josephrose wrote:Everyone who thinks BMD is going to stop the presses and do this recalibration on all new cameras from a certain number on, are insane. Or at least very optimistic.
I predict that they will absolutely NOT do this. To do so would be admitting that early cameras were defective, and they just refuse. They're counting on the large majority of buyers to not go through the whole process of returning cameras and just living with it.
This is what remains a mystery. If re-calibration solves most, if not all, of the customer satisfaction issues, I'm not sure why it matters if this is labeled an "issue" or a "defect". If there's a fix, err, "adjustment" that works, then all is good. I suppose it relates to who pays inbound shipping. But suppose that 1000 cameras have been shipped to date and that 50% get returned at an average cost of $40 each (inbound). The incremental cost to BMD for the inbound freight is $40 x 500 = $20K. That seems like a small amount of money to foster good will among your customer base. Maybe the numbers are much higher than that.
In any case, by far the cheapest place to address product "issues" is before they leave the factory. I would assume that as soon as re-calibration is confirmed to be the answer, some assurance that new shipments have all been "adjusted" would be in BMD's best interest. (put a pink slip in the box)
There are most likely resource and financial constraints to which we are not privvy but it also seems like there are some basic things that could be done at fairly low cost to make the situation better. Maybe it's too soon for those.
Also, in spite of the term "serial" number, I believe the formats are routinely obfuscated so that ranges can be reported without divulging the quantity of units shipped. I suppose someone who received one of the first units could post his serial number. If it is something like "000015", that would shed some light on that part of the question.