SEI (Smith Enterprises Inc) FYI

[Molasses]

I hope I'm not gonna be stepping out of bounds of any rules on here with this, but I've noticed that I'm not the only member on this board that likes M1As and such and figured the others might want to see the linked thread. If this is out of line, mods, just go ahead and delete or lock up the thread and hand me my head for it.



Over on the M14 forums, they've had a couple of recent threads regarding complaints about SEI's delivery time and customer service. Yesterday, one of the guys that posted negatively about his experiences got served with a lawsuit from the company. Here:
http://m14forum.com/m14/145566-i-need-l ... today.html


I'm just going to leave it at that, because I KNOW saying any of what I'm thinking WILL get me into trouble.

Edited to change link to go to page one of the thread, vs. page 4

[Tycer]

That should read Smith Enterprise Inc.
SEI not SAI

[Molasses]

That should read Smith Enterprise Inc.
SEI not SAI

My bad. I've got products from both outfits and let my fingers get ahead of my brain (not much of a trick).

[FatJackDurham]

I had an unsat experience trying to by a Marlin ladder sight from SEI. The deal just never completed. After 4 months, he never notified me the part was ready, so I left it alone.

He certainly seems to have attracted some negative attention.

[Molasses]

Some folks are coming forward on other forums to defend the company, saying the claims were unsustantiated and that the author was given the chance to retract them before they went all legal on him.
I dunno. SEI didn't do badly by me, so I've got no personal beef with them. I'm coming at this more from the intimidation end:

I've read a lot of unsubstantiated claims (Glock Kabooms, just to pick one subject: one forum I frequent even has guys posting Photoshops of a Glock with a grenade fuse assembly in the muzzle) and complaints against companies on a lot of gun forae over the years. This is the first time I've heard of a company getting so defensive and thin-skinned as to take action against an individual.
Wondering if this works out for them if the folks that keep saying "Japchester" are going to be hearing from Browning/Winchester's legal department (just posting an example, not saying anything disparaging about the people at Browning/Winchester)? Will some companies take it as a license to go after everyone that's written something trashing them due to a bad experience? There's folks that miss no opportunity to jump into a thread and slam a certain make or model as soon as someone talks about it. Will they be hearing from someone's attorney?
As someone mentioned in the thread over at the M14 forums, if this takes off, what about all the negative product reviews over at Amazon?

[Hobie]

I do not know whether or not to lock or to delete this topic. So far (emphasis on SO FAR) I do not see a problem with what has been posted but I can see how somebody might go too far.

As for me, I am disinclined to consider doing business with anyone that sues their customers for being dissatisfied with their service or product because should I be one of those persons I would not want to have to deal with it. Better to find another vendor. Now, if that company is suing people reporting on the supposed reasons for customer dissatisfaction then one has to reconsider any and all ties with them.

Recently, some say even now, Tyler Mfg. the maker of Tyler T-grip adapters was having a customer satisfaction problem of epic proportions. They were trashed on the internet by many people. Some still doubt their ability to deliver but I don't think anybody hates them. We're seeing a beginning of a real animus towards SEI over this.

If you are one of those ticked off at SEI and want to comment, please stick to the facts. Informative topics like this shouldn't be lost due to abusive posts.

[AJMD429]

That should read Smith Enterprise Inc.
SEI not SAI

My bad. I've got products from both outfits and let my fingers get ahead of my brain (not much of a trick).

You should go back to your original post, click "edit" and change the Subject line so it doesn't say Springfield Armory...! They are GOOD guys.

[Chuck 100 yd]

I agree with Hobie on this. I have never had any dealings with either company mentioned.
I would do a little more research before condemning them on one complaint by a customer.

[Molasses]

That should read Smith Enterprise Inc.
SEI not SAI

My bad. I've got products from both outfits and let my fingers get ahead of my brain (not much of a trick).

You should go back to your original post, click "edit" and change the Subject line so it doesn't say Springfield Armory...! They are GOOD guys.

I did that edit clear back this AM when I posted the bit you have quoted above. What I'm seeing this PM, now that I'm back home, reflects what I thought the edit fixed. Am I missing something or

Edited to add: I've got 3 of SAIs' rifles and I've been very happy with 'em. Only one I've had that I wasn't happy with was a squad scout, and that was just because it was a touch too long to balance to my personal taste with a forward mounted optic, but switching to a SOCOM16 solved that issue quite handily.
About the only issue I've had with the company was for being too helpful, because when I called to ask for a manual on the repro Garand they'd made and I picked up used, they sent me manuals for every last thing they made at the time.

Only explanation I have for mixing up the names earlier is that after reading about what was going on, I was thinking about how I'd been kinda hoping to get my hands on a SEI build someday and wondering if I'd even be able to notice any actual difference against my SAIs and then about the scope mount that I got from them that's never even been put on the SAI rifle I got it for and I musta got off on the wrong track for a minute.

[Griff]

Well, the notice or suit ain't gonna affect my buying... cause I haven't since they quit making cowboy sights...

[AJMD429]

I did that edit clear back this AM when I posted the bit you have quoted above. What I'm seeing this PM, now that I'm back home, reflects what I thought the edit fixed. Am I missing something or

I get it - I think the threat TITLE changed when you edited it, but those folks posting responses prior to that had the old title on the top of their posts. Probably no way you can change that.

As long as the title of the thread is not 'dissing' the wrong company, I think that is fine.

[Molasses]

I did that edit clear back this AM when I posted the bit you have quoted above. What I'm seeing this PM, now that I'm back home, reflects what I thought the edit fixed. Am I missing something or

I get it - I think the threat TITLE changed when you edited it, but those folks posting responses prior to that had the old title on the top of their posts. Probably no way you can change that.

