X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 10 [X] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2007 22:28:20 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-03.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.4) with ESMTP id 1741182 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 06 Jan 2007 20:10:31 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.93.47.42; envelope-from=toucan@Satx.rr.com Received: from VAIO (cpe-24-243-1-103.satx.res.rr.com [24.243.1.103]) by ms-smtp-03.texas.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l0719bnh002884 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2007 19:09:37 -0600 (CST) X-Original-Message-ID: <000e01c731f8$803732a0$6701f318@VAIO> From: "James Cameron" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Re: The D2A/Chelton Mess X-Original-Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 19:09:36 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000B_01C731C6.352325D0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C731C6.352325D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There's an additional factor in all of this D2A/Chelton mess that = so far hasn't come up in the on-line discussion. I've been involved in = two or three businesses over the years, and in the course of conducting = those businesses have dealt with dozens, or maybe hundreds of other = businesses of all sorts. Until I became involved in aviation, I had = never heard of vendors demanding 100% payment in advance, as D2A was in = habit of doing. Perhaps as a consequence, some of their secondary = dealers, like Lancair Avionics, followed the same policy. This is certainly not a normal business practice, and says something = uncomplimentary about our intelligence as aviation consumers. In the = real world, if I had demanded 100% payment in advance for my products = (without even giving a delivery date), I would first have been laughed = at, and second, run out of business in a hurry. Imagine going into a = Ford dealership and having the sales manager tell you to pay them the = full price now, and they'd deliver the car whenever they got around to = it. The normal mode for a business is to use its own cash float, or = lacking that, a line of credit to finance the purchase of parts, = development costs, and all the rest. Normal terms are net 30, or in = businesses where there is a lot of one-time commerce without a built-up = relationship of trust, perhaps C.O.D. In either case, the vendor = delivers, then the buyer pays, not the other way around. Why is this relevant? Well, if we had all been operating on that = basis, and D2A failed to deliver products, they would not have been paid = in advance for them, and we as consumers wouldn't be left holding the = bag. The problem is that when a vendor has a unique product (or thinks = it does), and makes such a demand on the buyer, the individual wanting = to make a one-time purchase has little leverage. The ones who really = let us down are the shops that place multiple orders, like the various = panel builders that have been alluded to in these on-line discussions, = and certainly including Lancair Avionics. Had they insisted on a more = business-like arrangement, we would all be in better shape. Perhaps = it's a little bit of poetic justice that these are the shops who will be = left holding a really big empty bag, though I take no pleasure in = pointing that out. A reasonable deposit can perhaps be justified, although when the = item is an off-the-shelf, stock item, it's hard to justify even that. = (Think, Lancair's engine payment policy.) For most of the things we = buy, there are choices of vendor, and we'd all be better off to deal = with the ones who adhere to normal and reasonable business practices. = They've been worked out over a very long time, and usually for good = reasons, of which we are now being reminded. Jim Cameron Legacy, N132X reserved ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C731C6.352325D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
     There's an additional = factor in all=20 of this D2A/Chelton mess that so far hasn't come up in the on-line=20 discussion.  I've been involved in two or three businesses over the = years,=20 and in the course of conducting those businesses have dealt with dozens, = or=20 maybe hundreds of other businesses of all sorts.  Until I became = involved=20 in aviation, I had never heard of vendors demanding 100% payment in = advance, as=20 D2A was in habit of doing.  Perhaps as a consequence, some of their = secondary dealers, like Lancair Avionics, followed the same = policy.
    This is certainly not a normal = business=20 practice, and says something uncomplimentary about our intelligence as = aviation=20 consumers.  In the real world, if I had demanded 100% payment in = advance=20 for my products (without even giving a delivery date), I would first = have been=20 laughed at, and second, run out of business in a hurry.  Imagine = going into=20 a Ford dealership and having the sales manager tell you to pay them the = full=20 price now, and they'd deliver the car whenever they got around to = it.  The=20 normal mode for a business is to use its own cash float, or lacking = that, a line=20 of credit to finance the purchase of parts, development costs, and all = the=20 rest.  Normal terms are net 30, or in businesses where there is a = lot of=20 one-time commerce without a built-up relationship of trust, perhaps = C.O.D. =20 In either case, the vendor delivers, then the = buyer=20 pays, not the other way around.
    Why is this relevant?  Well, = if we had=20 all been operating on that basis, and D2A failed to deliver products, = they would=20 not have been paid in advance for them, and we as consumers wouldn't be = left=20 holding the bag.  The problem is that when a vendor has a unique = product=20 (or thinks it does), and makes such a demand on the buyer, the = individual=20 wanting to make a one-time purchase has little leverage.  The ones = who=20 really let us down are the shops that place multiple orders, like the = various=20 panel builders that have been alluded to in these on-line = discussions, and=20 certainly including Lancair Avionics.  Had they insisted on a more=20 business-like arrangement, we would all be in better shape.  = Perhaps it's a=20 little bit of poetic justice that these are the shops who will be left = holding a=20 really big empty bag, though I take no pleasure in pointing that=20 out.
    A reasonable deposit can perhaps = be=20 justified, although when the item is an off-the-shelf, stock item, it's = hard to=20 justify even that.  (Think, Lancair's engine payment policy.)  = For=20 most of the things we buy, there are choices of vendor, and we'd all be = better=20 off to deal with the ones who adhere to normal and reasonable business=20 practices.  They've been worked out over a very long time, and = usually for=20 good reasons, of which we are now being reminded.
 
Jim Cameron
Legacy, N132X reserved
     
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C731C6.352325D0--