There Ought To Be A Law, Or At Least A Rule

Sometimes I wonder if such postings are not a promotional device. The follow-up postings are usually an explanation of why there was difficulty contacting the manufacturer, plus praise for the fine product. Many times this is all about an outfit that I for one had never heard of, before the original posting.

"There is no such thing as bad publicity".

Some companies simply do not find email that useful and only use the phone which screens out a lot of tire kickers. Steve Sank and Nick Gowan are both much more responsive to the phone than email as they get a lot of idle questions via email.

If they have history with a customer then they use email more effectively. People like Steve and Nick that have been around for years and actually do what they say are few and far between.

Convergent Audio Tech is another one with no web presence I've been able to find. CAT responds to phone calls.

Both sides of this have merit. I think that anyone intiating possibly negative feedback should be extremely sensitive to its possible undeserved negative effects. Yet poor service or reliability should definitely be published. Then copied to the "offender" to give them a chance to respond with their side of the story.
Perhaps the person initiating the post could least say something like " I tried calling on 3 seperate occasions over a period of ten days, after having verified that I had the correct number", versus "I called three times" (which all could be on the same day to an inadvertently transposed number)

Small or large, a business needs to either provide good product support (at high end audio pricing it should be excellent support, imho)or else be willing to take the hit.
Have three components from small firms, manufacturer support from two of them has been A+++++ world class. The third seems to be a 'take the money and run' outfit, I think it is good for the industry for us to be able to brag on the good ones as well as warn each other about the bad ones. Perhaps nothing will drive people away from the hobby quicker than dumping significant funds into something and then finding out a year later that it is effectively junk because of lack of repair support or parts support.

Being that there are always at least two sides to any story, how do you know you're hearing an honest and accurate presentation of the facts when someone makes this type of posting? I kinda' agree that the facts will eventually make themselves known, but that process could take several days and it won't fully erase the negative impressions the post started. It's like in the newspaper business where the retraction is never in as big a typeface as the original incorrect story. All I'm suggestion is that some burden of due diligence should be placed upon the original poster.

Audiogon doesn't allow an individual to post negative comments about another individual regarding equipment transactions without first getting input from the accused party. Why should someone be able to slam a company without also getting the company's response before putting the post in the public domain. You'll still be able to say negative things about small companies, but at least the companies will be in a better position to defend themselves.

Eldartford, shouldn't someone be able to come up with a better promotional stunt then publicly announcing they don't respond to customer inquiries? If they can't they maybe that is a good reason to not do business with them.