"grey cameras"

Ken Tough wrote:
jeremy wrote:

There are Mercedes Benz and BMW gray market importers, that bring cars into
the US that were not built for the US market. Sometimes they require
modifications to make them comply with US emissions laws (I recall that some
of those gray market BMWs required the addition of catalytic converters,
because they were European models, built for use in places that did not
require them, back in the 80s.) Those vehicles are NOT warranted by the
official US dealer network, and you have no right to presume that any US
dealer will give you free warranty repairs, or handle any recall items, as
they are not their cars.

In Canada, I don't think that's possible. Certainly a member of
the public can't import a vehicle and keep it here. Their statement:
"if it wasn't originally sold in Canada, it does not meet Canadian
requirements AND CAN NOT BE MADE TO MEET canadian requirements".

How that can be legal, I don't know. But it means we could never
bring our Vespa into the country, even if it is identical to the
models that were sold here. In Canada at least, it's commercial
trade restrictions, pure and simple; nothing to do with emissions
or safety or ...

It is possible to import your own car into the US but not easy.
http://zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=584
http://www.foreignborn.com/visas_imm/entering_us/7importingyourcar.htm#freeentry

In message OSj7h.1$Kw2.0@trndny05, jeremy writes
"Robert Brace" wrote in message
news:6g97h.325208$5R2.298459@pd7urf3no...
YOU, on the other hand, raise the typical argument of misonformed
whiners--that Company "A" ought to pick up the tab for providing support
that rightfully is the responsibility of Company "B."

No... With a world class company if I buy one of their products that is
highly portable I expect to get service from that company no matter
where I go. Or are you suggesting that some how Nikon USA is not part
of Nikon globally?

So Nikon is not a world class company..... or is it just Nikon USA?
It appears Nikon USA is not doing the Nikon brand any favours.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris Hills" wrote in message
...

In message OSj7h.1$Kw2.0@trndny05, jeremy writes
"Robert Brace" wrote in message

No... With a world class company if I buy one of their products that is
highly portable I expect to get service from that company no matter where
I go. Or are you suggesting that some how Nikon USA is not part of Nikon
globally?

So Nikon is not a world class company..... or is it just Nikon USA?
It appears Nikon USA is not doing the Nikon brand any favours.


You ought to check with your official Nikon importer in the UK regarding
whether you will receive support ion YOUR camera, if you were to buy it here
in the US, having been imported here not by Nikon USA but by one of the gray
market importers. You just might be told that your gray market camera will
not be supported in the UK!

As for availability of service globally, you seem to be either unable or
unwilling to understand that the camera is warranted--NOT BY NIKON IN
JAPAN--but by the entity that imports it. Unless the camera has an
International Warranty Card enclosed in the box, you are not entitled to
just walk in to any importer, anywhere in the world, and demand service.
Nikon and other manufacturers do not always issue International Warranties,
and when they do, the camera must be shipped back to the manufacturer. Last
I hear, Japan imposes tariffs on cameras coming back into the country (I
believe you can get a refund once you prove that the camera has been taken
back out of Japan, but that is a process that discourages buyers from
seeking service under International Warranties)

You need to carefully read the terms of YOUR PARTICULAR WARRANTY CARD to
determine what services you are entitled to, and where they are available.

The simplest and best approach is to buy from the official importer in
whatever country you live in. Gray market buyers should expect to get a
runaround if the equipment requires service, because most gray market whore
importers don't provide much in the way of service.

The fact that the camera carries the Nikon badge does not make you a direct
customer of Nikon in Japan. You are the customer of the importer whose
dealer sold you the camera. I believe that you will receive "world-class"
service and support if you buy from the "world-class" importer. I believe
you'll probably receive crappy support if you go the cheap route.

Why do you insist upon offloading your service and support issues to
importers other than the one from whom you bought? If you had an
officially-imported Nikon, and you sought support from one of the gray
market importers, for some reason, do you think that they would help you?
It works both ways, here in the US.

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 15:23:09 +0000, Chris Hills wrote:

In message OSj7h.1$Kw2.0@trndny05, jeremy writes
"Robert Brace" wrote in message
news:6g97h.325208$5R2.298459@pd7urf3no...
YOU, on the other hand, raise the typical argument of misonformed
whiners--that Company "A" ought to pick up the tab for providing support
that rightfully is the responsibility of Company "B."

No... With a world class company

What in the Hell is "a world class company"? There is no recognized
standard for that--the local supermarket claims to be "world class". It
seems to me that that's just marketdroid for "trust me".

if I buy one of their products that is
highly portable I expect to get service from that company no matter
where I go. Or are you suggesting that some how Nikon USA is not part
of Nikon globally?

They are and they aren't. First, there is no "Nikon USA", the name of the
company is "Nikon, Inc." and they are based in New Jersey, but they are
also a wholly owned subsidiary of Nikon Corporation. They take their
marching orders from Nikon in Japan but their day to day operations are
managed from New Jersey IIRC.

If you buy in the US you bought from Nikon, Inc or from a gray marketer,
not a subsidiary of Nikon, which imported it.

So Nikon is not a world class company..... or is it just Nikon USA? It
appears Nikon USA is not doing the Nikon brand any favours.

If you don't like it why don't you take it up with Tokyo instead of
whining here where the few people who give a damn can't do anything about
it except join you in shouting defiance at the sky?




--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 02:37:54 +0000, Robert Brace wrote:

"Chris Hills" wrote in message
...
In message pT17h.4920$T_.4411@trndny06, jeremy
writes
"Chris Hills" wrote in message
.. .


That would tip the balance for me if/when I get to the point of buying
a
new camera.


But you are in the UK, and the local practices may be different at your
location. I was commenting only upon Canon USA.


I agree. However I think the brand owners should try and sort out the
grey
importers and not penalise the buyer. There are exceptions whey you
personally import stuff especially where you buy equipment which is
not
spec'ed for your country eg cars.


I posted a few articles earlier today on the 35mm newsgroup that you
might
find helpful.

The owners do not have any relationship with the gray market importers.
They cannot sort them out.

Surely they can control who their distributors are? This is possible in
most areas of distribution ?

The buyer is not being penalized when he
bypasses the official importer--the buyer (in the US at least) exercises
his
choice.

Fair enough.

Nikon USA would be very pleased if every single buyer bought
officially-imported goods. The buyer is in control--he can go first
class
or he can choose a lesser package with little or no support. What the
buyer
CANNOT do is both have his cake and eat it too.

I agree.

Frankly I would have preferred that parallel imports had been banned
entirely, but our Supreme Court ruled otherwise.

This starts to get difficult... We end up with camera smuggling along
with the drugs :-)

Gray market buyers always cheer at the thought of getting lower prices,
but
they quickly exhibit sour grapes if they later want services from the
official importer, to which they are not legally entitled.

I know. However I was surprised that Nikon US will not give support
even
if it is paid for.


But please keep in mind that other countries may have completely
different
practices. Regardless of how one feels about how we do it in America,
court
rulings (which have the effect of law) give Nikon USA the right to
decline
to support customers that purchased through other importers.

I was not arguing with the law. That is fair enough. I note that Canon
has
taken a different stance.

Back when
Honeywell was the official US/Mexico importer of Pentax equipment, the
same
thing was the case--they did not support "Asahi Pentax" cameras. In
fact,
Honeywell pressed US Customs to enforce their rights as the registered
US
trademark holder of the name Pentax, and anyone trying to self-import a
Pentax camera from outside the US ran the risk that customs would
scratch
the Pentax name on the pentaprism, thus defacing the camera. Minolta
had
a
similar policy.

That sounds some what restrictive.

Servicemen bringing Takumar lenses back from the Far East, especially
Vietnam, learned to cover the Takumar name on the lens ring with a gooey
black substance, until the lens passed through customs, at which time it
could be safely removed.

This is worse than the old CCCP

We also have a big problem with phony apparel items--Tommy Hilfiger,
Gucci,
Burberrys and other such branded apparel, manufactured in the Far East,
and
sold in the US by street vendors.

That is a world wide problem....

Customs routinely cracks down on that
stuff. It also extends to such things as pirated DVDs and VHS tapes,
sold
with no royalties being paid to the copyright owner. And I understand
that
it also extends to expensive perfumes, imported via third-world
countries,
sometimes counterfeit.

Yep We have that here too.. Continual battle However unlike the grey
Nikons these are complete counterfeit goods.

see the name "Nikon" on a camera, you naturally assume that it is the
"real
thing." But it may have come from a questionable source.

Agreed. It is still AFAIK a Nikon. Not a fake... Actually has anyone
produced fake Nikons, Canons etc?

