Pentax Extended Warranty limitations

Not a Number · 12-31-2020, 07:56 AM

I wonder what the rationale is behind this? Perhaps people were buying the extended warranty to try to cover grey market cameras and/or protect a revenue stream for the dealers. I wonder what profit margin is for the dealers.

tibbitts · 12-31-2020, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by Not a Number

I wonder what the rationale is behind this? Perhaps people were buying the extended warranty to try to cover grey market cameras and/or protect a revenue stream for the dealers. I wonder what profit margin is for the dealers.

I agree, I don't understand why it would matter to Ricoh US as long as the camera and extended warranty both came from an authorized reseller. It's not protecting a revenue stream for dealers, since both products have always been required to come from an authorized retailer as far as I know. So one authorized dealer or another would be getting the business. The rep mentioned that sometimes the warranties are being bundled with the cameras, which I haven't noticed, but whatever... it still doesn't seem like a wise policy, especially since the change from the previous policy hasn't seem to be too well publicized.

Michael Piziak · 03-14-2021, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by tibbitts

Maybe this has been discussed here, but today I learned from contacting Ricoh USA that unlike in the past (which for me would be my experience with the K-5 generation Pentax extended warranties):

1. DSLR warranties must now be purchased from the same authorized retailer as a camera you want it to be applied to. And still within 30 days of camera purchase of course. The sme-retailer requirement was extremely surprising to me, but I double-checked (and so did the Ricoh representative) and that is the current USA warranty policy. So buying your camera from, say, Adorama, and your warranty from B&H (actually the only retailer where I've found the current Ricoh warranty product offering for Pentax dSLRs) won't benefit you in any way.

2. The older extended warranties (the ones that used to cost $20, and now are commonly sold for $10-$15) that are still being sold new by some authorized Pentax retailers won't be honored.

Perhaps other will agree with me when I call this move by Ricoh to be

a BIG B.S. move!

Wheatfield · 04-16-2021, 07:39 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by tibbitts

I agree, I don't understand why it would matter to Ricoh US as long as the camera and extended warranty both came from an authorized reseller. It's not protecting a revenue stream for dealers, since both products have always been required to come from an authorized retailer as far as I know. So one authorized dealer or another would be getting the business. The rep mentioned that sometimes the warranties are being bundled with the cameras, which I haven't noticed, but whatever... it still doesn't seem like a wise policy, especially since the change from the previous policy hasn't seem to be too well publicized.

Do remember that an "authorized reseller" in Hong Kong, for example, is not an authorized reseller in the USA. I expect the loophole they are closing is warrantying a product they didn't sell.

When I was selling cameras several decades ago, there was quite a price discrepancy between USA pricing and Canada pricing and our dollars were very close to par. Consequently, people were buying cameras from places like B&H photo or Adorama and then expecting the Canadian distributor to honor the foreign warranty on what was to them grey market equipment.
People were very miffed when they were informed that their camera purchased out of country was grey market, and their warranty was with a foreign distributor, so if they wanted warranty service, they had to deal with the foreign reseller, but that was how the Canadian distributors did things. They simply wouldn't warrant, or even touch cameras that they hadn't sold as they had no way of recovering the cost of repairs. Canon USA, for example, would not pay Canon Canada to fix a broken camera.
This applied to almost all of the manufacturers that we dealt with, which at the time were Pentax, Yashica, Nikon, Canon and Minolta
The notable exception was Pentax, who at the time sold equipment with an international warranty.

---------- Post added Apr 16th, 2021 at 08:40 AM ----------

Originally posted by Michael Piziak

Perhaps other will agree with me when I call this move by Ricoh to be

a BIG B.S. move!

Some might, people who think a little deeper probably won't.

Last edited by Wheatfield; 04-16-2021 at 11:20 AM.

tibbitts · 04-18-2021, 08:37 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Do remember that an "authorized reseller" in Hong Kong, for example, is not an authorized reseller in the USA. I expect the loophole they are closing is warrantying a product they didn't sell.

I don't believe that's the issue, because it's no different than the warranty on the product itself: Ricoh/Pentax makes it clear that the warranty, and the warranty extension, is only valid if purchased from an authorized retailer in the applicable region, and the extension only applies to the terms of the original warranty. So if the original warranty isn't valid, the extension wouldn't be either. The "fine print" wouldn't be any more or less complex or more of a deterrent than for any other product. But I still haven't found any written documentation stating the warranty extension has to be purchased from the same retailer as the product.

Wheatfield · 04-22-2021, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by tibbitts

I don't believe that's the issue, because it's no different than the warranty on the product itself: Ricoh/Pentax makes it clear that the warranty, and the warranty extension, is only valid if purchased from an authorized retailer in the applicable region, and the extension only applies to the terms of the original warranty. So if the original warranty isn't valid, the extension would be either. The "fine print" wouldn't be any more or less complex or more of a deterrent than for any other product. But I still haven't found any written documentation stating the warranty extension has to be purchased from the same retailer as the product.

What you believe is less important that why they have done what they did. I presented a simple scenario that would be open to abuse.
Any time a company modifies a customer facing policy, it is because the policy as it stands is being abused in some way.
You can make up any scenario you like, but make sure it fits the overarching reason for why the policies get changed rather than coming up with some conspiracy theory that defies any sort of logic.

tibbitts · 04-23-2021, 03:11 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

What you believe is less important that why they have done what they did. I presented a simple scenario that would be open to abuse.
Any time a company modifies a customer facing policy, it is because the policy as it stands is being abused in some way.
You can make up any scenario you like, but make sure it fits the overarching reason for why the policies get changed rather than coming up with some conspiracy theory that defies any sort of logic.

My "conspiracy theory"? I think I made it clear that I have no idea why the policy was implemented. And you've made it very clear that you don't either.

Wheatfield · 04-23-2021, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by tibbitts

My "conspiracy theory"? I think I made it clear that I have no idea why the policy was implemented. And you've made it very clear that you don't either.

Actually, it's pretty apparent that they closed a loophole that was being abused. Thats why companies do these things. Believe it or not, companies know that as a general rule, they want to avoid irritating their customers.
So, what was it that the loophole allowed again?

tibbitts · 04-23-2021, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Actually, it's pretty apparent that they closed a loophole that was being abused. Thats why companies do these things. Believe it or not, companies know that as a general rule, they want to avoid irritating their customers.
So, what was it that the loophole allowed again?

It's pretty simple: even as you say back in the film era the vast majority warranties always worked the same way. Some percentage of customers will always be unhappy with no justification. If you buy a Ricoh/Pentax USA product and a Ricoh/Pentax USA warranty from an authorized Ricoh/Pentax USA retailer, you should be good to go. When we had the choice to buy the USA product for $150 or the gray-market for $125, the vast majority of consumers understood what the difference was. Certainly some people bought the cheaper product believing they could convince the distributor to bend the rules by claiming ignorance, but you can't please all the people all the time.

What you're referring to would apply if the product specified the warranty terms in a confusing or misleading or incomplete manner. For example, the Ponderosa Steakhouse Christmas promotion problem, where the terms included with the coupons you obtained in the 1980s would (if you could find a Ponderosa Steak House today) still in theory let you buy your all-you-could-eat lunch for $2.99US. But if that had been a problem with a generation of warranty products, the solution wouldn't be to eliminate the products, it would be to fix them to eliminate the problem. After all we're only talking about printing on a little card, not redesigning an electrical or mechanical component. Not selling the product in the future won't help with defects that may or may not exist with products already produced.

