![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would have stopped before writting:
this utter lack of professionalism in letting the scope leave your factory in such a condition. How did this telescope make it out of your factory in such a condition and what is your explanation for the total lack of quality control? I await your response before I pack it up and send it back to Astronomics for a full refund and move on to Meade." Save those comments for the news group. Your letter up to that point was very reasonable, and to me indicates that you deserve another scope on their dime. Tearing into their credibility won't help you at this point. Leave that to your lawyer if they don't give you satisfaction (which I'm pretty sure they will). I suspect if they would have shipped you a clean scope that didn't star test as well as your TVs, you might chalk it up to mass production, design limitations, less money=less performance, etc. shrugged and kept the scope as a mostly satisfied customer. Shawn |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Meade 80mm Model 312 scope | Allan Adler | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | November 24th 04 07:38 AM |
second scope - which one? Orion ShortTube 4.5 EQ or SkyQuest XT 4.5 | Jim Fedina | Amateur Astronomy | 15 | November 16th 04 01:41 PM |
telescope newby question 101 | troll hunter | UK Astronomy | 12 | May 21st 04 09:23 PM |
Titan | Martin R. Howell | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | March 9th 04 09:44 PM |
SMALL SCOPE + NICE BACKYARD = ENJOYABLE NIGHT! | David Knisely | Amateur Astronomy | 2 | October 27th 03 09:55 AM |