It may have
suffered water damage while stored in a South American warehouse, and
the
local importer was reimbursed by their insurance company (and the
insurance
company now owned all of the "damaged" cameras, and sold them at pennies
on
the dollar to someone that then brought them to the US as gray market
cameras). When the gray market camera fails, you, the buyer, tend to
blame
the trademark owner, Nikon USA, even though Nikon USA would NEVER have
sold
you such an item. It gets to be a real mess.

Nikon USA is not the trade mark owner I think you will find Nikon is. I
agree with your senario. The problem is that a customer could buy the
grey
market camera in a store in the US without realising it is a grey
import.
That is the problem where I think some help should be given to the end
user.

However if the end user buys on the internet from a store on th4e other
side of the world at a very low price then they deserve all they get (or
probably don't get)

Even though gray market is different from counterfeit goods, they are
both
"cut from the same cloth," in that buyers tend to believe that they are
buying something equivalent to the top-shelf product.
... For next to nothing... If the deal is too good to be true it usually
is.

It's one thing when
one buys a $35.00 watch, and chucks it when it breaks down, but not when
the
price tag is $1000.00 for a camera and lens. When a big-ticket item
fails,
the gray market buyer tends to regret trying to have saved a couple of
dollars on the initial purchase price. Now his bargain camera is fit
only
for use as a doorstop.

Fair enough.

Though I still think Niokon USA could do repairs etc but charge the
going
rate.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Chris:
One thing you have to understand is that advocates of the "Fortress
America" approach to International business like "Jeremy" will die
advocating for the 3rd world marketing practices of companies like Nikon
USA
and Nikon Canada and it has nothing to do with their "Supreme Court
Decisions". It has everything to do with the warped thinking that is
responsible for the "Fortress America" outlook in the first place.
Canon are unique in their rational approach to dealing with their
customers. And one wonders why world-wide their marketing has been so
successful? Doesn't take a genius to figure it out.
If you move to the USA you can expect to get no support from Nikon
USA
or Nikon Canada.
I bought a Tamron lens while living in the US and subsequently moved
to
Canada. I was not only refused legitimate warranty service from their
Canadian distributor, but they would not honor Tamron's written
International Warranty coverage either. I ended up sending the lens back
to
Tamron's headquarters in New Jersey for the needed warranty repair. As I
told the Canadian distributor (Amplis) at the time, their Neanderthal
approach to business and Customer Relations would end up costing them a
multiplicity of the new lens value. I make the total so far in excess of
$30,000.00CDN. But that was their choice wasn't it.

Fascinating--you're accusing a Japanese company of having a "Fortress
America approach to international business". Or has it escaped your
notice that "Nikon USA" is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nikon?

--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt

J.Clarke
Save your fascination and your sarcastic blather for someone who cares.
The "wholly-owned subsidiary" as you choose to call Nikon USA (and
presumably Nikon Canada, by extension) are also wholly responsible for their
in-country Customer Relationship policies and deserve to bear the brunt of
any criticism generated because of them.
The fact that you would expect the Japanese parent to provide any meaningful
course corrections to the NA based operations in how to handle their
customers shows you neither have any intimate knowledge of their business
practices nor recognize it as a problem.
Not surprising.
Bob

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 18:09:00 +0000, Robert Brace wrote:

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 02:37:54 +0000, Robert Brace wrote:

"Chris Hills" wrote in message
...
In message pT17h.4920$T_.4411@trndny06, jeremy
writes
"Chris Hills" wrote in message
. ..


That would tip the balance for me if/when I get to the point of buying
a
new camera.


But you are in the UK, and the local practices may be different at your
location. I was commenting only upon Canon USA.


I agree. However I think the brand owners should try and sort out the
grey
importers and not penalise the buyer. There are exceptions whey you
personally import stuff especially where you buy equipment which is
not
spec'ed for your country eg cars.


I posted a few articles earlier today on the 35mm newsgroup that you
might
find helpful.

The owners do not have any relationship with the gray market importers.
They cannot sort them out.

Surely they can control who their distributors are? This is possible in
most areas of distribution ?

The buyer is not being penalized when he
bypasses the official importer--the buyer (in the US at least) exercises
his
choice.

Fair enough.

Nikon USA would be very pleased if every single buyer bought
officially-imported goods. The buyer is in control--he can go first
class
or he can choose a lesser package with little or no support. What the
buyer
CANNOT do is both have his cake and eat it too.

I agree.

Frankly I would have preferred that parallel imports had been banned
entirely, but our Supreme Court ruled otherwise.

