or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › REVIEW: The Audio Insider
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

REVIEW: The Audio Insider - Page 2  

post #31 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkuboy View Post

Just to chime in about the credit card verification part of it - online companies for the most part do not do their own checking. I am pretty sure a company the size of Jon's would not do their own. Most use a credit card authorization service, such as Authorize.net, because that is their specialty.

From my own experience, the authorization services are a necessary layer but they are not foolproof. They only check for certain factors in the information and if those seem to be okay, they approve the transaction. My company has had several transactions that were fraudulent that were approved by Authorize.net. The thing is, even though they approve it, the merchant is on the hook if it is a fraudulent account. Authorize.net is not liable for anything. So you might wonder what is the point then, to which their answer is that they can't catch everything and every merchant takes on that risk when they decide to do business online.

I understand that things get through here and there but the very basic address match, should have caused a red flag on the CC. There are tons of places that won't even ship to an addy if they don't match.
I'm not sure if Canada is different than the US in that regard but trying pleasing the customer is not always the right thing to do because the customer is generally and idiot. I know, I deal with the morons every day, though I'm lucky, I get to tell them the F$%# off when I know they are trying to scam.
post #32 of 61
Well I am not surprised to see this thread, although the owner of this company did respond to the problem quick and solved it. But the real question is, why couldn't the owner of this company change the address until the products got shipped form the "warehouse" given so many attempts by the OP to change it?

Well if the warehouse is not directly owned nor controlled by himself despite his claim, this explains everything. No matter how respected the owner is, this company is known to sell questionable products and misled users here to believe their products were novel - at least some of their products are just re-branded Chinese speakers that are claimed to be knockoff speakers by different legitimate famous companies from Europe but after putting a brand to these cheap copies like the "?wans" logo, their prices had been marked up 200-300%. Anyone who wanna to buy from this company should also check out some Chinese sites and you will find a flood of identical products with much cheaper prices, just under different brands (just like those generic iPod MP3 clones from thousands of factories from China that provides OEM branding). Everyone can also start a similar company to market products from other "warehouses" which drop ship the products for you and print your own brands on the products.

To learn more about how this company misled forum members to associate their brands with reputable brands by claiming licensing technologies from the same sources while they did not (as verified by the speaker of another reputable brand), check out this link and read to the end:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post20324162

I am not saying their speakers are bad and I have no opinion on their dubious product origins, but everyone should have the rights to know the truth and make their own decisions based on the truth.
post #33 of 61
troll alert
post #34 of 61
*sigh*

Someone turn the light on so the roaches will scurry back into the wall.
post #35 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

Well I am not surprised to see this thread, although the owner of this company did respond to the problem quick and solved it. But the real question is, why couldn't the owner of this company change the address until the products got shipped form the "warehouse" given so many attempts by the OP to change it?

Well if the warehouse is not directly owned nor controlled by himself despite his claim, this explains everything. No matter how respected the owner is, this company is known to sell questionable products and misled users here to believe their products were novel - at least some of their products are just re-branded Chinese speakers that are claimed to be knockoff speakers by different legitimate famous companies from Europe but after putting a brand to these cheap copies like the "?wans" logo, their prices had been marked up 200-300%. Anyone who wanna to buy from this company should also check out some Chinese sites and you will find a flood of identical products with much cheaper prices, just under different brands (just like those generic iPod MP3 clones from thousands of factories from China that provides OEM branding). Everyone can also start a similar company to market products from other "warehouses" which drop ship the products for you and print your own brands on the products.

To learn more about how this company misled forum members to associate their brands with reputable brands by claiming licensing technologies from the same sources while they did not (as verified by the speaker of another reputable brand), check out this link and read to the end:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post20324162

I am not saying their speakers are bad and I have no opinion on their dubious product origins, but everyone should have the rights to know the truth and make their own decisions based on the truth.

LOL I love this guy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

Sorry as a 100% Chinese growing in China and now a factory owner in China, I know exactly what you guys are doing. Yes people have the rights to buy inferior copies but don't insult my Mensa's intelligence by marketing your speakers being superior than the original Dynaudio / B&W speakers. There are Chinese people making a living by copying but doing it so blatantly really surprised me for the 1st time.

Hes a mensa member (or so he claims)
post #36 of 61
I got about 1/5th of the way through and decided the OP is over the top.

Like the part where he wrote to the company on Thanksgiving, and they only got back to him on the Saturday of Thanksgiving weekend ...
post #37 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by GSDTrainer View Post

LOL I love this guy!



Hes a mensa member (or so he claims)

I don't doubt you guys respect him because he provides good service, and for a guy that makes so much fortune from these cheap products I do expect his service is excellent. And I know you guys love his products and have no problem with you guys.

But my question to him is, why did he keep trying to explain the knockoff claims away by falsely claiming Dynaudio (and other reputable companies) licensing the same driver tech from some other companies and thus leading to the identical / similar looking products?

Copies are copies, and trying to make up a false story to explain it away makes me gross...
post #38 of 61
not to derail this thread too much, but there are lots of ID companies that provide great products with more bang for the buck for consideration if you guys are concerned with the product origins.

HSU for example develops their original products from the ground up, through their own research and development facilities and expertise, instead of sourcing and re-branding some copies or generic products from China. Despite the development costs, Hsu products still have one of the biggest bang for the bucks and their customer service is top notch too. Outlaw licenses products from Hsu and are of great value and performance. Mark Seaton's products are not only innovative and original but outperforming most similar priced items too.

There are lots of hard working designers out there working hard to deliver us great products and services exceeding our expectations, and all my respects go to them.
post #39 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

I don't doubt you guys respect him because he provides good service, and for a guy that makes so much fortune from these cheap products I do expect his service is excellent. And I know you guys love his products and have no problem with you guys.

But my question to him is, why did he keep trying to explain the knockoff claims away by falsely claiming Dynaudio (and other reputable companies) licensing the same driver tech from some other companies and thus leading to the identical / similar looking products?

Copies are copies, and trying to make up a false story to explain it away makes me gross...

You'll need to provide more factual and not anecdotal evidence to support your claim but hopefully in a separate thread.
post #40 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

You'll need to provide more factual and not anecdotal evidence to support your claim but hopefully in a separate thread.

Not factual? Or you just didn't follow the discussion at all? This is what Jon quoted whenever he was questioned about the suspected knockoff nature of his products, by claiming his products and other famous brands licensing the same technologies leading to smilar Dynaudio/B&W looking Swans speakers:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post20251443

And in response to this claim, Dynaudio already confirms that Dynaudio does not license any aspect of their technology from any other manufacturer:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post20336000

So who is misleading you? Who is more factal? I read your posts and you are very smart to not to get fooled... and this thread is about the speakers and services of TAI and I think it is appropriate to continue the discussion here.
post #41 of 61
This thread has now gone totally down the crapper.
post #42 of 61
Then you can discuss it by yourself, TS.
post #43 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

Not factual? Or you just didn't follow the discussion at all? This is what Jon quoted whenever he was questioned about the suspected knockoff nature of his products, by claiming his products and other famous brands licensing the same technologies leading to smilar Dynaudio/B&W looking Swans speakers:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post20251443

And in response to this claim, Dynaudio already confirms that Dynaudio does not license any aspect of their technology from any other manufacturer:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post20336000

So who is misleading you? Who is more factal? I read your posts and you are very smart to not to get fooled... and this thread is about the speakers and services of TAI and I think it is appropriate to continue the discussion here.

Whoa. Thank you very much, Tigerstripe.
post #44 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Then you can discuss it by yourself, TS.

Which, given the man's historical lack of perspective in tacitly libeling his pet phantoms all the way from Hong Kong, should be entertaining.
post #45 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

this thread is about the speakers and services of TAI and I think it is appropriate to continue the discussion here.

I totally disagree. This thread is about a disagreement between a specific customer and a vendor regarding a customer service issue. It has nothing to do with "licensing" and "knock-offs." You've hijacked another members thread to suit your own agenda, an all-too-common practice these days.

Jon, I almost stood up and cheered at reading your post #15. Thank YOU!!!!!!
post #46 of 61
I don't have a dog in this fight but wanted to let myfoot know that his intentions have backfired. I've read through this thread today out of curiosity, had never heard of TIA until now, and can honestly say as a customer service oriented consumer that Jon seems to have bent over backward to help. I have worked in CS oriented business for over 25 yrs and know good CS when I hear/see it. I for one will be giving TIA a look next time I am in a speaker buying situation. Jon don't worry about one whiny customer and his posts. Anyone with a brain reading this thread can see you did nothing but try to help and satisfy this customer. Look at it this way the thread intention was to make you look bad and did just the opposite. Keep up the good work.
post #47 of 61
You mean myfootsmell shot off his big toe?!!

I guess his smelly foot won't as bad now.
post #48 of 61
You mean myfootsmell shot off his big toe?!!

Well, I guess his smelly foot won't as bad now.
post #49 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Lane View Post

Which, given the man's historical lack of perspective in tacitly libeling his pet phantoms all the way from Hong Kong, should be entertaining.

Whatever you said. First it was Dynaudio accusing your speakers being knockoffs in the 1st place, not me:
Dynaudio Knockoffs

And many other users brought in proofs like this ones:

Knockoff Dynaudio and B&W speakers

Yet you never provided an acceptable explanations to all these. Given the your proven historical lack of perspective in providing valid statements except some false claims and make up stories to these knockoffs all the way from China, I am just one of the many to have the same questions asked. Do I need to post more links?

And because I am located in hong kong you have your reasons to discredit me as I am more informed about the true nature of your business model. Swan Hong Kong... I have been there and they told me something interesting too, but I won't reproduce those here since you already had too many basic questions about the origins of your products unanswered. If this was a Hong Kong forum you wouldn't be so explicitly libeling me as every audiophile here knows the origin of Swan.
post #50 of 61
Okay Jon you PMed me before. I now grant you the benefit of doubt despite what I found out and what Swan HK told me...

How do you explain the great resemblances of the Swan speakers to Dynaudio/Sonus Faber/B&W etc? It can't be a coincidence given so many Swan models resembling other brands. And you tried to explain this by claiming Dynaudio and Swan licensing the same tech and thus ending up the same looking products which Dynaudio already denied here. I understand you just make a living and I don't doubt you provide great customer services which many other knockoff sellers here also provide, and i have no intention to put you out of business, but you cannot just balantly mislead people that Swan and other legitimate brands share the same tech and quality. I will only keep my mouth shut unless you can convince me and other people which you have failed to do. PM me to cease fire again won't stop me since this is NOT a fight, just a peaceful discussion on the dubious origin of your products.
post #51 of 61
^^^

Take your agenda somewhere else, tigerstripe. You are the only one interested in what you have to say, and that is a waste of bandwidth for the rest of us.
post #52 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by myfootsmells View Post

All companies I know upon receiving a defective product will gladly pay for shipping both ways.

Can you perhaps list some of these companies? All the etailers I have dealt with that offer pre-paid return shipping will make it clear on their returns page. Amazon makes it clear they pay return shipping. Newegg on the other hand does not offer it, and as a result, don't make the claim on their return policy.

A cursory glance on TAI's return policy shows makes no mention that they offer pre-paid return shipping.

Are you complaining that you didn't get special treatment? Just trying to figure out where you are going with this.
post #53 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by martinq View Post

If the events occurred as detailed, it seems obvious that Jon (or someone at the company) dropped the ball. Why does the customer have to pay for this?

The customer has to pay because the seller doesn't offer to pay return shipping on returns?...I had to ship back a pair of defective packages, 120lbs and 60lbs back to a seller (Harman Audio) and it cost me a small fortune (read: over $150). Why do I have to pay it back? Because Harman doesn't offer to pay return shipping.
post #54 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerstripe View Post

Okay Jon you PMed me before. I now grant you the benefit of doubt despite what I found out and what Swan HK told me...