04-18-2021, 08:37 PM	#20
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196 Original Poster	Originally posted by Wheatfield Do remember that an "authorized reseller" in Hong Kong, for example, is not an authorized reseller in the USA. I expect the loophole they are closing is warrantying a product they didn't sell. I don't believe that's the issue, because it's no different than the warranty on the product itself: Ricoh/Pentax makes it clear that the warranty, and the warranty extension, is only valid if purchased from an authorized retailer in the applicable region, and the extension only applies to the terms of the original warranty. So if the original warranty isn't valid, the extension wouldn't be either. The "fine print" wouldn't be any more or less complex or more of a deterrent than for any other product. But I still haven't found any written documentation stating the warranty extension has to be purchased from the same retailer as the product. Last edited by tibbitts; 04-23-2021 at 03:09 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Value of extended warranty	Itbejames	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	06-06-2020 07:32 PM
Catch in focus limitation	lotech	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	01-19-2020 04:06 PM
Ricoh/Pentax 2 year Extended Warranty - Digital Camera Body - $ 15 (Tri-State)	phillydad	Pentax Price Watch	6	07-01-2019 01:47 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 HSM-II APO EX DC lens for Pentax w/ Extended Warranty	Edgar_in_Indy	Sold Items	3	03-09-2019 12:17 PM
Pentax warranty and extended warranty eligibilty	rrwilliams64	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	01-31-2014 05:14 PM

12-31-2020, 07:56 AM	#16
Not a Number Moderator Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Venice, CA Posts: 10,526	I wonder what the rationale is behind this? Perhaps people were buying the extended warranty to try to cover grey market cameras and/or protect a revenue stream for the dealers. I wonder what profit margin is for the dealers.

12-31-2020, 11:13 AM	#17
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196 Original Poster	Originally posted by Not a Number I wonder what the rationale is behind this? Perhaps people were buying the extended warranty to try to cover grey market cameras and/or protect a revenue stream for the dealers. I wonder what profit margin is for the dealers. I agree, I don't understand why it would matter to Ricoh US as long as the camera and extended warranty both came from an authorized reseller. It's not protecting a revenue stream for dealers, since both products have always been required to come from an authorized retailer as far as I know. So one authorized dealer or another would be getting the business. The rep mentioned that sometimes the warranties are being bundled with the cameras, which I haven't noticed, but whatever... it still doesn't seem like a wise policy, especially since the change from the previous policy hasn't seem to be too well publicized.

03-14-2021, 06:52 PM	#18
Michael Piziak Closed Account Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: West Virginia Posts: 2,815	Originally posted by tibbitts Maybe this has been discussed here, but today I learned from contacting Ricoh USA that unlike in the past (which for me would be my experience with the K-5 generation Pentax extended warranties): 1. DSLR warranties must now be purchased from the same authorized retailer as a camera you want it to be applied to. And still within 30 days of camera purchase of course. The sme-retailer requirement was extremely surprising to me, but I double-checked (and so did the Ricoh representative) and that is the current USA warranty policy. So buying your camera from, say, Adorama, and your warranty from B&H (actually the only retailer where I've found the current Ricoh warranty product offering for Pentax dSLRs) won't benefit you in any way. 2. The older extended warranties (the ones that used to cost $20, and now are commonly sold for $10-$15) that are still being sold new by some authorized Pentax retailers won't be honored. Perhaps other will agree with me when I call this move by Ricoh to be a BIG B.S. move!

04-16-2021, 07:39 AM - 1 Like	#19
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	Originally posted by tibbitts I agree, I don't understand why it would matter to Ricoh US as long as the camera and extended warranty both came from an authorized reseller. It's not protecting a revenue stream for dealers, since both products have always been required to come from an authorized retailer as far as I know. So one authorized dealer or another would be getting the business. The rep mentioned that sometimes the warranties are being bundled with the cameras, which I haven't noticed, but whatever... it still doesn't seem like a wise policy, especially since the change from the previous policy hasn't seem to be too well publicized. Do remember that an "authorized reseller" in Hong Kong, for example, is not an authorized reseller in the USA. I expect the loophole they are closing is warrantying a product they didn't sell. When I was selling cameras several decades ago, there was quite a price discrepancy between USA pricing and Canada pricing and our dollars were very close to par. Consequently, people were buying cameras from places like B&H photo or Adorama and then expecting the Canadian distributor to honor the foreign warranty on what was to them grey market equipment. People were very miffed when they were informed that their camera purchased out of country was grey market, and their warranty was with a foreign distributor, so if they wanted warranty service, they had to deal with the foreign reseller, but that was how the Canadian distributors did things. They simply wouldn't warrant, or even touch cameras that they hadn't sold as they had no way of recovering the cost of repairs. Canon USA, for example, would not pay Canon Canada to fix a broken camera. This applied to almost all of the manufacturers that we dealt with, which at the time were Pentax, Yashica, Nikon, Canon and Minolta The notable exception was Pentax, who at the time sold equipment with an international warranty. ---------- Post added Apr 16th, 2021 at 08:40 AM ---------- Originally posted by Michael Piziak Perhaps other will agree with me when I call this move by Ricoh to be a BIG B.S. move! Some might, people who think a little deeper probably won't. Last edited by Wheatfield; 04-16-2021 at 11:20 AM.