This starts to get difficult... We end up with camera smuggling along
with the drugs :-)

Gray market buyers always cheer at the thought of getting lower prices,
but
they quickly exhibit sour grapes if they later want services from the
official importer, to which they are not legally entitled.

I know. However I was surprised that Nikon US will not give support
even
if it is paid for.


But please keep in mind that other countries may have completely
different
practices. Regardless of how one feels about how we do it in America,
court
rulings (which have the effect of law) give Nikon USA the right to
decline
to support customers that purchased through other importers.

I was not arguing with the law. That is fair enough. I note that Canon
has
taken a different stance.

Back when
Honeywell was the official US/Mexico importer of Pentax equipment, the
same
thing was the case--they did not support "Asahi Pentax" cameras. In
fact,
Honeywell pressed US Customs to enforce their rights as the registered
US
trademark holder of the name Pentax, and anyone trying to self-import a
Pentax camera from outside the US ran the risk that customs would
scratch
the Pentax name on the pentaprism, thus defacing the camera. Minolta
had
a
similar policy.

That sounds some what restrictive.

Servicemen bringing Takumar lenses back from the Far East, especially
Vietnam, learned to cover the Takumar name on the lens ring with a gooey
black substance, until the lens passed through customs, at which time it
could be safely removed.

This is worse than the old CCCP

We also have a big problem with phony apparel items--Tommy Hilfiger,
Gucci,
Burberrys and other such branded apparel, manufactured in the Far East,
and
sold in the US by street vendors.

That is a world wide problem....

Customs routinely cracks down on that
stuff. It also extends to such things as pirated DVDs and VHS tapes,
sold
with no royalties being paid to the copyright owner. And I understand
that
it also extends to expensive perfumes, imported via third-world
countries,
sometimes counterfeit.

Yep We have that here too.. Continual battle However unlike the grey
Nikons these are complete counterfeit goods.

see the name "Nikon" on a camera, you naturally assume that it is the
"real
thing." But it may have come from a questionable source.

Agreed. It is still AFAIK a Nikon. Not a fake... Actually has anyone
produced fake Nikons, Canons etc?

It may have
suffered water damage while stored in a South American warehouse, and
the
local importer was reimbursed by their insurance company (and the
insurance
company now owned all of the "damaged" cameras, and sold them at pennies
on
the dollar to someone that then brought them to the US as gray market
cameras). When the gray market camera fails, you, the buyer, tend to
blame
the trademark owner, Nikon USA, even though Nikon USA would NEVER have
sold
you such an item. It gets to be a real mess.

Nikon USA is not the trade mark owner I think you will find Nikon is. I
agree with your senario. The problem is that a customer could buy the
grey
market camera in a store in the US without realising it is a grey
import.
That is the problem where I think some help should be given to the end
user.

However if the end user buys on the internet from a store on th4e other
side of the world at a very low price then they deserve all they get (or
probably don't get)

Even though gray market is different from counterfeit goods, they are
both
"cut from the same cloth," in that buyers tend to believe that they are
buying something equivalent to the top-shelf product.
... For next to nothing... If the deal is too good to be true it usually
is.

It's one thing when
one buys a $35.00 watch, and chucks it when it breaks down, but not when
the
price tag is $1000.00 for a camera and lens. When a big-ticket item
fails,
the gray market buyer tends to regret trying to have saved a couple of
dollars on the initial purchase price. Now his bargain camera is fit
only
for use as a doorstop.

Fair enough.

Though I still think Niokon USA could do repairs etc but charge the
going
rate.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Chris:
One thing you have to understand is that advocates of the "Fortress
America" approach to International business like "Jeremy" will die
advocating for the 3rd world marketing practices of companies like Nikon
USA
and Nikon Canada and it has nothing to do with their "Supreme Court
Decisions". It has everything to do with the warped thinking that is
responsible for the "Fortress America" outlook in the first place.
Canon are unique in their rational approach to dealing with their
customers. And one wonders why world-wide their marketing has been so
successful? Doesn't take a genius to figure it out.
If you move to the USA you can expect to get no support from Nikon
USA
or Nikon Canada.
I bought a Tamron lens while living in the US and subsequently moved
to
Canada. I was not only refused legitimate warranty service from their
Canadian distributor, but they would not honor Tamron's written
International Warranty coverage either. I ended up sending the lens back
to
Tamron's headquarters in New Jersey for the needed warranty repair. As I
told the Canadian distributor (Amplis) at the time, their Neanderthal
approach to business and Customer Relations would end up costing them a
multiplicity of the new lens value. I make the total so far in excess of
$30,000.00CDN. But that was their choice wasn't it.

