Originally Posted by
Grand58742
Never did really get the chance to reply to this.
I can more or less agree. However, do I think they just slapped something pretty together and shipped it off without testing it? I'll give them the benefit of the doubt when they say it was tested on the rifles they had. And I'll give them the benefit of the doubt when they said they were built to spec and worked flawlessly in those Colt rifles. I've got no reason to doubt them and they have realized the errors made and supposedly are going to make the changes. And from the reports, these are hit and miss in just about everything else on the planet. But do I think they were just blowing smoke when they said they were tested? No, I doubt they could get away with that.
So I'll say they probably did do testing in good conscience and those rifles they had might have worked perfectly. Lot of maybe there, but I wouldn't think they would have knowingly shipped out bad products then turned around and started making changes when the consumer started into an uproar.
See above...and the timing could have been better I agree. And maybe they felt the testing they did was sufficient. Probably not in retrospect. However, nobody could have foreseen the disaster in December. And since they had them "in stock and shipping" everyone started grabbing what they could not really giving a chance for a formal testing cycle in the courses, with gun rag writers, SMEs and with end users. From the back posts on TOS, they were released around the second week in November time frame which gave them a little over a month before the craziness started. And then problems started cropping up. They did try to ignore them a week or two, but all the sudden we started seeing "fixes" being "worked" from the rep. So my guess is, voices were heard and they decided to fix them on the fly.
In normal times, these probably wouldn't have sold quite as quickly and maybe had a better chance for more T&E on the user end. Same problems would have come up and maybe they would have fixed them. But let's face facts here, the timing on the release sucked. Or conditions out of their hands forced this situation and didn't give the opportunity for a proper evaluation in the long run.
Actually, on their site it did say the card would be charged at the time of processing. So those bitching about getting charged up front knew very well they were getting charged up front as well as the estimated shipping times which were and are in big red font on the pages themselves.
Might not be the best way of doing business, but everyone knew their cards were going to get charged. So I hold no pity for them when they want to complain about getting charged up front and/or the shipping times. They knew and still hit the submit button. And if they didn't take the time to read the big red print on the product page or the instructions on the order page, forgive me, but sucks to be them.
Again, in normal times, I would tend to agree. However, we are not in normal times. And the fact they are attempting to make fixes instead of continuing to produce a product of dubious quality in this market says something. They could have said "screw it, they are selling like hot cakes so continue to sell what we have and we'll make changes when the panic dies down." But they are attempting to fix it and rightfully so. They are fighting for a spot in the US market right now and this is make or break time for them. Between the idiots in Congress making a racket about high capacity bans and what happened over the past year, they have been thrust into the limelight. They HAVE to make this right in order to stay in the market...and be seen publicly responding to consumer demands.
As to replacing magazines, I can't say. So far they have been pretty good about replacing those that needed it from the reports over on TOS. I would tend to think it would be a consideration depending on the wear and tear of the mag in question. But see above, they have to be seen as a company that stands by it's products and my guess is they might offer a one for one swap when the time comes around.
You want an honest opinion? I'd be willing to bet half these mags will end up in a box in the closet or drawer in the basement and never see the light of day again. People bought them in a panic and because they could, not because they needed them...same for me. So as for replacement, I could see less than half the defective ones returned.
Forgive me if I came off harsh at you, but far too often I see on here a new product and people bashing it without any good reason or first hand knowledge. "Well, I KNOW they SUCK because I just KNOW!" and others jumping on the bandwagon because "I HEARD it from a FRIEND/READ a post on the INTERNET who said they SUCKED!" Overall, you look at this from a negative standpoint, the first iteration sucked and thus, all will probably suck and you won't do business with them.
I look at it from a semi-positive aspect. First iteration sucked, but they are attempting to fix it during a time which they very well could ignore the consumer and continue to sell to those that don't know any better. And let's face it, sales have not slowed even with the supposed problems. So they very well could have ignored the end market, but decided to get them right. Smart to be doing it right now? Yes and no. But the fact they are doing it impresses me. I'll stick around through the next batch and see what fixes are made. And as stated before, I can Dremel them out and/or resell them since they will keep their $18 value for the most part.
Different sides of the coin.
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks