Enough and DONE!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree will not buy any I watches on poly cause i also find them extremely uncomfortable
 
An excellent and inherently easy-to-read summary; I enjoyed each paragraph. By way of background, my assertions about Invicta are admittedly somewhat anecdotal in that what happened with one of their straps is that it literally crumbled away into pieces the size of the old Pop Roc candies, little by little, especially in the area of the barrels, which dropped away faster and faster as the watch -- one of IWG's first SW-200 offerings, with MOP dial, gunmetal case and barrel-laden rubber strap -- was put through nothing more strenuous than a day of hunting through thrift stores in Carmel. Fast forward a few days, and I come across what look like the exact same bracelets (save for the color of the rubber) on feeBay (being offered for sale by a non-Invicta private party). I replaced the broken black strap, put the watch in my storage box, and waited for the first of the two barrel straps to either succeed or fail. Turns out I didn't have long to wait.

The first of the straps, a lovely red rubber (YUM!) ditty with gunmetal barrels, started coming apart after a week, and lasted another week before it became unwearable. The second non-IWG strap, a purple rubber strip with still more ubiquitous gunmetal barrels, lasted a bit longer at three weeks. It came apart where the pins meet the lugs, and I nearly lost my beautiful SW200-powered sport watch. After that, I went to leather and didn't look back until earlier today when I mentioned the whole issue. Again, these are anecdotal experiences, but, since the colorful replacement straps didn't come from Invicta, I didn't think the bony finger of indignance should be pointed at them alone. Since the replacement straps were close enough in appearance to be from the same supplier as that which had provided IWG with their barrel straps, I hypothesized that the problem might be the supplier vice IWG. And that's the whole baked potato in one oven, Mr. Zard.

Hope that all made sense...

Yes. It makes excellent sense but if I'm reading it right the issue would still be Invicta's.

The existence of similar product would absolve them of poor design decisions but would be counter-balanced by the plausible assumption that they couldn't even be arsed to buy samples of the product to check for suitability for purpose. Based on your description such product evaluation would have been swift and unambiguous. The importer remains responsible for specifying QC measures and tests for suitability.

As example if your purchase of straps with barrels held together with a tapioca / wallpaper paste mixture from the 'bay was of sufficient magnitude to bring action against the seller Ebay would be looking squarely at the seller - they could not be diverted to take the matter up with Sagacious Panda Faux Elastomer LLC of Xining, Qinghai. China is overrun with ISO-9000 shops that can produce six sigma product. The choice to buy from someone who clearly doesn't know how to produce a rubber watch strap is a decision that was Invicta's alone along with the responsibility for the results. Even the most fundamental, rudimentary due diligence would have avoided the episode.

Remember the lead paint cribs? That was pinned 100% on the importer due in part to the fact that the entire mess could have been easily avoided by specifying "lead free paint". Really, it was that easy.

It's also plausible to assume that, whatever else might be in play, that Invicta knows about the problem in the here and now and by indications has elected to ignore the issue and continue shipping watch straps with the life expectancy of a Buddhist monk with a jerry can full of petrol during the VN conflict.

I'm not sure if my concern regarding "slippery slopes" has any validity but if we're to write off defective straps as the fault of the supplier do we then absolve IWG of any and all responsibility by assuming a defective product is the fault of MillionSmart, Walca Hong Kong, Ronda of Samut Prakan or any of the other myriad suppliers?

IME, importers are subject to the Harry Truman observation: "The buck stops here." IWG is responsible for any screw up on the part of any of their suppliers. In exchange for this we purchase their product and thereby contribute to hull insurance on Eyal's jet.

This is, of course, mostly of academic interest. At the end of the day such a strap probably amounted to only a minuscule portion of the product cost. It's not like there's much in the way of cost, other than frustration, involved. But it was so, so easily avoided.
 
Even a cheap leather strap from Ebay would look better anyway.
 
Yes. It makes excellent sense but if I'm reading it right the issue would still be Invicta's.

The existence of similar product would absolve them of poor design decisions but would be counter-balanced by the plausible assumption that they couldn't even be arsed to buy samples of the product to check for suitability for purpose. Based on your description such product evaluation would have been swift and unambiguous. The importer remains responsible for specifying QC measures and tests for suitability.

As example if your purchase of straps with barrels held together with a tapioca / wallpaper paste mixture from the 'bay was of sufficient magnitude to bring action against the seller Ebay would be looking squarely at the seller - they could not be diverted to take the matter up with Sagacious Panda Faux Elastomer LLC of Xining, Qinghai. China is overrun with ISO-9000 shops that can produce six sigma product. The choice to buy from someone who clearly doesn't know how to produce a rubber watch strap is a decision that was Invicta's alone along with the responsibility for the results. Even the most fundamental, rudimentary due diligence would have avoided the episode.

Remember the lead paint cribs? That was pinned 100% on the importer due in part to the fact that the entire mess could have been easily avoided by specifying "lead free paint". Really, it was that easy.

It's also plausible to assume that, whatever else might be in play, that Invicta knows about the problem in the here and now and by indications has elected to ignore the issue and continue shipping watch straps with the life expectancy of a Buddhist monk with a jerry can full of petrol during the VN conflict.

I'm not sure if my concern regarding "slippery slopes" has any validity but if we're to write off defective straps as the fault of the supplier do we then absolve IWG of any and all responsibility by assuming a defective product is the fault of MillionSmart, Walca Hong Kong, Ronda of Samut Prakan or any of the other myriad suppliers?

IME, importers are subject to the Harry Truman observation: "The buck stops here." IWG is responsible for any screw up on the part of any of their suppliers. In exchange for this we purchase their product and thereby contribute to hull insurance on Eyal's jet.

This is, of course, mostly of academic interest. At the end of the day such a strap probably amounted to only a minuscule portion of the product cost. It's not like there's much in the way of cost, other than frustration, involved. But it was so, so easily avoided.

Can't argue with anything you've written here; well said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom