|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 9, 2006, 2:54 AM
Post #226 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: Easy there sister, I never "accused" anyone of anything. I think either you mis-interpreted my statement or I just did a poor job of conveying my message. My point on niche gear is that aliens are not even close to "main stream" by comparison to BD or Metolius. I'm a big fan of Aliens from an aid climbing stand point. Especially the hybrids. I do use them free climbing. The vast majority of racks I see here in Josh and the valley aren't comprised of Aliens.
sister what?
robert, first off- just becuase people don't have aliens on their rack doesnt mean they dont want them. where have you been for the last few threads? noticed those trends? people can't get them. small stores dont stock, and therefore don't sell them. they dont get pushed in the stores, dont need to take out big ads in the mags, and still the online stores sell out of them, each with their own little "we're sorry, we can't get them, please don't hurt us" pages when you try to order. and like i said before, even REI goes on alien backorder, i dont care what their sweetheart deal is- it happens. and across the country, ive never seen an REI with a full set of aliens in the pro case.
are you saying that if cch ramped up production it just wouldn't move? give me a break.
In reply to: They just are not "main stream".
well, i think they *are* mainstream, but they just dont put out. its not like we're talking about freakin' ballnuts here.
In reply to: Meaning, I don't believe them to have the same capacity to deliver large quantities of product to a fairly limited, but, hungry following.
waht does that mean? you figure its the same 200 climbers replacing their alien rack every year? thats why REI sells out?
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Jan 9, 2006, 3:27 AM
Post #227 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
Just to note, last two times I bought small cams was at Rock and Snow - New Paltz - Gunks. Last year I bought three Zeros cause they didn't have the Alien I realy needed replaced. Then this fall I replaced one of those Zeroes and again R&S did not have an Alien so I picked up another Zero.
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Jan 9, 2006, 3:31 AM
Post #228 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
In reply to: waht does that mean? you figure its the same 200 climbers replacing their alien rack every year? thats why REI sells out?
Nope. Plenty of people like/want them, but if you go to any climbing area, how many aliens do you see on racks versus BD or Metolius? Not many. CCH makes great stuff, I love them. I will continue to buy them, and yes, I am very aware of the availability problems over the last year or so. My wife works at the local climbing shop, I've heard all about the constant calls to CCH inquiring about order status.
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 9, 2006, 4:02 AM
Post #229 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
sixleggedinsect, I think you must not have ever been in business. That's fine; it's not something everyone does. But the comments you made indicate that had you ever been, it's likely that it would have been one of those 99 out of 100 that fail in the first year.
You quoted me and "snipped" a paragraph that you felt didn't relate. It was an attempt to explain to you what a"limited market" is, as you mentioned that you couldn't understand how that could be the case.
You wrote:
[q]"what? selling all their stock costs money?"[/q]
Are you being fascetious? I don't catch your drift. What I meant was, once a company is unable to keep up with the demand, then the additional work needed to deal with requests the're unable to fill begins eating away at the profit margin for the inventory they DID sell. It seems to me that it is pretty clear that CCH hasn't been able to keep up with the demand. It's not as always as simple as "You want more? Well, here, let me make more!" A business can suffer heavily when unable to keep up with growth.
You wrote:
[q]"were you the person who repeatedly mentioned their small business in earlier posts? if so, did you consistently sell out of everything you could stock? were people hiring you for every hour you made available? i highly, HIGHLY doubt that you would complain if that were the case."[/q]
I may have been the person you refer to. I do have a small business. I don't stock a product, though; I sell a service. still, it relates. Have I had growth spurts that I could not handle taking on? Absolutely. Weere people hiring me every hour available. Yes, at times. And then some. You might say "well hires someone to help!" But, if the demand is temporary, sporadic and unable to be calculated, it makes the hiring a bit of a dificult proposition. After all, it sucks to be looking for work, get hired and then get laid off in short order because the work wasn't there to sustain the employee. I choose not to hire people and then fire them when I don't need them just so I can hear the sound of more coin jingling in my pocket. You say that you would "HIGHLY doubt" I would complain? Guess what - you would be wrong. It's not always about the money, honey(didn't intend that word to be in offense).
[q]every manufacturer has to deal with the same markups. its not like cch is the only company which has to sell to retailers at wholesale prices, and they sure aren't the folks with the most overhead.[/q]
How do you know? "The most overhead" isn't measured in dollars only. It is a percentage based on many variables.
[q]come to think of it, i wonder why cch (with its low output and high demand) doesnt drop the retailer contracts and sell direct to consumer. they could put an extra ten bucks a cam into quality control, and still have enough left over for imported beer and six salaried co-eds for order processing and PR.[/q]
Selling directly to consumers would INCREASE the cost per unit. Of course, instead of selling the unit to a retailer at $25(estimate), they would be selling it to you and I at $55. But no doubt, that $30 would not be going into their pocket. They would then have to pay a lot of additional costs.
What the fuck is a "salaried co-ed????" Six employees, at what.....$10 per hour, is $60(plus employers portion of SS, and benefits....and additional expenses, etc.). $60, an hour. To deal with a bunch of maroons like you and me. How many cams, exactly, are you imagining each of these six employees are processing....per hour, five days a week, for 35 hours a week?
Why CCH wouldn't do it....well, because it would be....a bad idea, probably.
I didn't write my original post to be nasty. I honestly was simply attempting to explain a concept that a lot of people don't understand. But I found the response you made to it to be depracating, arrogant and an indication of your ignorance.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 9, 2006, 4:37 AM
Post #230 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: In reply to: To make matters worse, we're a bunch of hard-headed dirtbags that are damn well going to climb anyway, so suddenly there will be a sharp increase in the number of climbing related injuries and deaths, with climbers that will risk run-outs, because they simply couldn't afford the additional cams that were necessary to sew up the route that ultimately cost them their lives. were climber injury stats significantly higher before active pro? id guess no (although it woudln't mean either of us are right). are you serious about this forecast? i think there would be a sharp increase in the number of people toproping;) |
|
|
|
|
tim
Jan 9, 2006, 5:24 AM
Post #231 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: sixleggedinsect, I think you must not have ever been in business. That's fine; it's not something everyone does. But the comments you made indicate that had you ever been, it's likely that it would have been one of those 99 out of 100 that fail in the first year.
Your statement above is equivalent to "1 out of 100 businesses survive for a year or more after opening". This has no basis in fact.
The conventional wisdom is that only about 20% of businesses remain in operation after a decade, with more than half closing in the first 4 years. A somewhat recent SBA study indicates that even this conventional wisdom may be overly conservative (the Small Business Administration, as you know, exists to make loans to small business owners, and its existence is predicated upon a reasonably low default rate for its loans).
Unless you're trolling, you might want to revise your figures, as their wild inaccuracy discredits everything else you have said (most of which I happen to agree with based on my own experience).
In reply to: What I meant was, once a company is unable to keep up with the demand, then the additional work needed to deal with requests the're unable to fill begins eating away at the profit margin for the inventory they DID sell. It seems to me that it is pretty clear that CCH hasn't been able to keep up with the demand. It's not as always as simple as "You want more? Well, here, let me make more!" A business can suffer heavily when unable to keep up with growth.
In terms of opportunity cost, this is clearly the case, but there is no law requiring businesses to fill all demand! Your example of not hiring employees to satisfy high demand illustrates your firm grasp of this.
In all likelihood, CCH would be better off burnishing their reputation for superior small cams at the expense of unfilled orders, than losing distributors or the trust of their customers in an embarassingly public fiasco. You cannot unring a bell, and a reputation for quality, built painstakingly over many years, can be heavily if not irreversibly damaged by a noteworthy example of systematic or semi-systematic neglect for QC. A brand name with a reputation for quality is a very valuable thing -- neglect it at your peril. Raising awareness for a new brand in a crowded market, or re-establishing legitimacy for a tarnished label, is a mighty undertaking.
Unfilled orders for a product in brisk demand are much, much better than a hasty attempt to meet demand, which jeopardizes the long-term value of the brand. The brand can be licensed to another company with better manufacturing facilities if preserved, but if those orders are filled with items of suspect quality, the value of the brand (probably the greatest asset CCH has) is likely to be eroded. That's really bad business.
Given your commentary on not hiring employees cyclically only to lay them off (an H&R Block staple, for example), it's tough for me to figure out why you would seem to support erosion of their long-term asset (brand identity) for a lesser short-term gain. Perhaps I'm not reading your post correctly.
In reply to: Selling directly to consumers would INCREASE the cost per unit. Of course, instead of selling the unit to a retailer at $25(estimate), they would be selling it to you and I at $55. But no doubt, that $30 would not be going into their pocket. They would then have to pay a lot of additional costs.
Why do you say this, and moreover, why do you imply the net per-unit cost would be near or above $30? In several other markets (admittedly, smaller or more specialized markets without a 600 lb. gorilla like REI), smaller firms selling Internet-direct have, improbably, survived and even flourished, selling high quality items at somewhat reduced margins by eliminating distributors. Whether it benefits the consumer is an open question (Mgear and REI having the resources to test units is an obvious plus, the expense of those resources, a minus), but the survival of the companies (eg. Hsu subwoofers, the first that comes to mind) indicates that this is not an un-tenable proposition. eBay is another avenue that is increasingly being used by firms with a savvy consumer base, and among climbing gear manufacturers, I would hazard a guess that CCH's may be the most singleminded in their pursuit of the desired product.
In reply to: Six employees, at what.....$10 per hour, is $60(plus employers portion of SS, and benefits....and additional expenses, etc.). $60, an hour.
One additional retail-price cam, or two eliminated overheads, per hour. For most widgets this would be a trivial cashflow, but for Aliens, maybe not. When a big company (within the industry) like BD brags about dropping $1 million on a CNC laser-cutting machine, you have to wonder about the market size, but it's possible that multiple Aliens are sold per hour.
I am fairly certain that you know optional employees are better recruited as 1099's (or as a 3rd-party PR firm, call center, whatever) than retained as a $90/hr ($3600/week) salaried unit. Whether the original poster realizes this, I'll bet you do. And I think that given CCH's established brand name and word-of-mouth marketing, they might do better as a result, regardless of whether they decide to hire PR people or customer service reps or whatever. This is clearly a boutique operation, and that's exactly the sort of company that has lately been able to pull off the direct-sales approach.
Unless you are privy to the details of their cash flow, it seems like we are all just speculating, but at least this way we can attach some numbers to it and narrow down a bit to the plausible.
Far more logical would be to outsource the QC to a 3rd party lab and then brag about their independently verified 3-sigma process. If the cash flow permits it, this seems like the easiest way to turn a potential disaster into a PR coup. If not, selling the brand and licensing the patents comes to mind.
In reply to: Why CCH wouldn't do it....well, because it would be....a bad idea, probably.
Could you elaborate? I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I don't see any evidence one way or the other, and for CCH to lose an REI distribution deal is at least as huge an opportunity cost as to outsource QA/QC to a 3rd party.
See above for the thought process; feel free to point out obvious logical flaws or inaccuracies.
I like Aliens, though they're wider than TCUs and perhaps less consistent than Camalots, Friends, or DMM products. They Just Work. However, my confidence that $45-60 per unit is money well spent has been somewhat shaken by these latest reports, and I would be more than happy to resume placing my trust in CCH cams, if only they'd handle the QA issue a bit more gracefully.
Ed Leeper issued what amounted to a recall on 20 years' worth of bolt hangers. If he can do it, and still retain his loyal (tiny) customer base, then I suspect CCH do so as well, assuming that this is even necessary. Cheaper still would be to determine what units might be defective, and deal with those individually in a limited recall -- again, assuming that a statistically significant sample can be obtained and tested. I suspect it can, and I suspect the cost is minimal compared to the FUD of this debacle.
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jan 9, 2006, 5:37 AM
Post #232 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: Keep in mind, that many of the companies that are already seeking certs and standardization, are owned by huge corporate conglomerates or like Trango, work with a manufacturing partner to defray costs. Quite possibly the best thing for CCH, would be to partner up w/ Trango and their Czech manufacturing partner.
This sure as hell seems like the logical strategy to me. Outsource manufacturing to one party, outsource QA to another, keep the patents and the brand name, and save yourself a lot of work...
Direct distribution (eg. eBay, letting the market equilibrate to the item's value) is another obvious avenue. Every time I see an Alien listed on eBay, used or new, it seems to sell for at or near retail. That's fucking amazing.
Man I hope they don't screw this up. They've got quite a racket if they just make a handful of good decisions; and depending on how long until their patent runs out, they can probably ride the gravy train for plenty long enough to survive.
JMHO
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 9, 2006, 5:43 AM
Post #233 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: I may have been the person you refer to. I do have a small business. I don't stock a product, though; I sell a service. still, it relates. I didn't write my original post to be nasty. I honestly was simply attempting to explain a concept that a lot of people don't understand. But I found the response you made to it to be depracating, arrogant and an indication of your ignorance.
There is a bit of a difference between booking time slots to take Snoopy for a stroll, and having to project sales far enough in advance to be able to order/receive/stock all of the raw materials necessary to manufacture and deliver a finished product. It's even worse when you have orders piling up and suddenly there are issues with your raw materials order (delivery issues, wrong materials received, employee shortages or illnesses, etc.). Now imagine that it has taken a couple months to work the bugs out, but during that time, orders have been canceled due to failure to deliver..? Suddenly you're sitting with inventoriable materials, be it raw or finished product, yet your revenue stream has dried up...
I had to sell a business in the aquatics industry because I was unable to keep up with the cost of production, and it was costing me money in the end. The reason being that I had to maintain adequate stock of materials to produce electronic controllers that retailed for $150, were sold to distributors for $90-$110 depending upon size of order, and cost me $65-$70 to manufacture, depending upon the cost of goods and size of order placed with my suppliers. If I was busting my ass and everything went smooth, I was able to turn out upwards of 20-25 units a week (not bad at all for a part-time home based business). Unfortunately though, my dealers and distributors paid on 30-45 day terms, therefore I was faced with having to burden the expenses, rather than working off of their money. As there was more and more commercial interest in my products, as well as requests for private labeling, I realized that I had to make a serious business decision... Unfortunately I waited too long, and the demand dropped off, thus I walked away with next to nothing, but at least I got out alive without having to dissolve the company, and my products continue to be manufactured (to my original specs) by another company.
I still own the rights to another line of products that I personally designed/manufactured/marketed within the firearms and outdoor industries several years back. Again, I'm no longer in a position to manufacture these, but I refuse to let this line go without substantial compensation. The main focus of this product line costs roughly $15 in raw materials & $10 in man hours to produce, retails for $100, and has been featured in Shotgun News magazine.
Unless you've been directly involved in a small manufacturing company w/ a niche product, you can't possibly begin to have a clue as to what's actually involved! Things like storm-related power outtages tend to render welding equipment and drill presses useless, and when you live in the sticks, it takes hours and even days to get power restored... That equates to costly downtime that customers could care less about! :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 9, 2006, 7:25 AM
Post #234 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
In reply to: In reply to: waht does that mean? you figure its the same 200 climbers replacing their alien rack every year? thats why REI sells out? Nope. Plenty of people like/want them, but if you go to any climbing area, how many aliens do you see on racks versus BD or Metolius? Not many. CCH makes great stuff, I love them. I will continue to buy them, and yes, I am very aware of the availability problems over the last year or so. My wife works at the local climbing shop, I've heard all about the constant calls to CCH inquiring about order status. Robert |
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Jan 9, 2006, 8:22 AM
Post #235 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
I personally just bought a set of Aliens from REI, instead of Climb Max (who I have worked for), which boast the Nations largest climbing supply, because Climb Max CAN'T GET ALIENS. PERIOD. The buyer is a friend of mine, and he wants them bad, but simply cant get them because of supply and demand in relation to honoring their previous contracts. REI and Mountain Soles has to strong of a contract, which makes it impossible for local stores to get a hold of them. Even when I went to REI I couldn't pick up every one I wanted because they where out, at both stores in my area.
My point is simply that CCH has the means to test their products more efficiently, their sales are strong enough and consistent enough. They could easily raise their prices to allow for funds to more adequately test their product. I personally would be happy to pay a few more dollars a piece to know that the gear I was buying was sound. Especially when I am paying $450 for a full set. I also think that the market reflects this as well. I don't think that this increased cost would hurt their business at all. They already can't fulfill the demand for their product.
|
|
|
|
|
socalclimber
Jan 9, 2006, 2:11 PM
Post #236 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437
|
In reply to: I don't want to start a fight, but I don't see many metolious cams around, exceot my own, which I like but don't love.
No problems. I should have re-worded that to "I see plenty of other cams on racks, just not that many aliens by comparison."
I really like the Metolius stuff in the small ranges, and BD for the larger ranges.
Robert
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 9, 2006, 3:57 PM
Post #237 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
Tim:
In reply to: Your statement above is equivalent to "1 out of 100 businesses survive for a year or more after opening". This has no basis in fact......Unless you're trolling, you might want to revise your figures, as their wild inaccuracy discredits everything else you have said (most of which I happen to agree with based on my own experience).
