Ah, I just wondered why you waited over two months to say anything about it then. I've said lots of times that there would be a charge, the best time to complain isn't at the last minute after a project has been budgeted and is about to ship.

I believe if you'll look back at the record, I have said this in the past, right around time I first complained (in July) about the glare issue with the top down. Please also note here where I'm very clear on my feelings as far back as 21 August with jbauer agreeing with me that they should be comp'ed.

There I was thinking we had a reputation for great customer responsiveness. I can only think of one issue that we put our foot down over - the visual switching thing - and we came up with a compromise that most people are happy with. But then, they're all sheep, right?

All of them? Certainly not, but anyone who MIGHT have agreed with me sees the pasting I get from the "kiss-ass" end of the spectrum and doesn't bother.

I'll even stipulate that the MAJORITY of Empeg owners don't give a damn one way or the other on the AR panel issue.

We don't have any AR and ITO coated screens yet, and neither will we before the full production run.

Silly Question: How do you have any idea then if what you're paying lots of money to produce is even going to work? I ask that not to be sarcastic, but because I honestly am interested in the answer. If you've never had ne with both coatings, and you CAN'T get one until you get the whole production run, how do you know it'll work at all? Again, that's not sarcasm, that's an honest desire to understand that process.

We can't supply non-ITO coated screens to clients, especially not in the USA - if a competitor picked up on that they could have the FCC shut down our export channel into the US.

That makes sense (I guess, I'm assuming the ITO coating is some FCC mandated thing).

I think you have this completely out of proportion, and I find it really quite offensive that you can go from a "stellar experience" to vehement condemnation over this issue. In effect you're telling us that no matter how hard we work, how great a product we develop, how great support we offer - despite all that if we make one slip in your eyes (a $10 charge for a new panel) you will turn your back on empeg, withdraw all of the reccommendations you have made to your friends, and presumably run us down to anyone that will listen.

No, I think you're overstating my position on that. I'm saying "Wow, they've done some really good customer service in the past, but on this -- which is really important to me -- they completely dropped the ball." It's not like I'm saying "If you don't send the panels for free, then dammit, I'm registering empegsucks.com tomorrow and putting up a huge site railing against them!"

What I'm saying is that I would find it more difficult, when asked for my opinion, to give a glowing review.

To turn your argument on its head, I could just as easily say that for all the money, patience, etc. that Empeg customers have offered Empeg, Inc., it really is quite offensive that you would suddenly get all cheap over a $10 part. Given the amount of money Empeg customers pay (let's call it an average of around US$1500), for Empeg to suddenly not being willing to eat 0.6% of that cost to make good on a design flaw is insulting.

Is it a design flaw that affects everyone? Certainly not. Is it a design flaw that renders the unit completely inoperable making it a 5 pound paperweight? No. Does that mean you should have to proactively send a replacement panel to all the 1000+ existing owners? No.

It means, "If someone is experiencing a problem from this design flaw, then they should get their panel comp'ed." So if the number of people actually complaining about this problem is small (as you indicate) then your outlay for those few is minimal. If someone has a non-AR panel and DOESN'T have a problem with it, then great! they're happy with what they have, it doesn't affect them, no need to waste money sending them an AR panel which doesn't change their experience one bit.

D