 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2002-03-13 19:40
To those of you who participated in the Rosewood on eBay thread: Thanks for all the input--both encouraging and discouaging about my situation with my instrument. As you know, I have been having to pay for some of my elderly parents' nursing care and needed to sell the instrument rather than have to pay off the balance on my credit card for this expensive clarinet. I did find a buyer and he's a very, very nice gentleman who is so excited about having it that it's rewarding in and of itself---even if I did loose $1,100.00 on it.
I apologize for getting so worked up about this. Sandra posted the topic and I don't know her at all. Suddenly it became like some sort of "quest" for her to help me sell it. I think that's why she kept bidding on it. Anyway, it probably wasn't a good idea for her to do that, or promote it on the board--but that's not up to me. I got involved in the discussion because I felt I needed to put some correct information out there on this specific instrument.
As I've read the posts, I really got a bit teary-eyed over this one:
<Brenda,
From comments you made either in another message to the board, or your ad in the Sneezy classifieds and your eBay ad, I knew the general background behind your selling of this clarinet. What disappoints me most in this story is that, considering all the business you have given International and all the business you have sent their way, they (Lisa?) apparently couldn't see fit to cut you some slack on their return deadline this time, given your circumstances. As near as I can tell from your comments, you missed their 30-day return deadline by a couple of weeks. Even if they had imposed their 20% late fee, you would have been even with your buy-it-now price. However, considering how good a customer you've been (based on your reply to HAT above), I think it would have been smart business for them to waive their restocking fee, entirely. To say that I am disappointed in their inflexibility is a gross understatement.
Best regards,
jnk>
I had the instrument exactly 6 days too long. And, I had originally sent it back for adjustments and told a rep. (I won't name names) that I just wanted to return it since I really didn't have time to play it because my mother-in-law was not expected to live but another week (yes, I had all 3 old people in crisis at the same time). It was suggested I let them "overhaul" it and send it back to me--on approval of course. So, I agreed against my better judgement. I liked it a lot better when they sent it back (Jan. 10,2002), but had to take care of my mother 24 hrs. a day while my dad was in the hospital so I forgot about my time limit on getting it back. When I realized I didn't like it $3,795.00 worth PLUS the nursing care for my mom--I called and was told it was considered sold since I had had it more than 30 days.
Yes, I agree jnk, but I complied with the rules and took my hit. I won't be buying anything for a long, long time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2002-03-13 20:53
Hmmm.......
Maybe I don't like IMS as much as I though I did.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-03-13 21:41
"...I complied with the rules..."
What an awful postscript to this situation, reminiscent of "I was only following orders." From either side of the fence it's very sad, unfortunate, and lacking in consideration of humanity.
In his book *Up the Organization* Robert Townsend makes it crystal clear that no company can have a human face while slavishly following rules. He suggests instead operating only with guidelines, which must be be flexible enough to apply reasonably in all situations. Otherwise, we are reduced to machines.
I await receipt of Lucifer's meteorological status report indicating a temperature lower than 5ºC prior to placement of any order with IMS.
Regards,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2002-03-13 22:39
Brenda - I read your Rosewood thread, but made not comment. I can only say - I'm sorry to hear of the outcome of this and I certainly hope that you move on to the next chapter in your life and forget this.
I appreciate your wisdom and read your threads with interest, you're obviously a highly talented woman and it shows.
take care - diz
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-03-14 14:10
Brenda, sorry to hear about your experience. Mine was similar but didn't cost as much. I have always liked the expression "screw me once, shame on you; screw me twice, shame on me". For bb members who are offended by my quote may I offer that other synonyms just don't do justice to the quote....or the experience.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: William
Date: 2002-03-14 15:17
I used to give Biehoff Music, in Milwaukee, all of my schools printed music business--until they added twenty bari sax technique books to an order for only two, saying that "it was the publishers requirement for a minimum order" (or something like that). It has been 35 yrs since that incident, and I made other music store thousands of dollars richer in published music sales. Beihoff's is an old and good name in Milwaukee's musical, educational and business heritage, they are still in business and, hopefully, their ordering policies have changed--however, I have just never bothered to return and find out. BTW, I never encountered that "publishers requirement" anywhere else where my school did business. "Had it" once, but not twice. "Power to the Customers!!!!" Good Clarineting!!!!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Brenda Siewert
Date: 2002-03-14 15:52
I really don't have bad things to say about IMS. I've always had good results with them and they've bent over backward to get me good instruments. I really like Lisa and think she tries hard to please her customers. The 30 day limit on taking back and instrument is an upfront rule. I really shouldn't have even expected them to take the instrument back after that period of time. Also, there's the possibility that their records showed the first time they sent the instrument out to me rather than the second as the time of purchase. If that is true, then it was more like 60 days.
