for free, or for $26 if I wanted to buy the insurance on the replacement
tire. Should I have insisted on paying full price because it wasn't their
fault?



Scott

Bob Rickard wrote:

Bob LaLonde is a man of total integrity and was absolutely right in the way
he handled his returns. He knew that he had paid at the time of purchase for
full entitlement to the manufacturer's return policies, whatever they may
be, and he would have been a fool not to have taken full advantage of them.

Agreed 110%. You are absolutely right.

Those manufacturers who build the "abuse insurance" into the original
purchase price are the villains here and should be treated as such. They are
taking the cheap and sleazy way out to protect their own butts and to try to
look like heroes in the process. The buying public should never be tricked
into paying for other's mistakes, and true manufacturing defects should
never cost the buyer a penny to correct.

Here's where we part company.

Why would a rod company set themselves up to be judge, jury
and final authority over rod breakage knowing full well that
some will cheat and some will feel cheated ? Better just to
replace them all and incorporate it into the cost of the rod.
Remember, we're not talking about what's fair, we're talking
about what's good for their business.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Bob Rickard" wrote in
. com:

Bob LaLonde is a man of total integrity and was absolutely right in
the way he handled his returns. He knew that he had paid at the time
of purchase for full entitlement to the manufacturer's return
policies, whatever they may be, and he would have been a fool not to
have taken full advantage of them.

Of course. I wasn't talking about custom rods when I posted, but there is
an expected difference. If I bought a custom rod, and the blank had a no-
fault warrantee, I would expect the maker to charge me for time and
material, minus the blank, which he would get replaced by warrantee.
Depending on the price of the rod, I might not buy one without a no-fault
warranteed blank


Those manufacturers who build the "abuse insurance" into the original
purchase price are the villains here and should be treated as such.
They are taking the cheap and sleazy way out to protect their own
butts and to try to look like heroes in the process. The buying public
should never be tricked into paying for other's mistakes, and true
manufacturing defects should never cost the buyer a penny to correct.



The buying public isn't being "tricked" into anything. They all have
purchased the same no-fault insurance that any other purchaser has. If
they don't believe in that type of policy, they should consider Loomis or
some other rod with a warrantee they can live with.

If there are any villians, its the customers that insist on paying $600 for
a $200 fly rod.

Scott

"Bob Rickard" wrote in
. com:

Bob LaLonde is a man of total integrity and was absolutely right in
the way he handled his returns. He knew that he had paid at the time
of purchase for full entitlement to the manufacturer's return
policies, whatever they may be, and he would have been a fool not to
have taken full advantage of them.

Of course. I wasn't talking about custom rods when I posted, but there is
an expected difference. If I bought a custom rod, and the blank had a no-
fault warrantee, I would expect the maker to charge me for time and
material, minus the blank, which he would get replaced by warrantee.
Depending on the price of the rod, I might not buy one without a no-fault
warranteed blank


Those manufacturers who build the "abuse insurance" into the original
purchase price are the villains here and should be treated as such.
They are taking the cheap and sleazy way out to protect their own
butts and to try to look like heroes in the process. The buying public
should never be tricked into paying for other's mistakes, and true
manufacturing defects should never cost the buyer a penny to correct.



The buying public isn't being "tricked" into anything. They all have
purchased the same no-fault insurance that any other purchaser has. If
they don't believe in that type of policy, they should consider Loomis or
some other rod with a warrantee they can live with.

If there are any villians, its the customers that insist on paying $600 for
a $200 fly rod.

Scott

Scott Seidman wrote:
snip
If there are any villians, its the customers that insist on paying $600 for
a $200 fly rod.

Who wouldn't want to pay $200 for a Sage 890-4 TCR, arguably the
best stick available for tossing big wind eaters to bucketmouths,
but they run $725 for the factory model and $363 for the blank.

If you know where to find a comparable cannon for less I'd sure
love to hear about it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Scott Seidman wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Scott Seidman wrote:
snip
If there are any villians, its the customers that insist on paying
$600 for a $200 fly rod.

Who wouldn't want to pay $200 for a Sage 890-4 TCR, arguably the
best stick available for tossing big wind eaters to bucketmouths,
but they run $725 for the factory model and $363 for the blank.

If you know where to find a comparable cannon for less I'd sure
love to hear about it.

Well, I can't tell you what's comparable to that, but I can tell you that
I search for the right time and place to buy the right rod.

A Winston Boron XTR is comparable, $675 factory, $338 blank.

snip
I've seen the Sage discount program for guides, and a guide pays not much
more than $275 for much of Sage's top of the line is today (I don't know
about the TCR, though)--and Sage would still make money off the rod.

Right, I bought one of my Winstons when I guided and paid right at
20% of retail, back then that was ~$100 for a ~$500 rod, but there
was/is no warranty at all, if I break it, that's that. And then too,
in Montana you actually have to log hours on the stream and have it
verified by an outfitter to qualify for guide discounts. At my age
and my curmudgeonly temperament I'd just as soon pay the extra $$$
as to have to spend time on a stream with a *!#$%^* tourist. ;-)

snip
We can go back and forth about what makes a $600 rod worth $600. I think
a good part of that is the warrantee ...

So it's not particularly villainous to fish with a $600 rod, it's
only villainous if you pay retail for it ? ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry