Could be worse than a planning problem, could be a short sighted policy of
cutting costs.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Brokaw" <jbrokaw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Discontinued lenses
> on 10/10/02 9:52 AM, clintonr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx at
clintonr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
>
> > The truly infuriating thing is that parts for some (if not most) of
these
> > lenses are officially "NLA" -- No Longer Available! When I asked
someone at
> > Olympus how they could still sell items if repair parts weren't
available (for
> > warranty repairs, etc.), I was told that if I had one that needed work I
> > should send it in to Olympus for repair -- if it needed parts, they'd
just go
> > to the warehouse and strip the part off a new lens! But they would NOT
sell
> > the parts for anyone "outside" to do the work.
>
> That's interesting... I wonder if they would strip a good lens if I send
> them my 16/3.5 or 8/2.8 fisheyes? I need the rear elements for both (as
has
> been mentioned here before, substantial finder's fee offered for locating
> the needed elements) and perhaps Olympus has an 8/2.8 that has been
> 'stripped' of its front element only sitting around...?
>
> That's a crazy OEM parts policy, somebody didn't do the planning right.
> --
>
> Jim Brokaw
> OM-1's, -2's, -4's, (no -3's yet) and no OM-oney...
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|