SOS's responses are, to be quite frank, bullshit.
We are not talking about ANYBODY losing ANYTHING out of pocket or raising their cost of operating expenses. This is NOT warranty work. The cost of the upgrade is a set price. Ernie offered to pay full price. Ernie also made special arrangements to deliver said unit and Alan knew that he would have to go well out of his way to do so. Ernie was never asked to supply the serial number, so he didn't. He was simply asked if the unit had a serial number and responded accordingly.
As far as i can see, Alan is a schmuck, did NOT obtain all of the pertinent information prior to agreeing to do the work, inconvenienced a customer to GREAT extent and now wants to charge said customer double for his own idiocy.
As far as i'm concerned, this IS a reflection on EC and is directly related to company policy, customer support and product viability. This SHOULD affect EC directly as it affects anyone thinking about buying an EC product. After all, it could be ANY of us that becomes the "exception" as to how / why they won't work on their own product ( in this case, EC ) regardless of the point of purchase. I could understand if it was a "bootleg" i.e. NOT a "real" EC product but a clone or knock-off under another brand name, but this is NOT the case.
Alan / EC have opened a MAJOR can of worms here. There is only ONE way to make this right. They know it, we know it and they better do something about it if they want to save face.
I stand by my statements as both a consumer and as the owner of an electronics sales / service center*. Sean
>
* Non-Audio related
We are not talking about ANYBODY losing ANYTHING out of pocket or raising their cost of operating expenses. This is NOT warranty work. The cost of the upgrade is a set price. Ernie offered to pay full price. Ernie also made special arrangements to deliver said unit and Alan knew that he would have to go well out of his way to do so. Ernie was never asked to supply the serial number, so he didn't. He was simply asked if the unit had a serial number and responded accordingly.
As far as i can see, Alan is a schmuck, did NOT obtain all of the pertinent information prior to agreeing to do the work, inconvenienced a customer to GREAT extent and now wants to charge said customer double for his own idiocy.
As far as i'm concerned, this IS a reflection on EC and is directly related to company policy, customer support and product viability. This SHOULD affect EC directly as it affects anyone thinking about buying an EC product. After all, it could be ANY of us that becomes the "exception" as to how / why they won't work on their own product ( in this case, EC ) regardless of the point of purchase. I could understand if it was a "bootleg" i.e. NOT a "real" EC product but a clone or knock-off under another brand name, but this is NOT the case.
Alan / EC have opened a MAJOR can of worms here. There is only ONE way to make this right. They know it, we know it and they better do something about it if they want to save face.
I stand by my statements as both a consumer and as the owner of an electronics sales / service center*. Sean
>
* Non-Audio related