My bad. Splashing out numbers that I am remembering incorrectly. But I don't see a need to revise the post. You corrected it right away; it just shows my error is all. Not a big issue to me to be sen as being less than pristine.
In reply to: Given your commentary..... it's tough for me to figure out why you would seem to support erosion of their long-term asset (brand identity) for a lesser short-term gain. Perhaps I'm not reading your post correctly.
I think you do mistake something I wrote. I'm not in favor of the erosion of brand identity. In fact, I sort of wonder if the problems HAVE occurred because the company "rushed" to comply with demand. What I have been adamant about, is my distaste for people from the outside deciding that we know how someone else should run their business, when we have little to no insight into their daily operations. Probably I am reacting this way because I have seen my own similar problems. (Luckily, not in quality problems - I have always been able to do damage control when that occurred, and yes, I ran, not walked, to right any wrongs that occurred in my company - but plenty of problems nonetheless.) And particularly regarding growth and ability to sustain it. It's very tiring, to listen with feigned patience, about how I "should" do things and how simple it all would be, and why don't I such and such. The growth causes a lot of stress, and in the last year it also conflicts with some of my other desires. Yet, I need the income...vicious cycle!
I think I probably put way to much effort into this thread, simply because it reminds me of all the issues tapping at my own shoulder, whispering in my ear, taunting me in my sleep....Calgon - take me away! And I can't help but think(because of the numerous posts and conversations I've heard and read from people in a position to know) that is partially the situation with the company this thread is about.
In reply to: Why do you say this, and moreover, why do you imply the net per-unit cost would be near or above $30?
If a company sells product both at wholesale and retail, they need to keep the "suggested retail price" the same so they don't injure the business of their wholesale accounts. God, let's HOPE our gear suppliers don't cut out the retail stores, who provide such wonderful assistance. These small mom and pop gear stores are the ambassadors to the climbing community and many barely eek out a living. How many people stop in at Nomads to get the scoop on their first trip to JTree? To Rock and Snow when they're at the Gunks?
In reply to: Could you elaborate?
What other gear manufacturer do we know of that does do a direct-to-consumer, and not to retailers, do we know of? Of course, maybe someone will break the mold, go for the gold, and find it is the way to go. I just don't see that it is the case, but I am not the end-all, be-all of knowledge, despite the several insinuations that I see myself as such.
tgreene:
In reply to: ...lots of stuff he said, not needed to requote...
So.....I'm not talking completely out of my butt. Now I admit - I am not a business school-educated person; what I know, I learned from experience and interaction with others. And I know I tend to stat things very....adamantly... and this irritates people sometimes. Humility is a concept sometimes lost on me, I guess, and it comes out in posts, in spades, doesn't it!? But, I am okay with the occasional repartee. I'm not stating any of the things I say as an absolute, with regards to this thread. I just am putting out my opinion. Others have made cases for the opinions of QC, PR and...umm..I am lost for the word - when you retain the idea but someone else makes it - God, I hate getting old! And they have done so quite well, so I feel no compulsion to post about those topics. It doesn't mean I don't have an opinion....but, if I DID post on them, it would still boil down, for me, to "it's not OUR business(meaning the actual company) to be deciding these things!" That seems to be the issue that is speaking 'to me' about this whole fiasco.
Anyway - I should really step away from the keyboard now.....
|
|
|
|
|
nuts_r_us
Jan 9, 2006, 4:30 PM
Post #238 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2005
Posts: 172
|
In reply to: Anyway - I should really step away from the keyboard now.....
Yes please. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jan 9, 2006, 4:47 PM
Post #239 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: If a company sells product both at wholesale and retail, they need to keep the "suggested retail price" the same so they don't injure the business of their wholesale accounts.
Aside from REI, whose margins are unlikely to be eroded by this sort of thing (they still carried Boreal until very, very recently; Boreal is now legendary for their mistreatment of mom & pop shops), who would be hurt?
Nomad will stay in business till the bitter end. So will Rock & Snow, the Yosemite Mountain Shop, and Neptune's. But I'm afraid that the mom & pop shop is mostly doomed if they fail to adapt (case in point: Gear Express/Starved Rock, GearX/Burlington Gear Exchange, etc... all adapting).
