|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 8:15:47 GMT -8
Or, Like in the case of seiko...Lack of QC is intentional. New/Reissue models are just a marketing ploy that plays off the interest of the original models, Simply for profit, Not Customer Satisfaction. Actually, as the watch is one of the mass produced products, the printing misalignment on the dial and the misalignment of the dial legs’ positions are allowed to some extent; we set the appearance standard. Meanwhile, we think it is difficult to adjust the misalignment by repair as it is due to a variety factor (e.g. dial print, dial legs). Therefore, please kindly ask the customer to accept the appearance level by explaining the above and the fact that you explained to the customer before the replacement that it could not be guaranteed that the appearance would be improved dramatically as the watch was within standard originally. I personally have no problem with their response, it's very common in mass production. Oh, and "allowed to some extent", is not the same as "intentional" IMO. Well, When one sets out to mass produce, There intent is crystal clear, Seiko's response clearly says allowed, So there knowledge of the problems are known and clearly intentional within there poor quality control or lack thereof. Seiko's marketing never mentions that there are issues until they are prodded as in there response in the above post. Done...Next
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 8:24:37 GMT -8
I personally have no problem with their response, it's very common in mass production. Oh, and "allowed to some extent", is not the same as "intentional" IMO. Well, When one sets out to mass produce, There intent is crystal clear, Seiko's response clearly says allowed, So there knowledge of the problems are known and clearly intentional within there poor quality control or lack thereof. Seiko's marketing never mentions that there are issues until they are prodded as in there response in the above post. Done...Next Again, you saying it is done intentionally is not correct, when mass producing, you have no choice but to allow some imperfections. Low price point items are going to have some issues, that is a fact. When something is intentional, it is done on purpose. They did not create these issues on purpose, they are just a product of low budget manufacturing.
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 8:35:34 GMT -8
Put it this way, Seiko had intentions to mass produce with full knowledge that that there quality control issues. And I am saying that it is bullshit on seiko for doing this.
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 8:40:54 GMT -8
Put it this way, Seiko had intentions to mass produce with full knowledge that that there quality control issues. And I am saying that it is bullshit on seiko for doing this. Every mass produced product has issues, Seiko is hardly a criminal for "allowing" this to happen. I guess since you're so disenchanted, you could sell of your Seiko's, and make a statement for the cause.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 8:52:11 GMT -8
Put it this way, Seiko had intentions to mass produce with full knowledge that that there quality control issues. And I am saying that it is bullshit on seiko for doing this. Every mass produced product has issues, Seiko is hardly a criminal for "allowing" this to happen. I guess since you're so disenchanted, you could sell of your Seiko's, and make a statement for the cause. I don't remember seeing anyone claiming Seiko is criminal When Seiko or any manufacturer makes a choice that affects the bottom line, it is intentional. Many of us are disappointed in the way Seiko is headed with new products but it does not take anything away from our love of the vintage Seiko offerings Nothing that Seiko does, going forward, could ever diminish my enthusiasm and respect for the art they produced in the past
|
|
|
Post by leffemonster on Mar 30, 2018 9:04:58 GMT -8
I don’t think the effect of flaws in mass production is the issue here, but rather the quality control process. It would be interesting to understand what percentage of ‘flawed’ items are allowed to pass through QC before Seiko calls ‘foul’, or even whether such a percentage exists in their manufacturing processes. As with anything that is produced in volume, and sold in volume, there will be QC issues and some of these will end up in the supply chain and in the hands (or on the wrist in this case) of the consumer. I’d imagine, given the numbers involved, that the amounts affected by misalignment are extremely low. As for the official response, that’s pretty much what I’d expect from a global multinational to be honest in respect of this particular issue. Now, if that same response was to be provided into a similar issue on, say, a Grand Seiko, then I think that would be a different matter entirely. Given the volumes involved I’d expect QC to be much more rigorous for the high-end models. And I’d also expect the response of the AD to be better in such instances as well. Why? Because I’ve just paid ££££’s for this damn watch FFS! I expect it to be perfect! And, to be fair to Seiko, we are aware of experience of this happening - wristsushi.proboards.com/thread/15286/2nd-seiko-homage-watch-keeper
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 9:10:39 GMT -8
Put it this way, Seiko had intentions to mass produce with full knowledge that that there quality control issues. And I am saying that it is bullshit on seiko for doing this. Every mass produced product has issues, Seiko is hardly a criminal for "allowing" this to happen. I guess since you're so disenchanted, you could sell of your Seiko's, and make a statement for the cause. Now that is asinine.....Criminal ? WTF Why change the conversation ? Disenchanted ? No, I just don't care for poor quality, Yes even the 4k reissues have the same problems.... Easy for me to remedy, Don't purchase :dance: At least I don't have to sell any at a loss...
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 9:12:01 GMT -8
Every mass produced product has issues, Seiko is hardly a criminal for "allowing" this to happen. I guess since you're so disenchanted, you could sell of your Seiko's, and make a statement for the cause. I don't remember seeing anyone claiming Seiko is criminal When Seiko or any manufacturer makes a choice that affects the bottom line, it is intentional. Many of us are disappointed in the way Seiko is headed with new products but it does not take anything away from our love of the vintage Seiko offerings Nothing that Seiko does, going forward, could ever diminish my enthusiasm and respect for the art they produced in the past Neither did I, and here I thought you were wise enough to be able to see through sarcasm...apparently not. Being disappointed is one thing, bringing it to the next level is ridiculous IMO. Making the accusation that Seiko is intentionally creating an inferior product is ludicrous.
