[jmg257]

Non transfereable warranty IMO is discouraging resale and IMO should be a prohibited way of doing business.

And the encouraging of new sale (sure works for me for various items). And makes great sense when you consider a manufacturer has NO control over what some buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to dump it.

[eddie1960]

Like i said before this is not a new policy, In fact I don't remember it ever being different in the 25 or so years i worked retail in any category

[Rondec]

Like i said before this is not a new policy, In fact I don't remember it ever being different in the 25 or so years i worked retail in any category

The odd thing to me is that third party warranties aren't transferrable either and there is no particular reason, except that the third party companies want a way to get out of paying for warranty coverage.

[mrnotwo]

And the encouraging of new sale (sure works for me for various items). And makes great sense when you consider a manufacturer has NO control over what some buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to dump it.

Your second point is not valid as manufacturer has NO control over what original buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to ask for warranty service, either. Why would they care which lens owner is making the claim?

[jmg257]

Your second point is not valid as manufacturer has NO control over what original buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to ask for warranty service, either. Why would they care which lens owner is making the claim?

Most manufacturer's will however try to distinguish what are valid factory issues covered under warranty and what can be attributed to...user 'error'. Now they avoid this totally for 2nd hand gear, and a 2nd buyer wouldn't be very informed to know what caused HIS problems...a valid warranty case due to a factory flaw (that he could articulate if he was the only user ever), or the original purchaser doing something stupid like dropping his camera or mucking up the lens/sensor/whatever. What gets worse (though slightly unrelated) is when the equipment user goes online screaming how XXX company sucks because his (used) gear doesn't work properly when they have no idea why.

[monochrome]

And the encouraging of new sale (sure works for me for various items). And makes great sense when you consider a manufacturer has NO control over what some buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to dump it.

The odd thing to me is that third party warranties aren't transferrable either and there is no particular reason, except that the third party companies want a way to get out of paying for warranty coverage.

Your second point is not valid as manufacturer has NO control over what original buyer/user has done to their products before they decide to ask for warranty service, either. Why would they care which lens owner is making the claim?

Legally a warranty is a contract between a buyer and a seller. If the seller is the manufacturer of a product the warranty has a cost that is reflected in the cost accounting for corporate profit and loss at the time of intermediate sale (wholesale). The expected actual expense related to repairs under warranty must be reserved in some fashion and that reserved capital cannot by deployed to earn a higher return.

Desiring to earn the highest prudent return, manufacturers establish warranty terms to suit the product and target final buyer using cost-benefit analysis tools. A manufactuer is under no legal obligation to offer any warranty contract under unlimited terms, transferability to a different buyer or any other benefit beyond that which offers the best relationship between cost and profit (to the manufacturer), though in certain countries they may be subject to regulatory requirements thereto - which they price into the item.

A warranty is not a consumer entitlement - it is a feature of the product you buy, for which you pay. If you want Pentax to offer something closer to Nikon's 5-year warranty on their lenses, expect to pay something closer to Nikon's prices for their lenses.

[glanglois]

And the cat has been released amongst the pigeons once again .....

Nicely done!

---

Last edited by glanglois; 05-11-2012 at 11:07 AM.

[ElJamoquio]

I agree, quite skillful, monochrome.

[jmg257]

Legally a warranty is a contract between a buyer and a seller. If the seller is the manufacturer of a product the warranty has a cost that is reflected in the cost accounting for corporate profit and loss at the time of intermediate sale (wholesale). The expected actual expense related to repairs under warranty must be reserved in some fashion and that reserved capital cannot by delpoyed to earn a higher return.

Desiring to earn the highest prudent return, manufacturers establish warranty terms to suit the product and target final buyer using cost-benefit analysis tools. A manufactuer is under no legal obligation to offer any contract under unlimited terms, transferability to a different buyer or any other benefit beyond that which offers the best relationship between cost and profit (to the manufacturer), though in certain countries they may be subject to regulatory requirements thereto - which they price into the item.

A warranty is not a consumer entitlement - it is a feature of the product you buy, for which you pay. If you want Pentax to offer a something closer to Nikon's 5-year warranty on their lenses, expect to pay something closer to Nikon prices for thier lenses.

Excellent explanation!

[mrnotwo]

... If you want Pentax to offer a something closer to Nikon's 5-year warranty on their lenses, expect to pay something closer to Nikon prices for thier lenses.