CCH won't change that. It's not their responsibility to change it. Their only responsibility is to make money -- although it would be nice if the cams that they made bore some resemblance to the specifications ;-)
In reply to: I'm just guessing , for instance, that a company that doesn't have the facility(meaning wherewithal) to update their email addy on the website.....isn't going to be intrigued with the idea of managing a direct to consumer business.
Maybe they ought to license the brand if they don't want to do the whole "company filling orders" thing. Their patent and name is the real value of the company, and we all know it.
In reply to: What other gear manufacturer do we know of that does do a direct-to-consumer, and not to retailers, do we know of?
Black Diamond, for starters, does a direct-to-consumer model in addition to their usual distribution chain. Wild Things does it. So does Pika (bad example) and Vermin, with even smaller markets. I'm not saying it's the ''right'' model, but it does exist.
In reply to: ...if I DID post on them, it would still boil down, for me, to "it's not OUR business(meaning the actual company) to be deciding these things!" That seems to be the issue that is speaking 'to me' about this whole fiasco.
Amen. We're all just speculating; most of us out of genuine concern for a company whose products we believe in. It would suck for Aliens to go away.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 9, 2006, 5:56 PM
Post #241 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
No apology needed!
And for what it's worth....I really need to not to write any more posts in this thread......
|
|
|
|
|
goob3r
Jan 10, 2006, 8:55 PM
Post #242 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 6, 2006
Posts: 219
|
He was rather defensive in response... you'd think, knowing full well that people bought Alien products because they TRUST and KNOW them, that no one would be out to just ruin their rep.. unless of course we're talkin commercial competition here or something, in which case i'm in way over my head.. but.. for any other situation.. my god, dude from CCH needs to chill out and see that no one's attacking his company.. just giving rc.com a heads up on a possible product defect.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Jan 11, 2006, 7:20 AM
Post #243 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: My how things would be different if he said, 'never happened before. Please send us the cam ASAP, we'll investigate and report our findings.' If it was a hoax, cam never shows up. If its for real, CCH gets a chance to deal with it. When I seel guys like Malcom engage, share info, and by gawd stick up for CCH too while he's at it, and used to see Chris Harmston do the same for BD, I realize how much opportunity other manufacturers are missing out on; community service, customer support, fostering good will. I don't think it is wise at all for a vendor to be taking the 'dismissive' approach. DMT
Chris Harmstom was an amazing source of info, especially on Usenet.
I learned a lot from his post. One thing I learned most of all is all this SHITOLA about climbing gear is meant to never fail because someones life is on the line is BULLSHITOLA. He always was clear to state that climbing gear can and will fail and that it is just a tool to be used properly and aid in climbing safety. Furthermore, he added that no piece in the system should be relied upon solely.
I always laugh when people go "whats the point of having a rack of 16Kn cams if you don't fall on them" that 16Kn cam is my last resort to be used as rarely as possible. Staying on the rock or ice is your first margin of safety in the system, the gear is a last resort before hitting the ground.
But Dingus hit the nail on the head. Chris, Malcom and other gear designers, engineers, and even local retailers taking a proactive approach in this modern world is a good thing. These boards might be lame but they do offer an instaneous outlet for real advice and sometimes make you think about things beyond what you might have otherwise. I've learned a lot on these boards but never felt they were the word of god and don't blindly believe anything, but CCH's approach seems awful. Sadly I like CCH cams and own a few. I've never felt BD gear was the greatest but I was more apt to gravitate towards it when in doubt because of the great informative, no nonsense post by Chris Harmstom. Same thing with Rock and Snow in New Paltz because of Rich Gottliebs involvment on Gunks.com (and the fact that I find the shop to be amazingly honest when it comes to advice). CCH needs to either ignore these boards or do a better job with reacting to them. They also need to do a better job addressing if there is a hoax or a problem with the cam.
With that said I don't feel bad for the bashing CCH has gotten. On the flip side I feel like they've taken some abuse and possibly some hoaxes because they are a small but well admired company with a cultish following.
|
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Jan 12, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #244 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
So I just emailed REI today to try and get ahold of their buyer. I did this after I called and talked to the manager of my local store who knew nothing of the events. I wanted to post this so that you all can see what REI is doing about this, it is on all three forums relating to the issue. I was also wondering what any of you thought about what I am asking of REI. I typically am not their greatest fan, but figured that they would have the best bet of whipping CCH into shape. I hate to see their product go downhill. Anyway, this is what the email said.
Hello,
I am trying to get a hold of the buyer in charge of dealing with CCH and their product Aliens. They make a rock climbing cam that you sell.
