Hee Hee - You're kill'in me

Will, like they have always said-- "We don't own no stinkin" factories".

I don't think the Chinese outsource to Korea. Maybe the other way around. Even if they wanted to, they don't have the hard currency to afford the Koreans.

I think it depends upon the factory and its quality control procedures (maybe overseen by the companies contracting with these factories)as to whether the product put out is of high quality or not.

The most price sensitive products will be move to a factory/country offering lower production costs. If costs are shaved too much, then quality may suffer. But then again, high cost or manufacture in a high cost country is no guarantee of high quality/reliability.

Paul

------------------
the 1derful1

Well, I was being a bit facetious. However, I think you'd find that the relative manufacturing overhead costs of these countries is pretty consistent with my ranking. I would also question your point about the signficance of the emphasis on quality control in these countries. You don't have your products out-sourced to Taiwan or move your manufacturing facilities down to Mexico because you value quality. Increasing the level of quality control in these situations would start to erode the cost benefits from using the site in the first place, and you are already at a QC disadvantage since you are probaly dealing with company that is remotely located and has a language barrier with your own, employs untrained/uneducated workers who are making grossly inadequate wages, and adheres to very few manufacturing standards -- if the country even acknowledges any. (At least that has certainly been the case in my industry.) Sure, your company may have some influence over quality, but more influence means more costs means less profit. I would also argue that it is the mentality of most corporations to move ALL products to low-cost manufacturing sites, not just price-sensitive ones. After all, increasing profit margins is increasing profit margins.

It may be to a companies financial benefit to move production to a lower cost country as long as the the product as presented to the customer has enough quality to please the customer.

BUT, if a shoddy product is presented to the customer, woe be unto the manufacturer for the dissatisfied customer with taketh his or her business elsewhere, badmouthing this company far and wide.

For example, I purchased an IBM hard drive a couple of years ago (a GXP75 series, I think). It worked fine for a few months, then major data errors happened. IBM replaced it under the 3 year warranty. Since then, I have found out that this series of drive has had a MUCH greater rate of failure than other IBM drives and non-IBM drives. Of course IBM is doing the Cleopatra act (queen of de-nile). IBM has replaced my filed drive with a refurbished (one that has already failed but was fixed) version of the same drive.

I have lost faith in IBM and their drives. I have not purchase another IBM drive and have not recommended IBM to others.

Once a customer loses faith in a manufacturer, all the corporate spin in the world will not get it back.

So, if companies outsource their manufacturing to low cost countries and do not maintain any sort of quality assurance check on the product, they are asking for disaster. This is assuming the basic design itself is sound.

Paul

------------------
the 1derful1

Could that be one reason why IBM sold their disk drive business to Hitachi? If your customers think your products are no good, just sell the product line.... And buy somebody else's product line. Could that be why PriceWaterhouse sold their consulting business to IBM?

Sure, that's certainly an alternative... Unless everyone else is also making their products at low overhead manufacturing sites with substandard quality, which is often the case since many consumer products have to remain price competitive with their competitors. The fact is, you often get what you pay for in consumer products. You can find a company that makes a better product, but -- chances are -- they're going to charge you more for it simply because it costs them more to make.

This is off topic, but I couldn't resist it as an illustration of a case of tiny sample sizes. In our office most of the drives are IBM (GXP60/75/120 series) and we've had one bad drive. At home I have mostly IBM also, (5 drives) with no problems.

I'm wondering what percent of the 950s are showing problems (in a vain attempt to add topicality )

I've also had a lot of IBM drives, and so far none have given me any problems.

I think part of their mistake is replacing a bad unit with a refurbished, rather than new, one. This increases the likelihood of a second failure and an EXTREMELY dissatisfied customer.

Or perhaps they already regard the customer who has experienced a failure as a lost cause.

It's hard to argue with the sample size point, but when you experience two failures in two drives, youc ertainly get an impression that transcends sample size.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

Hmm, I just re-read Paul's message and saw that he only experienced one failure... for some reason I was thinking that his replacement drive failed also. I, personally, would not fault a company for the first product failure, especially if it was replaced promptly and if the replacement worked.

After all, my first 1050 went bad after less than a month. Outlaw replaced it with a unit that has been functioning flawlessly for nearly a year now. It might even be a refurb; I didn't care enough to ask. I don't fault them for it.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net