Fascinating--you're accusing a Japanese company of having a "Fortress
America approach to international business". Or has it escaped your
notice that "Nikon USA" is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nikon?

--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt

J.Clarke
Save your fascination and your sarcastic blather for someone who cares.
The "wholly-owned subsidiary" as you choose to call Nikon USA

I don't choose to call it that, the CEO of Nikon, Inc chooses to call it
that http://www.mitsubishi.or.jp/e/monitor/0212/insight.html.

(and
presumably Nikon Canada, by extension) are also wholly responsible for
their in-country Customer Relationship policies and deserve to bear the
brunt of any criticism generated because of them.

What part of "owned" do you not understand?

The fact that you
would expect the Japanese parent to provide any meaningful course
corrections to the NA based operations in how to handle their customers
shows you neither have any intimate knowledge of their business
practices nor recognize it as a problem.

Huh? If it's a problem that is hurting sales in one of their largest
markets then why would they _not_ "provide meaningful course corrections"?
As to your assertion that I have no intimate knowledge of their
busines practices, I have never claimed to have such knowledge. Do _you_
have such knowledge?

asNot surprising. Bob



--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt

"Robert Brace" wrote in message
news:0Vm7h.328422$5R2.85052@pd7urf3no...

The "wholly-owned subsidiary" as you choose to call Nikon USA (and
presumably Nikon Canada, by extension) are also wholly responsible for
their in-country Customer Relationship policies and deserve to bear the
brunt of any criticism generated because of them.


The fact that many foreign manufacturers elected to set up shell
corporations in the US, in order to control distribution and pricing, was
one reason that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of parallel imports.

I am still unable to understand why there is a perception out there that one
has some right to demand support from the official importer, when he made
the purchase from an unauthorized, unrelated gray market company.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...

Huh? If it's a problem that is hurting sales in one of their largest
markets then why would they _not_ "provide meaningful course corrections"?


If you are concerned about Nikon's revenue in the US, why not just buy
officially-imported goods from them?

I think your real objective is to try to get something for nothing. If the
official Nikon importer has to give you free service, that can't be good for
revenues.

Why not just call the gray market importer, and ask why THEY won't/can't
properly serve you, instead of directing your criticism toward Nikon ??

On Fri, 17 Nov 2006 21:56:27 +0000, jeremy wrote:

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...

Huh? If it's a problem that is hurting sales in one of their largest
markets then why would they _not_ "provide meaningful course corrections"?


If you are concerned about Nikon's revenue in the US, why not just buy
officially-imported goods from them?

I think your real objective is to try to get something for nothing. If the
official Nikon importer has to give you free service, that can't be good for
revenues.

Why not just call the gray market importer, and ask why THEY won't/can't
properly serve you, instead of directing your criticism toward Nikon ??

Huh? How did you get from a comment about the likelihood of Nikon
Corporation in Tokyo doing something about the activitives of Nikon Inc in
New Jersey if those activities were damaging Nikon's sales to my wanting
something for nothing? In fact how is what I personally want of any
relevance at all to the discussion?



--
X:\Newsreaders\sig.txt

jeremy wrote:

"Chris Hills" wrote

No... With a world class company if I buy one of their products that is
highly portable I expect to get service from that company no matter where
I go. Or are you suggesting that some how Nikon USA is not part of Nikon
globally?

So Nikon is not a world class company..... or is it just Nikon USA?
It appears Nikon USA is not doing the Nikon brand any favours.

You ought to check with your official Nikon importer in the UK regarding
whether you will receive support ion YOUR camera, if you were to buy it here
in the US, having been imported here not by Nikon USA but by one of the gray
market importers. You just might be told that your gray market camera will
not be supported in the UK!


I agree with Chris. Nikon is Nikon. Would you expect the Nikon USA
product to be lower quality than the Nikon Japan product? Someone
just took it on the cheek for the misconception that they might have
thought non-Namerican product was actually in some physical aspect
different than the Namerican product. Well, if we know (and are
supposed to know --and value--) the fact that Nikon is Nikon is Nikon
worldwide, then Service should have the same qualities as product.


Period.

[If Canon does this properly, then Nikon is on the road to suffering
big time, especially in the professional market.]

--
Ken Tough