Disappointed in Leupold's service dept. (1 Viewer)

[nfbirder]

I initially posted about this situation in the Leupold sub-forum, but figured I'd promote the topic here after hearing back from the service department.

Original thread here: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3120166#post3120166

So, I sent the binocular in, got a letter from Leupold asking that I call the service department, and just got off the phone with one of their service reps. I was told that normally they would just charge me for the glass to replace the lenses because they are not included in the warranty, but that the model is no longer in production, so my option is to pay the cost of the lenses ($187) to get a copy of their new HD binocular (the McKinley).

Having read so many things about the way Leupold stands behind their GR products, I'm extremely disappointed. Yes, I understand that this is all up to their discretion, etc. But part of establishing such a sterling reputation for service is having your customers take that into account when choosing a binocular.

Currently debating on whether I should spend $187 on what I understand to be an inferior binocular or just ask them to send the somewhat mangled GRs back. ||

 

[MPeoples]

nfbirder, if they don't have the parts what do you want them to do?

Mike

 

[mooreorless]

Hello, I sent in a older non-phase coated Swarovski 7x30 SLC to SONA to get fixed, my ocular lens had some sleeks etc. on them and I asked if they could be replace or might need replace. I would of had to pay to replace these if need be. I don't remember the actual cost but I think it was about what you quote above. I had black inside the binocular from moisture getting insid. I was happy with the "new" binocular they sent back to me. They used my old lens but everything else looked new. The lens did not need replaced. This older series did not have the optical lens in front of the moving objective lens that made the newer series more WP.

If I understand you right they do not have the lens to fix this GR binocular. I guess you would feel better if Leupold did not charge anything for the McKinley? If it was me I would ask if I could try the McKinley and if I didn't like it send it back and have them put together your GR as is I guess. Sorry I could not help any.

 

[etudiant]

Sounds like good service to me:

Customer brings in a beat up specimen of a top tier model out of production so long that parts are no longer available. You offer him a modern equivalent to his old unit for the cost of an ocular lens replacement.

Is that so disappointing?

The OP had stated that this glass had seen very hard use and no manufacturer offers a 'beat it to hell and we'll replace it free forever' warranty.

 

[SteveTS]

no manufacturer offers a 'beat it to hell and we'll replace it free forever' warranty

http://www.vortexoptics.com/content/vip_warranty

 

[etudiant]

http://www.vortexoptics.com/content/vip_warranty

I stand corrected.
Good on Vortex, they have the right idea!

 

[MPeoples]

So does Swarovski, great service.

 

[MPeoples]

Nikon use too have a no fault but that changed last year.

 

[etudiant]

Nikon use too have a no fault but that changed last year.

Except this is not a 'No Fault', it is a case of an old, hard used glass that is out of production.
Should the supplier graciously provide a modern new one when the old gets too worn for comfort? That takes 'Lifetime Warranty' to a whole new level.

Mind that this might a plausible option, where the glass is really under a lifetime service contract. Thus far however, no seller has explicitly endorsed this concept, even if some come close.

 

[SteveTS]

Good on Vortex, they have the right idea!

One thing that you can be absolutely sure about with Vortex is that they have got your back.

They even have a dedicated client care rep for international customers ; you can just send them an email via their website and they usually reply same day.

I have ordered a spare part from Vortex with absolutely no hassle whatsoever ; inquiry one day, immediate reply, part shipped air next day, no charge.

It's freshing to have the support of a company that does not charge for aftersales spare parts or service items, compared to those that charge something (Vanguard, Viking, Zeiss) and those that overcharge (Nikon).

The Vortex warranty is just as stated. They, with Swaro (who may even give you a bone for your dog), own the ground in this respect.

Like many others I have also had good service from Leupold and feel that the OP was given a reasonable offer.

Best wishes,

 

[ceasar]

One thing that you can be absolutely sure about with Vortex is that they have got your back.

They even have a dedicated client care rep for international customers ; you can just send them an email via their website and they usually reply same day.

I have ordered a spare part from Vortex with absolutely no hassle whatsoever ; inquiry one day, immediate reply, part shipped air next day, no charge.

It's freshing to have the support of a company that does not charge for aftersales spare parts or service items, compared to those that charge something (Vanguard, Viking, Zeiss) and those that overcharge (Nikon).

The Vortex warranty is just as stated. They, with Swaro (who may even give you a bone for your dog), own the ground in this respect.

Like many others I have also had good service from Leupold and feel that the OP was given a reasonable offer.

Best wishes,

Leupold's offer may have been reasonable but it seems it was not as good as what he could have had from Vortex. Right? Why should this be so?

All binocular manufacturing companies have their own business models to guide them.

I've wondered why Eagle Optics which owns Vortex doesn't carry Leupold anymore. I assume that Leupold dropped them. It looks like Bushnell is leaving them too and we all know that Nikon left their fold.

I wonder if the fact that the cost of insurance has to be factored into the cost of these warranties and ultimately into the price of the binoculars is one reason. To compete with Eagle Optics and Vortex these companies would have to give warranties competitive with Vortex and that might put their binoculars at a price disadvantage with Eagle/Vortx Optics brands.

That being the case why should Leupold, Bushnell and Nikon deliver a portion of their profits (however small) to Eagle/Vortex for working as their sales representative?

We know that Nikon, Leupold and Bushnell all sell binoculars in the same general price range as Vortex. Leica and Swarovski do not sell binoculars that compete with Eagle/Vortex; and Zeiss, for the most, part does not sell binoculars in price ranges that competes with it. Swarovski is most generous with its warranty policy, especially in the USA. However it is a fantasy to think that it is not factored into the original cost of their binoculars. And the people who don't need it help pay for the ones who do need it when they purchase one. Swarovski has a business model too and they almost certainly know where every penny comes from and where it goes.

Bob

 

[BruceH]

My level of disappointment, if any, would be dependent on what the original warranty stated. If it was a manufacturing defects only warranty, then I would elated over the offer. If it were a no fault warranty with no exceptions for abuse, then I would be asking for an explanation of the $187 charge. Do you have the details on the original warranty?

As far as the McKinley being an inferior replacement, I am not so sure. I have heard the GR is great but have never seen one. I have seen the first gen McKinley and I thought it had a high quality view. I believe it has newer technology not in the GR, such as ED glass and di-electric coatings. Many of the newer mid price binoculars can match the view of the best from a few years ago. The biggest knock with the McKinley has more to do with the large size and ergonomics that the optics. The suggestion to see if you can give one a try is a good idea. If it fits, you may be pleasantly surprised. I would be assertive in requesting a second gen over a remaining first gen.

Good luck and let us know how it works out.

 

[mooreorless]

http://www.leupold.com/resources/leupold-golden-ring-full-lifetime-guarantee/

This warranty is for the Gold Ring riflescopes and there is none posted for the GR binoculars. In that case what is the fair thing esp. with the original price of GR binoculars? $900 or so if I remember.

 

[nfbirder]

Wow, interesting set of responses here.

A bit of background...I'm a hunter and was familiar with Leupold (and their outstanding service reputation) long before I got into birding. I have heard and read countless stories of people sending decades-old scopes, etc. back for repair and having them fully restored (or replaced with units of equal quality) at no cost. Similar reports can now be Googled up by the dozen.

My disappointment is basically twofold...first, I'm disappointed that Leupold no longer has the materials to repair/replace the GRs. They haven't been out of production very long. Second, I'm disappointed that my only option (aside from having them ship the GRs back) is paying a substantial amount to have them replaced with an inferior model.

To those who feel that the offer "seems reasonable", etc. I have to assume that you're basing these statements on some general standard of fairness. Indeed, if that's what I were going by, I'd probably think it was pretty reasonable too. But I'm not--I'm going by their absolutely sterling reputation for repairing/replacing GR products at no cost. Simply put, they've earned their reputation. It helps sell units, no doubt. It (in part) sold my GR.

Perhaps the bottom line is that "unspoken" no-fault warranties are unfair. You can't blame someone for trusting them when the overwhelming evidence suggests that they're very reliable.

My level of disappointment, if any, would be dependent on what the original warranty stated. If it was a manufacturing defects only warranty, then I would elated over the offer. If it were a no fault warranty with no exceptions for abuse, then I would be asking for an explanation of the $187 charge. Do you have the details on the original warranty?

Good question. I have the documentation that came with the binocular which does address warranty, but only in a very general way. The literature on the Leupold website seems to have been changed/updated or removed since I acquired the GR. I distinctly remember there being text that referenced the GR binos specifically, but such text can no longer be found (the pages for the GR binos have been removed as well).

As far as the McKinley being an inferior replacement, I am not so sure. I have heard the GR is great but have never seen one. I have seen the first gen McKinley and I thought it had a high quality view. I believe it has newer technology not in the GR, such as ED glass and di-electric coatings. Many of the newer mid price binoculars can match the view of the best from a few years ago. The biggest knock with the McKinley has more to do with the large size and ergonomics that the optics. The suggestion to see if you can give one a try is a good idea. If it fits, you may be pleasantly surprised. I would be assertive in requesting a second gen over a remaining first gen.

Everything I've read in terms of direct comparison suggests that, optically speaking, the McKinleys do not compare to the GR HDs. I have never looked through a non-HD GR bino, although I do have a non-HD GR spotting scope which is quite nice, but the view it affords isn't in the same category as the HD binos. As I understand it, the GR HDs were originally meant to be a pseudo-alpha bino, sold at a pseudo-alpha price point, but were greatly reduced in price when they didn't sell as expected. Having learned their proverbial lesson, Leupold yanked the GRs and came back with the McKinley, which was designed to sell at the price that the GRs were ultimately discounted to. If this is accurate, it supports what I've heard regarding the McKinley being an inferior binocular (technological improvements notwithstanding). The image quality of the GR HDs is just staggering and I have a hard time believing that a bino designed to be sold at half the price can compete (although I like the idea of asking to try the McKinleys out).

 

[etudiant]

Wow, interesting set of responses here.

A bit of background...I'm a hunter and was familiar with Leupold (and their outstanding service reputation) long before I got into birding. I have heard and read countless stories of people sending decades-old scopes, etc. back for repair and having them fully restored (or replaced with units of equal quality) at no cost. Similar reports can now be Googled up by the dozen.

.

Well, that does help clarify the situation.
I've no experience with Leupold and no sense of their status within the hunting community, but do remember the GR line getting sold as Leupold's alpha. So to have the glass need help and then get billed does seem cheesy, given the background.
Clearly Leupold now believes they can't afford to be quite as generous as they once were. We can all argue that the resultant savings are not worth the loss of customer goodwill, but that is the decision of the Leupold management.
The GR warranty that is posted, which may not be applicable in any case, clearly would not cover a scratched lens. So there is no recourse that I can think of.
Does raise the question of whether similar economic pressures are weighting on Zeiss and Swarovski. We already know they were impacting Nikon and Leica.

 

[Steve C]

I'm a bit surprised they are where they are, but every once in a while, I hear of something like this. I frankly would have expected a new McKinley offered as a GR replacement.

As far as the comparison of the two binoculars goes, put the GR brown armor on a McKinley and I would have to see it for myself you could tell the difference. They are really too close to call.

Sorry, I can't help with the $187 outlay, other than to offer the observation that if the GR can't be fixed, $187 seems like a pretty deep discount on the McKinley.

 

[ceasar]

On the matter of these very generous warranties forget the loss of customer good will because the customer will ultimately forget it. After the Piper comes to be paid no good deed will go unpunished.

Bob

 

[nfbirder]

On the matter of these very generous warranties forget the loss of customer good will because the customer will ultimately forget it. After the Piper comes to be paid no good deed will go unpunished.

Bob

I wonder what the profit margin on a mid-range binocular is.

 

[SteveTS]

The cost of production is necessarily low.

A binocular very similar to this one : http://kunyangoptical.en.alibaba.com/product/756825944-213960426/6_5X32_waterproof_compact_convenient_hot_sale_Multifunction_binoculars.html, retailed for about USD$ 395.00, down to about USD$ 150.00 on closeout.

Anyone wishing to import these would pay from USD$ 15.00 to USD$ 25.00 per unit, FOB., depending on the size of the order.

I have yet to see these on the market here.

 

[nfbirder]

I doubt the cost of production for a GR bino is quite that low, but the "customer goodwill" line is bunk anyway. I'm very loyal to brands that I have good experiences with. The question isn't so much, "what's the profit margin on a mid range bino" but "what's the profit margin on a mid range bino, a compact spotter, a rangefinder, a couple of T-shirts" etc. Of course, this is the way it works for lots of people.