As long as the title of the thread is not 'dissing' the wrong company, I think that is fine.

Oh not so easy, now we've got to go at it, lawyers at 10 paces.... (don't worry, I could barely pick a lawyer up off the ground, much less throw 'em any distance)

Seriously, after having all day to think about it and running my thoughts past Sweet Tooth (who is uncommonly down-to-earth and level headed and honestly, I don't know what she sees in me...please don't anybody tell her I said so), I suspect that this whole thing has a lot to do with people getting their backs up over misunderstanding each other and then not wanting to back down in a public venue. If both sides would sit down and talk over a cup of coffee, it'd probably be a non-issue in a couple of minutes.

However, my big concern still holds. If siccing lawyers on folks posting negatively about companies or products or customer service on discussion boards catches on, there's not going to be a whole lot being said on them anymore. I sure wouldn't want to post nothing but plain, bland beige stuff full of weasel words designed to dodge out of any legal binds.

Edited because I just can't stand seeing myself use the word "seriously" that many times in one post.

[Old Ironsights]

...As for me, I am disinclined to consider doing business with anyone that sues their customers for being dissatisfied with their service or product because should I be one of those persons I would not want to have to deal with it. Better to find another vendor. Now, if that company is suing people reporting on the supposed reasons for customer dissatisfaction then one has to reconsider any and all ties with them.
...

No dog in this fight, but +1.

[FWiedner]

A third party report about a disgruntled or dissatisfied customer should only result in further investigation of obtainable facts, not a determination of opinion regarding the subject of animus.

Sounds unsavory, but libel or defamation is a serious commercial matter .

[7.62 Precision]

I can't really spend the time right now to research this and worry about who may be right or wrong. I don't think it really matters as far as the impact this could have on SEI. Maybe SEI feels they have enough demand that they could stand to lose a few customers. Maybe they are tired of problem customers and are reacting accordingly.

Right now, I just spent a few weeks handling customer service for a firearms product company that lost their CS guy. I have been dealing with customers through my own company for years. Since Sandy Hook, the attitudes of customers have totally changed. I used to say that I liked working in the firearms industry because of the kinds of people I got to work with. This is no longer the case. Since Sandy Hook, dealing with customers had been brutal. I have, personally, never had any issue keeping customers happy in the past. Since then, however, we cannot make customers happy. We normally ship orders the same day or the next day at latest if the order comes in to late to ship. Our terms are the same as they have always been. The products are the same, and nothing that we are doing has changed, but since then, we are getting constant chargebacks, irate customers calling and emailing over non-issues, people fraudulently attempting to get their orders for free. We have been reported to the ATFE and local police departments and state attorney generals for stealing firearms by people who don't want to pay for work or who don't want to wait the time quoted. I have been accused of lying, of fraud, I have been sued. I have customers calling me telling me what I will do for them if I don't want them to post lies about us on every major firearm forum. I just bought a new pistol for a guy who gave clear, specific instructions on what colours he wanted used on his pistol, only to later change his mind and refuse to accept it. I have a holster sitting in front of me that I just had returned by a guy who ran a chargeback the morning after receiving it. When we offered to work with him, he became angry and purposely damaged the holster so we could not resell it.

It has reached the point that I really do not look forward to answering the phone or checking my email.

This is a frustrating change, and customers can do a lot of damage by purposely or ignorantly posting on the internet. I know, because in my marketing work in the firearms industry, apart from my own company. I have been dealing with a lot of misinformation that is purposely posted by certain people, and ignorantly by others who mean no harm and are just passing on what they have heard. In that case, my strategy is to carefully and strategically work to defend the company and change public opinion without being dishonest - the day I have to be dishonest I'll change jobs.

Sometimes this means clearing up misinformation. Sometimes this means saying, "Yeah, you're right, we messed up big time. Here is what we are doing to fix it, here is what we are doing to prevent the same in the future. Can you see your way to giving us another chance?"

What I could not imagine doing is suing a customer, unless it were a case of patent infringement or something like that, and even then, it would need to be handled very carefully. First, it generally isn't the best way to treat people. Secondly, from a marketing standpoint, it is suicide.

People always pull for the underdog. Remember a guy named David? Robin Hood? You don't want to be Goliath or the Sheriff of Nottingham. People also want a cause. When a company treats someone badly (deserved or not) it gives people a cause. It can be a big company or a small one, but all people see is the big guy bullying the small guy.

Remember the backlash when Progressive sent their lawyers to support the defense of the guy who ran a red light and killed one of their customers? The cheapest thing they could have done would have been to just pay out what they owed her family.

I knew a huge church one time that sued a member/employee. The pastor was given poor information and advice, but was doing what he thought best. (It is not something I would have done, no matter what.) That church lost a lot of members over that, and many were members who truly believed the employee was in the wrong, but did not like the way it was handled.

Suing a customer is not a good idea.

[Peter M. Eick]

I read the thread on the M14 forum out of interest. I am an M1A owner and have not bought from SEI so it was just curiosity.

To me it was fascinating how the situation progressed. My perception is that CS was poor but the customer was expecting a reasonable product. It is too messed up to really sort out though.

It sure puts an interesting view on something as simple as a range report. Just think. If I were to say report on XYZ firearm on the forum and point out the flaws (either real or imagined) I could be served with a lawsuit.

That is an interesting turn of events and I am concerned about the precedent it sets.

[AJMD429]

If they go after this guy enough to harm him they will shed customers so fast it will kill their business. Not for fear of being sued will they leave but just on the principle of not wanting to deal with that type people (owners of the business).