Recently on Rockclimbing.com there has been an issue of strong concern regarding aliens. A person posted that he had one of his Aliens (Orange) fail on him at a very low impact. The cam cables separated at the point of the braze. This caused the cam to pretty much break. The customer posted this alarming incident online at the following thread.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=104150&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=0
This is how CCH responded to the claim.
The Silver brazed connections on Aliens are made by experienced ,skilled people who take great care in the quality of the braze. The accusations being made on this site are quite serious .
An examination by a certified metallurgical lab on the device in question is necessary in order to prove or disprove the claims made regarding alleged failure of the brazed connection. Without an actual report by a lab we will assume this is a staged hoax.
The cable on a 1.5 orange alien will hold over 3500 pounds, far more force than a falling climber could ever generate. When tested on a machine the cable will break ,not pull out of the cable eye.
David Waggoner at CCH
The thread where that post is made is http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=104279&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=0
Following the post made by Dave, there is 16 pages of outrage and concern made largely by CCH supporters who where offended at the response to the troubling situation.
In response to the post, Mountain Gear, who was following the thread, said that they decided to do a test of their own. After their test they found that 33% of the cams from random batches and sizes failed at a rate below the standard given to them by CCH.
The link to that thread is below
http://www.rockclimbing.com/topic/104768
The reason why I am writing is to try and get a hold of the buyer from REI to see if these issues have been brought to your attention.
I recently bought over $300 worth of CCH Aliens from your Portland Oregon, and Tualatin Oregon stores. I was wondering if you had the batch numbers that both of these stores have received so I could figure out what batch number my cams belonged to. Please check my account to see when I bought them if you need to, I don’t have the receipts, but it was about a week ago. I bought all of them except the blue and the yellow at Portland, and the blue and yellow I bought at Tualatin because Portland was out.
I was also wondering about your return policy on these items. REI dose have a 100% guarantee, but I am not positive that the guarantee applies to rock Protection, or climbing ropes and harnesses. This would be good to know.
I was wondering if you could look into the fiasco and see if a re-call is needed. Although I am a loyal member of the CCH cult (I love their cams) I do not feel safe with my purchase because of the recent failures. CCH has a history of not issuing recalls of defective gear even when the problems where brought to their attention. For an example, a few months ago there was an issue with the drilling of the Orange cam lobes. This resulted in the cams strength being compromised at best, and rendered useless at worse. There still has been no recall of these cams.
CCH currently dose not individually test their cams, and I hold the burden to pressure CCH into a policy of doing so in the hands of REI. It is not your responsibility to test their product, nor is it mine. (I do understand that my life is in my own hands while climbing and I will test my own gear before I use it, however, one should feel safe and assured that they are being sold quality product from a store as professional as yours. Asking CCH to test their product through the use of NDT (Non Destructive Testing) to make sure that it holds under reasonable situations would fulfill this requirement.)
I ask that the situation be looked into fully, and that REI plays a part in assuring its customers that the cams purchased from their stores are safe to climb with. If there is any compromise to safety through cam strength I ask that a recall be put into action.
I would also recommend that REI monitor the threads that I listed above. I would find it wise of you to make a post on each of these forms letting your customers know that you are doing everything in your power to assure your customers of their safety and the quality of the products that you are selling. Much like Mountain Gear has, and unlike CCH. I understand that these forms are not the arena for these proceeding to take place, however they are a great resource for communicating to the climbing community. Many are concerned, and there is talk of a massive boycott of CCH, possibly resulting in its termination.
I urge you to play a part in the forthcomings of these events, for the interest of yourself, climbers, and the community as a whole.
Sincerely,
Taylor Anderson
REI should respond by the end of tomorrow, and I will let you know what they have to say about it. They are still selling possibly defective cams, and their store managers are not aware of these issues.
|
|
|
|
|
subtle
Jan 12, 2006, 4:20 AM
Post #245 of 246
(41147 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2004
Posts: 438
|
I just sent an e-mail to REI's generic gear question address via their website. I got the following response within 1/2 hour. I'll just re-post the meat of the thing, in the interests of brevity:
"Thanks for contacting REI about your cams.
REI is currently investigating these cams but we do not have any specific details at this time. Please contact us in a couple of days, we should have an update from CCH at that time."
So, they seem to be aware and working on it, which is positive.
Allez. Homard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
