Yes, absolutely Seiko's fault. Putting blame at people's feet because "they should've known better than to ___" is a slippery slope that ends up in some ugly places.TheJohnP wrote:All I am implying is it seems everyone either complains and/or jokes about alignment issues with Seiko. But continue to buy them. Does the fault fall to Seiko?peskydonut wrote: ↑Sat Jul 25, 2020 3:30 pmI'm not sure what "buyer's rationale" there is to speak of. The rationale is the same as when you go to the grocery store and expect the food that you buy to not be spoiled or expecting the car that you purchase to be without flaws. The baseline expectation is to exchange money for goods; goods that are provided as advertised.TheJohnP wrote:
From a business perspective they see no need to improve as long as they keep moving product.
Can't speak to the buyer's rationale though
Is the implication that consumers are to blame because they don't collectively take action against Seiko (i.e. boycott or lawsuit)?
As long as Seiko keeps selling heaps of watches with issues and no consumer blowback, they have no reason to improve. Or maybe there are people complaining to Seiko? I'm just watching from well past the sidelines.
If the Seiko movements died regularly, rendering the entire watch a complete loss, then consumers would likely stop buying them as the risks would outweigh the benefits. However, for most, an occasional misalignment is not enough to banish Seiko from their life.
Regarding the "blasé" attitude about Seiko's QC, that may be a coping mechanism; at least it is in my case. "I gave Seiko my hard earned money and was disappointed, but at least I'm not alone."
I have already contacted the seller (Sakura Watches), but I have pretty low expectations of them resolving this to my satisfaction. Their return policy explicitly calls out that they do not accept returns due to misalignment.
We'll see. I'll do some due diligence in calling Seiko out, but I'm not going to make this my life's crusade.
Casio!