04-22-2021, 08:26 PM	#21
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	Originally posted by tibbitts I don't believe that's the issue, because it's no different than the warranty on the product itself: Ricoh/Pentax makes it clear that the warranty, and the warranty extension, is only valid if purchased from an authorized retailer in the applicable region, and the extension only applies to the terms of the original warranty. So if the original warranty isn't valid, the extension would be either. The "fine print" wouldn't be any more or less complex or more of a deterrent than for any other product. But I still haven't found any written documentation stating the warranty extension has to be purchased from the same retailer as the product. What you believe is less important that why they have done what they did. I presented a simple scenario that would be open to abuse. Any time a company modifies a customer facing policy, it is because the policy as it stands is being abused in some way. You can make up any scenario you like, but make sure it fits the overarching reason for why the policies get changed rather than coming up with some conspiracy theory that defies any sort of logic.

04-23-2021, 03:11 PM	#22
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196 Original Poster	Originally posted by Wheatfield What you believe is less important that why they have done what they did. I presented a simple scenario that would be open to abuse. Any time a company modifies a customer facing policy, it is because the policy as it stands is being abused in some way. You can make up any scenario you like, but make sure it fits the overarching reason for why the policies get changed rather than coming up with some conspiracy theory that defies any sort of logic. My "conspiracy theory"? I think I made it clear that I have no idea why the policy was implemented. And you've made it very clear that you don't either.

04-23-2021, 03:19 PM	#23
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,991	Originally posted by tibbitts My "conspiracy theory"? I think I made it clear that I have no idea why the policy was implemented. And you've made it very clear that you don't either. Actually, it's pretty apparent that they closed a loophole that was being abused. Thats why companies do these things. Believe it or not, companies know that as a general rule, they want to avoid irritating their customers. So, what was it that the loophole allowed again?

04-23-2021, 06:00 PM	#24
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196 Original Poster	Originally posted by Wheatfield Actually, it's pretty apparent that they closed a loophole that was being abused. Thats why companies do these things. Believe it or not, companies know that as a general rule, they want to avoid irritating their customers. So, what was it that the loophole allowed again? It's pretty simple: even as you say back in the film era the vast majority warranties always worked the same way. Some percentage of customers will always be unhappy with no justification. If you buy a Ricoh/Pentax USA product and a Ricoh/Pentax USA warranty from an authorized Ricoh/Pentax USA retailer, you should be good to go. When we had the choice to buy the USA product for $150 or the gray-market for $125, the vast majority of consumers understood what the difference was. Certainly some people bought the cheaper product believing they could convince the distributor to bend the rules by claiming ignorance, but you can't please all the people all the time. What you're referring to would apply if the product specified the warranty terms in a confusing or misleading or incomplete manner. For example, the Ponderosa Steakhouse Christmas promotion problem, where the terms included with the coupons you obtained in the 1980s would (if you could find a Ponderosa Steak House today) still in theory let you buy your all-you-could-eat lunch for $2.99US. But if that had been a problem with a generation of warranty products, the solution wouldn't be to eliminate the products, it would be to fix them to eliminate the problem. After all we're only talking about printing on a little card, not redesigning an electrical or mechanical component. Not selling the product in the future won't help with defects that may or may not exist with products already produced.