I'd gladly pay less to get more warranty

[eddie1960]

I'd gladly pay less to get more warranty

apples to apples Nikon is not cheaper
they do have a broader assortment though

[mecrox]

And the cat has been released amongst the pigeons once again .....

Nicely done!

Well, that depends on the size of the cat Ricoh have in the game. Some cats, on being released, take one look at the pigeons and race straight back inside the bag, thoroughly intimidated. And pigeons with Nikon five-year warranties are big mofos which hunt in packs. There's not much point in half measures here. I reckon Ricoh should come along with a big bag and let out a lion.

[StepOne]

Legally a warranty is a contract between a buyer and a seller. If the seller is the manufacturer of a product the warranty has a cost that is reflected in the cost accounting for corporate profit and loss at the time of intermediate sale (wholesale). The expected actual expense related to repairs under warranty must be reserved in some fashion and that reserved capital cannot by deployed to earn a higher return.

Desiring to earn the highest prudent return, manufacturers establish warranty terms to suit the product and target final buyer using cost-benefit analysis tools. A manufactuer is under no legal obligation to offer any warranty contract under unlimited terms, transferability to a different buyer or any other benefit beyond that which offers the best relationship between cost and profit (to the manufacturer), though in certain countries they may be subject to regulatory requirements thereto - which they price into the item.

A warranty is not a consumer entitlement - it is a feature of the product you buy, for which you pay. If you want Pentax to offer something closer to Nikon's 5-year warranty on their lenses, expect to pay something closer to Nikon's prices for their lenses.

I'm sure it is a very good legal explanation of what a warranty is. But, at least how i see it, is a pile of bullsh**. Legal is getting further from "right" and "moral" each day...

As i see it, you are buying a product that is supposed to work at least few years. If the product fail to perform because of some build weakness, it is only the manufacturer to be blamed. It has no importance who is using the item, original buyer or somebody else.

Manufacturer got payed, and the product should work as advertised. Who is using it has no importance.

[chesebert]

Legally a warranty is a contract between a buyer and a seller. If the seller is the manufacturer of a product the warranty has a cost that is reflected in the cost accounting for corporate profit and loss at the time of intermediate sale (wholesale). The expected actual expense related to repairs under warranty must be reserved in some fashion and that reserved capital cannot by deployed to earn a higher return.

Desiring to earn the highest prudent return, manufacturers establish warranty terms to suit the product and target final buyer using cost-benefit analysis tools. A manufactuer is under no legal obligation to offer any warranty contract under unlimited terms, transferability to a different buyer or any other benefit beyond that which offers the best relationship between cost and profit (to the manufacturer), though in certain countries they may be subject to regulatory requirements thereto - which they price into the item.

A warranty is not a consumer entitlement - it is a feature of the product you buy, for which you pay. If you want Pentax to offer something closer to Nikon's 5-year warranty on their lenses, expect to pay something closer to Nikon's prices for their lenses.

Not accurate!

Please consider implied warranty of merchantability and fitness. These are warranties recognized under the U.S. common laws that are attached to every product sold by every manufacturer/builder, whether or not the manufacturer/builder has a "warranty" policy, unless, I believe, the manufacturer expressly, clearly, in bold 30pt font, state that it is disclaiming any such implied warranties (e.g., by stating "AS IS" or "CAVEAT EMPTOR").


Ok, I made the 30pt font bit up

[monochrome]

Not accurate!

Please consider implied warranty of merchantability and fitness. These are warranties recognized under the U.S. common laws that are attached to every product sold by every manufacturer/builder, whether or not the manufacturer/builder has a "warranty" policy, unless, I believe, the manufacturer expressly, clearly, in bold 30pt font, state that it is disclaiming any such implied warranties (e.g., by stating "AS IS" or "CAVEAT EMPTOR").


Ok, I made the 30pt font bit up

Pentax Lenses carry an express 1 Year Warranty in the United States.

In the United States, the law is derived from four sources. These four sources are constitutional law, statutory law, administrative regulations, and the common law (which includes case law). When applying the common law to a claim of obligation please cite your case law precendents as they apply to the manufacturer of a consumer item who has no intent to defraud a consumer.

An express (or even an implied) warranty has a cost, a price and a value. Given equivalent capabilities, in a court of American law, a strong case could be made that at their recent prices when compared to equivalent Nikon and Canon lenses, a consumer should have had no expectation of implied warranty beyond the express 1 Year Warranty.