How do you explain the great resemblances of the Swan speakers to Dynaudio/Sonus Faber/B&W etc? It can't be a coincidence given so many Swan models resembling other brands. And you tried to explain this by claiming Dynaudio and Swan licensing the same tech and thus ending up the same looking products which Dynaudio already denied here. I understand you just make a living and I don't doubt you provide great customer services which many other knockoff sellers here also provide, and i have no intention to put you out of business, but you cannot just balantly mislead people that Swan and other legitimate brands share the same tech and quality. I will only keep my mouth shut unless you can convince me and other people which you have failed to do. PM me to cease fire again won't stop me since this is NOT a fight, just a peaceful discussion on the dubious origin of your products.

How is Swan imitating to the aesthetics of other brands a bad thing?...if Swan is illegitimate then there should be only one mp3 player on the market, the rest are all knockoffs. There should be only one smartphone, the rest are all knockoffs...
post #55 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by jephdood View Post

^^^

Take your agenda somewhere else, tigerstripe. You are the only one interested in what you have to say, and that is a waste of bandwidth for the rest of us.

Speak for yourself. I'm thoroughly interested in what Tigerstripe has to say.
post #56 of 61
Tigerstripe, we could have a nice quick conversation about the semantics and maybe you could be reasoned with (having not been reasonable before)...except that I think you have an agenda rooted in your profession.

So I'll keep this brief: When I'm maligned in public as having hosted counterfeits for a decade, I tend to get my back up (and talk to my counsel). In both cases second-hand opinion and hearsay tend to diminish.

TAI has thousands and thousands of quite satisfied customers, and tens of thousands of units in the field, satisfying them and all based on unique designs, not counterfeits. In 15 years of having an association with Swan and in a decade of working with them, yours is literally the first - and certainly the most obsessive, topic-steering, thread-wrecking compulsion - I have ever seen on this topic of one you've created.

I'd prefer to waste no more time in the waste of time this thread already is, but in an industry of hundreds of thousands of products, I can also post a list of design similarities so long AVS will take a hammer to all of my computers. I'll spend my week letting all the air out of your little one-anonymous-poster hobby topic.

---

Rules vary, don't they folks? You can come at a company and a public figure using an anonymous identity and you can say anything you wish, especially from offshore. Venders are held to different standards as to how they can reply too. I tend to mostly condition my remarks with an acute sensitivity to this dynamic, but there are those times when one feels the need to get a little more up front and personal...
post #57 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post

The customer has to pay because the seller doesn't offer to pay return shipping on returns?...I had to ship back a pair of defective packages, 120lbs and 60lbs back to a seller (Harman Audio) and it cost me a small fortune (read: over $150). Why do I have to pay it back? Because Harman doesn't offer to pay return shipping.

We offered to pay for the return, provided it was defective. It was not and the problem customer's previous track record with us limited our will to simply cave in to his many demands. Instead, we elected to cover outbound freight on a product that needed no service.

We've prepaid return freight on the great majority of genuine warranty returns, that despite not having a policy to do so from our manufacturer.

One more note: In general "free freight" we feel is a disguised added cost to valued customers, and therefore unfair to them. We do not offer it. There is no such thing as free in business, and if we offered free freight, all of you buying from us would have to pay for an increased level of returns - whether on a $10 fee on a laptop speaker system or on a $400 fee on a complete 7.1 system "borrowed" for Super Bowl Sunday.

That said, good business calls for the vender to always be conscious of and sensitive to a customer's legitimate needs. We are and we therefore cover a lot of eventualities, as I indicated upthread.
post #58 of 61
@OP: Next time when you have an issue with your speakers, always document it. A simple cell phone video should suffice.

I did returned a defective M200 to Jon (think I paid return shipping), for a replacement. But always had a positive experience with TAI.
post #59 of 61
Everyone should wait tables for a summer to learn about humans. We are all here for the same reason. We gain nothing by tearing people down. This much vitriol indicates psychological issues that transcend the audio hobby.
post #60 of 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by jephdood View Post

^^^

Take your agenda somewhere else, tigerstripe. You are the only one interested in what you have to say, and that is a waste of bandwidth for the rest of us.

Agreed. I have no interest in Swan speakers but this vendetta is ridiculous!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › REVIEW: The Audio Insider