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 9:14:50 GMT -8
Every mass produced product has issues, Seiko is hardly a criminal for "allowing" this to happen. I guess since you're so disenchanted, you could sell of your Seiko's, and make a statement for the cause. Now that is asinine.....Criminal ? WTF Why change the conversation ? Disenchanted ? No, I just don't care for poor quality, Yes even the 4k reissues have the same problems.... Easy for me to remedy, Don't purchase At least I don't have to sell any at a loss... See my post about, I guess that first part pertains to you as well. Just like you, I have the right to MY opinion, and if my opinion spins you into a tizzy, perhaps you need to grow a pair.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 9:21:59 GMT -8
I don’t think the effect of flaws in mass production is the issue here, but rather the quality control process. It would be interesting to understand what percentage of ‘flawed’ items are allowed to pass through QC before Seiko calls ‘foul’, or even whether such a percentage exists in their manufacturing processes. As with anything that is produced in volume, and sold in volume, there will be QC issues and some of these will end up in the supply chain and in the hands (or on the wrist in this case) of the consumer. I’d imagine, given the numbers involved, that the amounts affected by misalignment are extremely low. As for the official response, that’s pretty much what I’d expect from a global multinational to be honest in respect of this particular issue. Now, if that same response was to be provided into a similar issue on, say, a Grand Seiko, then I think that would be a different matter entirely. Given the volumes involved I’d expect QC to be much more rigorous for the high-end models. And I’d also expect the response of the AD to be better in such instances as well. Why? I’ve just paid ££££’s for this damn watch FFS! I expect it to be perfect! And, to be fair to Seiko, we are aware of experience of this happening - wristsushi.proboards.com/thread/15286/2nd-seiko-homage-watch-keeperIn the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s Japanese companies produced things to very high standards. QC was King! Around 1995, they started using the 6 sigma standard for allowable defects. This meant that 99.99966% of products came off the line as perfect. This should have allowed even fewer defects If you take a sample of 100,000 watches and remove 99.99966% of them, you will see that Seiko no longer follows this standard of excellence. The chances of our small enthusiast community receiving as many defects as we do is outside the probability factor. It is obvious that Seiko has chosen profit over customer satisfaction
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 9:27:13 GMT -8
I don't remember seeing anyone claiming Seiko is criminal When Seiko or any manufacturer makes a choice that affects the bottom line, it is intentional. Many of us are disappointed in the way Seiko is headed with new products but it does not take anything away from our love of the vintage Seiko offerings Nothing that Seiko does, going forward, could ever diminish my enthusiasm and respect for the art they produced in the past Neither did I, and here I thought you were wise enough to be able to see through sarcasm...apparently not. Being disappointed is one thing, bringing it to the next level is ridiculous IMO. Making the accusation that Seiko is intentionally creating an inferior product is ludicrous. You said it yourself...Seiko is making a product to a price point. In order to do that, they have to make decisions one where to cost cut and what is acceptable to them. These are intentional choices! We really do need a 'sarcasm' smilie since it is often lost on slow folks like myself.
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 9:27:44 GMT -8
Now that is asinine.....Criminal ? WTF Why change the conversation ? Disenchanted ? No, I just don't care for poor quality, Yes even the 4k reissues have the same problems.... Easy for me to remedy, Don't purchase At least I don't have to sell any at a loss... See my post about, I guess that first part pertains to you as well. Just like you, I have the right to MY opinion, and if my opinion spins you into a tizzy, perhaps you need to grow a pair. Seiko needs to "Grow a Pair" I haul mine around in a wheelbarrow
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2018 9:30:18 GMT -8
See my post about, I guess that first part pertains to you as well. Just like you, I have the right to MY opinion, and if my opinion spins you into a tizzy, perhaps you need to grow a pair. Seiko needs to "Grow a Pair" I haul mine around in a wheelbarrow I used to haul mine in a Merkur
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 9:34:57 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 9:37:03 GMT -8
Now that is asinine.....Criminal ? WTF Why change the conversation ? Disenchanted ? No, I just don't care for poor quality, Yes even the 4k reissues have the same problems.... Easy for me to remedy, Don't purchase At least I don't have to sell any at a loss... See my post about, I guess that first part pertains to you as well. Just like you, I have the right to MY opinion, and if my opinion spins you into a tizzy, perhaps you need to grow a pair. Why do you have to turn this into something other than seiko's crap production lately. You have decided to make this a personal issue ? :bs:
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 9:37:46 GMT -8
Wow, You should see a doctor
|
|
|
Post by leffemonster on Mar 30, 2018 9:41:18 GMT -8
In the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s Japanese companies produced things to very high standards. QC was King! Around 1995, they started using the 6 sigma standard for allowable defects. This meant that 99.99966% of products came off the line as perfect. This should have allowed even fewer defects If you take a sample of 100,000 watches and remove 99.99966% of them, you will see that Seiko no longer follows this standard of excellence. The chances of our small enthusiast community receiving as many defects as we do is outside the probability factor. It is obvious that Seiko has chosen profit over customer satisfaction Sad, but true. The current marketing strategy of (in my opinion) over-priced reissues shows this as well.
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 10:32:54 GMT -8
See my post about, I guess that first part pertains to you as well. Just like you, I have the right to MY opinion, and if my opinion spins you into a tizzy, perhaps you need to grow a pair. Why do you have to turn this into something other than seiko's crap production lately. You have decided to make this a personal issue ? How have I turned this into a personal issue? You referred to my statement as asinine, and I'm making it personal? I disagree with your level of outrage, simple as that...deal with it.
|
|
|
Post by DAHASCO on Mar 30, 2018 10:49:24 GMT -8
So, You add the criminal element, I call that asinine and that makes me the one who made it personal.
|
|
|
Post by Groundhog66 on Mar 30, 2018 10:53:39 GMT -8
So, You add the criminal element, I call that asinine and that makes me the one who made it personal. Yeah, you're right...it was me all along. We done now?
|
|