On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Joe Curry wrote:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> > They fane to
> > > bring the parts in (usually from Britain) and then add the cost to their
> > >price.
> > Afraid i don't understand this sentence. "fane" is old english for "Church
> > or Temple". And why would Rimmer get parts "(usually from Britain)" when
> > they are in Britain. It is also my understanding that they manufacture
> > some of the parts themselves from original dies. Which would explain why
> > they have parts that no one else seems to have.
> I'm afraid I was typing faster than I am able to so so correctly. "fane"
>should be "have". Makes much more sense that way!!! :)
Well, the sentence does, but the concept does not. Unless the business is
buying "ones'es" as the orders come in (in which case what would be the
point of using them rather than just cutting out the middleman??) I would
expect they would be paying wholesale prices and shipping in bulk containers
thus incurring a sizable saving over what I pay as an individual.
The facts are really quite simple. In defense of the original argument,
Rimmer is not necessarily more expensive than the US based parts dealers
and eveidence seems to show exactly the opposite. Wether or not the cost
of shipping takes the price above the cost+shipping from one of the US
based companies probably depends on how fast you need the part as well as
it's size, weight and actual cost.
But, ruling them out as "too expensive" without any validating data hardly
seems fair. People got very irate about things that were said about TRF
that were less than glowing even when backed up with concrete examples.
Doesn't Rimmer deserve at least the same treatment here?? If you don't
like them, don't use them, but doen't make unsubstantiated statements
that paint them in a bad light.
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
email@example.com | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>