After all, business is business---and a Symphonie VII is a hunk of change for any business person.
I'll continue to buy clarinets from IMS--and continue to recommend them to others. I wish they would have made an exception in my case, but I really, really do understand why they didn't. I just shouldn't have let myself be talked into taking it back the second time for a trial period.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: JMcAulay
Date: 2002-03-14 16:33
"Yes, I know you've been hospitalized for the last two weeks, but the loan agreement is clear: payment must be made by the tenth, or there will be a late fee. So you've just got to pay it. Please realize there's nothing personal about this, Mother."
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2002-03-14 16:35
Hi All! I'm a clarinetist and a business owner. This is a tough call. A big company works on volume. I work as a small entrepreneurial business. There has to be a limit, and a big company tends to "go by the books", especially when the boss delegates to subordinates and cannot be present for every transaction, decision, and conversation. I've made exceptions to my own rules as a business owner, but remember, we are entitled to make a profit. Any business for which all you must work has to pay your salaries. If all businesses made exceptions there would be no profit. An item out for 30 or 60 days, is an item that is nonprofitable if it is returned. Once I had a man try to return a year-old paperback book because the binding broke! Though that's extreme, he was disgruntled and never came back. I sympathize with Brenda. If Lisa at IMS handled the phone call personally (which she cannot physically always do...I know!) the outcome may have been different. I know that caring for needy people, incredibly Brenda had 3 to care for, is time consuming and overwhelming. Kudo's to Brenda.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-03-15 13:04
Sandra: Neither you nor any other business owner is entitled to anything other than attempting to stay in business by attracting and keeping customers. When you alienate a customer you've started to dig your hole. There are some owners of businesses who may be excellent musicians but who don't have a clue about how how handle customers.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob
Date: 2002-03-15 13:08
Brenda: your mistake was thinking she was your friend. p.s. you were whining.....imho.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2002-03-15 14:17
So, Bob, who do you work for? (That's a rhetorical question.) You obviously do work for someone else and not for yourself. It took me YEARS to understand and accept the fact that I needed to make a profit. There is no other way to stay in business! I bend over backwards for customers; however, the customer IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT! Think, again, Bob, "the customer is always right" is the "American Way" which is quite hedonistic. People need to think and take responsibility for themselves. If you break a book binding because you abused the book you take responsibility for it. Brenda did just that. Your stinging remarks are indications of ignorance (just not having knowledge, not harsh judgement of you) of how business works. Sole proprietorships are very much different that large corporations. Retail is a tough, tough business. Watch your tongue until you have walked in those shoes. I still say kudos to Brenda. So, why don't we stop here and go play some clarinet music?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fred
Date: 2002-03-16 00:18
I have heard on numerous occasions of manufacturers that honored warranty claims which developed a reasonable time after the expiration date - including cracked clarinets. I myself have had a basketball backboard replaced even though I couldn't find my receipt to prove date of purchase. In cases like that, I look at those businesses with added respect and become more likely to purchase from them again. Those that go by the letter of the contract face increased competition for the next purchasing decision.
Many businesses, including IMS, get free advertisement on this bb through the posts of delightfully satisfied users. It is the kind of advertising that money can't buy - one consumer telling another how well they were treated. I believe that it was a bad BUSINESS DECISION to not accept the return. The message has been sent that IMS goes by the letter of the contract. No customer loyalty, reputation, or circumstance is to interfere with that premise.
Therefore, if no favor is to be expected, expect none to be given.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2002-03-16 00:36
Fred et al.,
There's always two sides to every story. IMS has not given theirs; and in fact may chose not to.
But there is another side ...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sandra F. H.
Date: 2002-03-16 04:16
That's right, Mark! And...IMS may not even be aware of the thread. If Brenda felt that she wass wronged, she could have gone directly to the company herself again. Also, approaching businesses with a problem is a matter of attitude, as well. If one calls a voice mail and leaves foul language, for example, it's unlikely that a return call will be honored. Another amazing thing that I've found is the inability to return phone calls, because the caller's name is not discernable or the phone number is not discernable or even missing. Letter-writing is even better! I have few problems in my business and have earned a good reputation. However, the negative comes when there is talk-bordering-on-gossip, that can hurt hard-earned reputations. If IMS saw these threads, there very well could, indeed be another story for some of the things brought out. Brenda handled things very well and in a manner that she thought was best. I still say "Kudos".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
