Thoughts on buying refurbished from Nikon (Page 4): Replacing the LCD is a repair, not a refurb. Different process, different people, likely different physical location. Different...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ScottWardwell wrote:

Bill I think you are parsing my words a little too fine. Picking it up and seeing if it the focus is smooth or the aperture functions or the glass is clean is testing. Camera bodies can go out of calibration. Are you saying that if a body came in and had an outdated firmware, they would not update it? They did mine with the LCD swap.

Replacing the LCD is a repair, not a refurb. Different process, different people, likely different physical location. Different purpose and definitely different costs to operate.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

John Maher wrote:

IMHO Quality Control for "refurbished" may be more stringent than normal because reputable manufacturers of anything don't want to see it again.

Some items were returned because they were not what the buyer wanted but cannot be resold as "new". Others had some defect and were returned under warranty. Either way, the manufacturer does not want the cost of turning it around a second time.

Slight changes to the same urban myth don't make it any more 'real' ...

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Festus wrote:

I've bought several refurbished lenes fron Nikon. All looked as if they were new and all functioned flawlessly. I feel buying refurbished from Nikon is a far safer bet than buying used from any saource.

Unless it is from me.

ScottWardwell Loc: Maine

CHG_CANON wrote:

One would think with your quoted resume, you'd hav... (show quote)

Experience since 2000? Yeah, like yesterday. And I am interviewing for a new position Monday with a local IT service company.
Does that score me any points?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ScottWardwell wrote:

Experience since 2000? Yeah, like yesterday. And I am interviewing for a new position Monday with a local IT service company.
Does that score me any points?

If I was interviewing you and had access this discussion, you'd get some hard questions to determine whether you're a fit to my modern organization and needs.

BebuLamar

CHG_CANON wrote:

No. No rational company is going to spend the mone... (show quote)

One more thing. The labor cost of the technician is about 4 times of what he makes. So go figure how much an hour of the tech is worth.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

BebuLamar wrote:

One more thing. The labor cost of the technician is about 4 times of what he makes. So go figure how much an hour of the tech is worth.

One would think people with 'experience' in this area would understand these rules-of-thumb.

ScottWardwell Loc: Maine

CHG_CANON wrote:

If I was interviewing you and had access this discussion, you'd get some hard questions to determine whether you're a fit to my modern organization and needs.

And how many companies have you run?

BebuLamar

CHG_CANON wrote:

Replacing the LCD is a repair, not a refurb. Different process, different people, likely different physical location. Different purpose and definitely different costs to operate.

And replacing the LCD is very expensive. If the camera returned has a broken LCD they would dump it instead of trying to replace it. The camera isn't worth to them all that much. But if the defect isn't obvious they will simply pass it on and let you the customer do the inspection. If it takes you more than 90 days to complete your inspection you may be out of luck.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I look for refurbished first. I've bought refurbished cameras and lenses (and computers), and they all looked and performed as if they were new. They cost quite a bit less, though.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

BebuLamar wrote:

And replacing the LCD is very expensive. If the camera returned has a broken LCD they would dump it instead of trying to replace it. The camera isn't worth to them all that much.

The quote referenced $350. Where is the refurb team supervisor going to 'hide' that cost for equipment coming out of their team's "refurb" work?

BebuLamar

ScottWardwell wrote:

Except I would add to that display samples from dealers. Nikon does not permit selling samples as new.

This is not neccesarily true. I bought the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 AF-D lens for $256 because it's a display sample at the local store. It was in the store display case for at least several years (I looked at the lens but decided not to buy it many times over the course of several years). At last they had it on clearance and I got it for the price and it was sold to me as new with full warranty. In fact the aperture blades stuck 4 years after I bought it and Nikon fixed it for free under waranty.

ScottWardwell Loc: Maine

CHG_CANON wrote:

The quote referenced $350. Where is the refurb team supervisor going to 'hide' that cost for equipment coming out of their team's "refurb" work?

It is called "Depreciation". It is is separate line item cost on the department's financials. It is not the entire cost of the acquisition of that equipment. That is carried on the Balance Sheet in the Fixed Assets. When the Accumulated Depreciation equals the Fixed Asset cost, then it technically has zero-book value and is usually sold for scrap value and is replaced with another piece of equipment over say 5 years or so. There is no "hidden cost" here.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

ScottWardwell wrote:

It is called "Depreciation". It is is separate line item cost on the department's financials. It is not the entire cost of the acquisition of that equipment. That is carried on the Balance Sheet in the Fixed Assets. When the Accumulated Depreciation equals the Fixed Asset cost, then it technically has zero-book value and is usually sold for scrap value and is replaced with another piece of equipment over say 5 years or so. There is no "hidden cost" here.

We cancelled the interview after the initial probing questions, earlier. Thank you for your interest and good luck in your search.

ScottWardwell Loc: Maine

BebuLamar wrote:

This is not neccesarily true. I bought the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 AF-D lens for $256 because it's a display sample at the local store. It was in the store display case for at least several years (I looked at the lens but decided not to buy it many times over the course of several years). At last they had it on clearance and I got it for the price and it was sold to me as new with full warranty. In fact the aperture blades stuck 4 years after I bought it and Nikon fixed it for free under waranty.

I was referring specifically to a body which was on floor display tethered. So any yokle could come along and molest it. So yeah, Nikon did not want that type of sample sold. They displayed lenses the same way. When the salesman took down my boxed camera, he also brought down the display sample box and took the sample off the floor.
A camera store has more control over their samples as they are kept in glass cases. Admittedly less wear and tear. I sold cameras for Value House and Service Merchandise in Maine. The sample was the last to go only if the customer insisted. Otherwise we would order them a fresh one.