Re: Total Wreck! Clark Custom....
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Badmojo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My $0.02;
This post was far from bashing. What's hurting Clark's reputation at this point, is all of the little Clark defenders jumping up and pointing fingers at a Clark customer who paid good money for an inferior product. This topic would have had a far different tone.
This little Louisiana good ol' boys club believes in keeping everything a little secret for their own protection. Sorry to bring bad news, but that's not the way it works. In fact, I'm quite glad it wasn't kept secret. It brings to light their mistakes and if I ever choose Clark in the future, you can bet I will be mentioning SMACK's experience and will be almost guaranteed to have a working product when it arrives.
Companies make mistakes; and with mistakes come consequences. The right thing to do is fix the problem, not point fingers at the customer who paid good money to get screwed. You LA guys think it's not fair that he posted his experience (claiming prematurely), but somehow think it's fair for SMACK to waste his time and money? Funny how that works. Sounds a bit hypocritical and a wee bit liberal to me.
I live and breath information security and we have a very common principle in our line of business called 'full disclosure'. Every email, phone call, conversation, etc you can pretty much expect will be public domain, so you act and conduct business accordingly. Sure, we get black eyes every now and then, but it's the cost of doing business and only serves to increase the quality of our products and services going forward. You don't screw up a product and expect everyone to just 'accept' that things might not work as advertised the first time. Full disclosure hurts, but it's the incentive in a capitalist world to do things right the first time or _make_ it right++ the second time.
There is absolutely no requirement on the part of SMACK to have given anyone an opportunity to fix anything before he voices his opinion. In fact, he paid $1400 for his opinion and is clearly capable of sharing it wherever and however he likes. He does in fact have a right to voice his opinion and I personally think its humorous that a bunch of gun-toting / constitution defending LA gunsmiths think he needs a muzzle over his free-speech rights so they can fix a problem that they themselves engineered. A little self serving, don't ya think?
"hey! give us your money and sign this agreement that you can't say anything negative about our company, even if the delivered product is completely useless." -- then of course defend this pathetic ideology by telling us all it's the right thing to do, and do unto others as you would have others...
Business is business, get it right or get out.
~badmojo
</div></div>
Your $.02 is WAY overpriced.
This is not any kind of LA conspiracy. It just so happens that a great number of this country's most reputable smiths reside in the same state. In addition to being great smiths, the three mentioned or participating herein are not only top notch smiths with impeccable reputations, but also, without question the most generous and consistent supporters of shooting sports in time, money, innovation and participation as competitors.
These men are GENTLEMEN, plain and simple. And as a GENTLEMAN, you treat others as you would be treated. OP showed bad form in acting the cyber-DRAMA QUEEN before he gave the smith a chance to make right.
