Thank you Chip. Your remarks were well put and sorely needed.
Ed Woods
-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Old <fold@bcpl.net>
To: Triumph Mailing List <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Date: Sunday, May 10, 1998 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: powder-coat
>
>On Sat, 9 May 1998, Justin Wagner wrote:
>
>> SINCE the home product has come out... I've run into a LOT of people
>> praising the quality of the results... and a lot of people mentioning
>> how they did a part at home for a fraction of what the pro shops
>> wanted...I'm sorry, maybe I missed something in my business school
>> background... but when someone comes along and offers a home product
>> that can do for $5.00 what the local "pro's" want $60.00 or more for...
>> I'd say... it's a threat... a multi-million dollar threat...
>
>Don't forget that the $60 (or whatever) charged by the pros includes prep
>costs and labor, plus something toward the cost of the equipment used.
>These are the most expensive componants any time you pay to have work like
>this done. It isn't a ripoff, as some here have implied, it's a simple
>matter of the professional powder coater passing his costs along to the
>customer and adding a bit for profit. Any business has to do that to stay
>in business. When you buy the Eastwood kit you are paying for materials
>plus some amount for Eastwood's profit, but you are not paying the labor
>costs for prepping the piece and applying the coating, nor are you paying
>towards equipment. You provide the labor and equipment.
>
>> I do agree that PREP is important here... but even the advertisement in
>> EASTWOOD shows a sandblasted "before" part... and explains that it needs
>> to be prepped well... To suggest that the home auto enthusiasts...
>> would not know how to follow directions and prep a part is sort of
>> misplaced... I mean... these guys take engines apart and put them back
>> together again... they... WE... know all about various media blasting...
>> and auto paint prep procedures......
>>
>> I can't see how a few people screwing up the home process are going to
>> extend that disappointment into the entire powdercoat industry! The
>> quality of the professional powder coat industry is already known and
>> accepted... If anything... bad experiences with the home product would
>> only bolster the professional business! But I don't think those bad
>> experiences that you're suggesting are going to be the rule... they are
>> going to be the exception. When an enthusiast screws up a part, due to
>> bad prep... he'll sandblast the part, and follow the directions the
>> second time around.
>
>I wish I could be as optimistic about the abilities of the average BritCar
>owner as you are. I've been involved in the hobby for many years, mostly
>as just another enthusiast but also on occasion as a business venture and
>as a supplier of technical guidance. I've seen too many botched jobs
>resulting from lack of experience and/or unwillingness or inability to
>read and follow instructions. You're correct that in most cases the
>response is to say "Well, I sure screwed that up", then start over.
>
>But these days there is an increasing trend toward blaming others for our
>own mistakes. We see it here in the various autox.team.net mailing lists
>fairly often, where someone buys a part from a Moss, TRF, or whomever,
>installs it only to have it go bad, and blames it on the parts supplier.
>Now, that same part has been used successfully by hundreds of other
>buyers, and of course it's possible that this one person got a defective
>example of the part, but more likeley he just plain bothched the job. He
>then badmouths the supplier here on the autox.team.net BritCar lists, and
>others believe him. This hurts the parts supplier's credibility.
>
>We've also all seen many examples of how rapidly misinformation spreads
>via these BritCar lists and is accepted as fact. The old wives' tale about
>DOT3 brake fluid comes immediately to mind...
>
>Bringing it closer to home (for me at least), I see this phenomenon every
>day in my business. I run a low-cost Internet access service with about
>5500 customers, 99% of whom are very happy with the service we provide.
>The other 1%, for various reasons, have trouble making connections,
>trouble browsing the Web, trouble with their computers in general.
>According to them it's all our fault. They can't (or won't) understand
>that if several thousand other customers use the service without problems,
>then most likely their difficulties are their own doing. They aren't
>willing to take responsibility for their own problems, but they are very
>willing to badmouth us to anyone who will listen. Consequently every
>disatisfied customer, even if he/she is the real cause of his
>disatisfaction, costs us many potential customers. I spend a lot of time
>doing damage control as a result, and I can appreciate that Doug feels he
>is potentially in that position regarding the effects of DIY
>powdercoating.
>
>I don't blame Doug for worrying about the effect of DIY powdercoat kits on
>the professional powdercoat industry. He's not worrying about the
>existance of the kits as a threat to the industry in terms of volume of
>business. He's worrying about the effect of botched DIY powdercoating on
>the credibility of the industry as a whole. I don't blame him.
>
>> I think there was a "mystery and magic" to this process that was closely
>> held, in general, (not necessarily a conspiracy though!) to keep the
>> enthusiasts coming back, time and time again, to pay big bucks for what
>> was ultimately, an inexpensive process.
>
>You DO make it sound like a conspiracy, especially when comparing the DIY
>cost to the cost of professional application. I've already talked about
>that, so won't repeat myself.
>
>> Your first post almost made it sound like we should all disregard the
>> home product and stand by our local professionals... regardless of the
>> costs involved... it was difficult to see it as a post that was just
>> trying to protect us from disapointment. Maybe it's just how I read
>> it.
>
>I don't recall seeing Doug or anyone else here saying that the Eastwood
>kit is junk. What I HAVE seen is an attempt to make sure everyone here
>understands the potential pitfalls of DIY application. That's entirely
>appropriate on a list of this type.
>
>> It seems to me... that if you really care about all your "fellow
>> hobbists" ... you'd be offering up the powder to sell, in smaller
>> minimum quanities, at prices much better than Eastwood!
>
>It probably isn't possible for the major bulk suppliers of powder coating
>materials to do that profitably. They are geared toward selling in large
>bulk quantities, and would find it very expensive to provide kits similar
>to Eastwood's. Eastwood can buy the materials in bulk at relatively low
>cost. They are already involved in supplying kits of various types on the
>consumer market, so putting together and retailing their powdercoating
>kits is relatively easy for them to do.
>
>> Secondly...
>> you'd be including with your powder supplies, perhaps, clear directions
>> on how to get optimum results at home. Or maybe you could have a
>> website where enthusiasts could download these recommendations... (that
>> are, perhaps, more extensive than EASTWOOD's directions) along with some
>> sources for the powder... (maybe not directly from you, the
>> manufacterer, but from some of your distributors!) Wouldn't this be
>> the better approach? Or did I, once again, miss something?
>
>Agreed. Doug has already offered to put together some powdercoating info
>for the list, and I'm looking forward to seeing it. I'd like to see a
>description of the process from start to finish as done in a professional
>shop, along with tips on how the wannabe DIY powdercoater can most closely
>duplicate those shop conditions and techniques at home.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Chip Old 1948 M.G. TC TC6710 NEMGTR #2271
>Cub Hill, Maryland 1962 Triumph TR4 CT3154LO
>fold@bcpl.net
>
|