Hello Grant, hello all,
I am sorry for having made the statement quoted below on a public
mailinglist. It was silly and unnecessary. Now I have to offer my
view in addition to yours.
--- In wiardgroup@y..., "grantrichter2001" <grantrichter2001@y...>
wrote:
> > I have been wanting one for a long time. Actually I ordered a
> >Wiard system in January 2001, but in the course of eleven
> >months time, our dealings never resulted in a transaction (I fail
> >to see a reason for this but I know I'm not alone with this
> >situation).
>
> This is a puzzling statement, I am not aware of such a situation.
> I regret my communication was not sufficient to prevent a
> misunderstanding.
To my understanding "communication" is something between two or more
people, and thus its failure cannot be the fault of one individual. I
told you several times before that I did never accused you of
"insufficient" quality of our communication, but that I believe every
communication failure to be mutual. Please: stop apologizing and
regretting.
> Wiard follows the United States Uniform Commercial Code in
> the formation of binding contracts by formal quotation and
> acceptance. An order does not exist until a written quotation has
> been issued, and a deposit needs to be transfered to Wiard to
> establish acceptance of the quotation. In Mr. Kuehnl's case,
> neither of these conditions ever existed.
That's right. But I don't see why they never did. I have never been
asked to pay a deposit. In fact, two months or so after I had first
written to you, I asked if I shouldn't pay the 50% down some time,
but you said you were having deposits for two orders around already
and would not want to take any more deposits at that time.
> Mr. Kuehnl submitted an 8 page list of customizations which he
> wished performed upon the instrument. The modifications were
> so extensive that the instrument no longer met our product
> discription. In other words, Mr. Kuehnl was requesting a
> quotation for something Wiard does not manufacture. Under the
> terms of the Uniform Commercial Code, Wiard responded with a
> "No Bid" to his request for quotation.
This is wrong and distorts reality. I'm making a gross statement here
but anyone who would like to inspect my archived email correspondence
will see it.
I sent you a wishlist of about a dozen electrical modifications to
customize my Wiard system. At that time I was not aware that this was
rather respectless, because I recalled that you had done custom
things like red faceplates and CV-MIDI converters before. Anyway, a
while later you agreed on making the modifications, under the
condition that I supply my own faceplates. I was very appreciative of
that, and there I was again waiting for you to request a deposit in
order to make a binding contract.
A few weeks later, I realized that it had been rather respectless of
me to request all these modifications to your designs while I hadn't
ever used them myself, and wrote you that I wanted to conduct a
normal transaction like all your other customers.
After that, I did not hear from you for about two months, and wrote
to see what's up and asking if it was possible to buy a synth from
your existing setup in the event you had no time for building my
Wiard (we're talking six months after my order and no request for
deposit ever).
It was in reply to this message opf mine that you did what you
describe below:
> Due to the extensive and personal nature of the requested
> modifications, I felt it was in Mr. Kuehnl's best interest to
locate a
> supplier within the EU who would be better able to support such
> a personalized instrument. This was the only reasonable and
> proper response to protect Mr. Kuehnl himself.
Please, protect me from what? Pretty please?
From buying something I might regret having bought because it doesn't
make me happy, like you have been telling several other prospective
customers? Grant, it is my own and only my own responsibility to buy
only things that I will be happy with.
I think what you are saying between the lines is, that you consider
spending time on building a synth the buyer might not like wasted
time that you could have spent for building for someone else.
> No quotation was issued and no funds were transfered, there
> was never a business transaction of any kind between Mr.
> Kuehnl and Wiard Synthesizer. It was my hope to be able to
> provide Mr. Kuehnl with a quotation, but it proved to be
> unsupportable over the course of our correspondence.
I don't understand a word. Why didn't you tell the story to its end?
Ten weeks after you had suggested I buy synths from European vendors
rather than Wiard, like you described above, you wrote to me an
apology. You said that you had said this because you had been under
strain at that time, and that you would like to take up our dealings.
I agreed. And waited again for you to ask me for a deposit (since in
the back of my head I still had the picture of you temporarily
refusing to take new deposits, like back in February).
Anyway, a few weeks after that, I had to report to you that I had
lost money and could not buy a new Wiard system at that time. You
then made me the terrific offer of selling me your Wiard prototypes
because they were cheaper than new modules. I was overjoyed by that
idea of yours and accepted.
Strangely, after that I never heard from you again. This is why I
said in the "Joystick wanted" message that I did not understand why
we never made it to a transaction.
Regards,
Sebastian Kuehnl
PS - One of the modiofications I had asked back then was a lowpass
gating mode for the Borg. Which is reality by now.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Wiard has never defaulted on a contract, or failed to perform
> contacted work as quoted by standard American business
> practice. On two occasions, Wiard has returned deposits on
> unreleased products. Wiard's business record is otherwise
> spotless.