Maccabee Defense SLR information and updates

Presales without a guaranteed delivery date should be banned.

Why?

If the customer chooses to place an order without a guaranteed delivery date, that is the customer's decision.

The attraction for the dealer is obvious. Known sales prior to bringing in inventory.

Of course, there is all sorts of potential for problems.

Interminable whinethreads can result.

These promotions are allowed - but the customer must understand what he is getting into.
 
Last edited:
Presales without a guaranteed delivery date should be banned.

Why? We all know the risk factor. We all know delays are possible.

I agree that pre-sales where you pay FULL price up front like the BCL 102 should not happen. I will never participate in a scheme like that.

However in this case, where a miniscule $100 deposit is held at the dealer to simply secure you're place in line, I see nothing wrong with it. It's a simple, low risk way of showing the manufacturer that people are indeed interested and willing to support their upcoming product.

However there are no regulations regarding the issue so it is up to the consumer to decide if they see the terms and risk factor of the pre-sale as being something they wish to be a part of or not.

I don't agree that pre-sales should be banned or even regulated for that matter. The last thing this industry needs is more regulations.

The consumer should be the regulator by deciding if they see it fit to lay out what is asked of them. We are free to choose.
 
Last edited:
Why?

If the customer chooses to place an order without a guaranteed delivery date, that is the customer's decision.

The attraction for the dealer is obvious. Known sales prior to bringing in inventory.

Of course, there is all sorts of potential for problems.

Interminable whinethreads can result.

These promotions are allowed - but the customer must understand what he is getting into.

Are the same promotions allowed in the EE by private parties?
 
Why? We all know the risk factor. We all know delays are possible.

I agree that pre-sales where you pay FULL price up front like the BCL 102 should not happen. I will never participate in a scheme like that.

However in this case, where a miniscule $100 deposit is held at the dealer to simply secure you're place in line, I see nothing wrong with it. It's a simple, low risk way of showing the manufacturer that people are indeed interested and willing to support their upcoming product.

However there are no regulations regarding the issue so it is up to the consumer to decide if they see the terms and risk factor of the pre-sale as being something they wish to be a part of or not.

I don't agree that pre-sales should be banned or even regulated for that matter. The last thing this industry needs is more regulations.

The consumer should be the regulator by deciding if they see it fit to lay out what is asked of them. We are free to choose.

As we have seen, a retailer can back out or mess up and never provide the product and simply issue a refund.

But if the buyer decides not to follow through there is usually a fee to pull out or deposit is simply forfeit.

Seems like a lot of people are fine with not being on the same footing as the retailer when things go wrong by the response here
 
As we have seen, a retailer can back out or mess up and never provide the product and simply issue a refund.

But if the buyer decides not to follow through there is usually a fee to pull out or deposit is simply forfeit.

Seems like a lot of people are fine with not being on the same footing as the retailer when things go wrong by the response here

That is why a buyer needs to completely understand what he is getting into.
 
Why? We all know the risk factor. We all know delays are possible.

I agree that pre-sales where you pay FULL price up front like the BCL 102 should not happen. I will never participate in a scheme like that.

However in this case, where a miniscule $100 deposit is held at the dealer to simply secure you're place in line, I see nothing wrong with it. It's a simple, low risk way of showing the manufacturer that people are indeed interested and willing to support their upcoming product.

However there are no regulations regarding the issue so it is up to the consumer to decide if they see the terms and risk factor of the pre-sale as being something they wish to be a part of or not.

I don't agree that pre-sales should be banned or even regulated for that matter. The last thing this industry needs is more regulations.

The consumer should be the regulator by deciding if they see it fit to lay out what is asked of them. We are free to choose.

Because like it or not the Canadian consumer actually needs a little protection from shady business practices. That's why we have rules in regards to credit cards and interest, rent increases, auto warranty, gift card expiration dates, fast food calorie counts, etc.

These are not all assaults on freedom.

Buyer beware only goes so far, and the fact of the matter is that most of us are truly uninformed and need a little guidance.

I wish that wasn't the case, but history has proven it time and again.

Lot's of the people commenting here have only been on the board for 2, 3, maybe five years. Many of those of us who are against the more questionable presales, especially this 100% cash up front BS with loose delivery dates, have been here 10+ years and seen so many presale fails that maybe we're not just shooting from the hip and have some actual valid experience to share.
 
Absolutely not. Item must be in the physical possession of the private seller - with one exception that you will see if you consult the rules.

Too bad, would be a good way to gage interest/have buyers in waiting for an item I will be selling after hunting season, event, etc.
 
Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with a nominal down payment to secure a place in a queue. Serious money against something that exists only as a prototype or hasn't reached Canada's shores yet? I don't think so. Too much can go wrong. I suppose that it might make a difference if deposits were being held in secure escrow.
 
It's not like the modern hunter where there was a presale before frt was finalized and then having to wait for parts to come in.

This is an untrue statement. We had to wait for the FRT group to do a final inspection in order to confirm that "we made a faithful copy of the firearm that the FRT was given to" as a production rifle. We had the 1st FRT# in August 2014 for the prototype, and we produced exactly the same rifle as the prototype, so were assured that the 2nd inspection was a mere formality, which it turned out to be. Any significant alteration to the original design would have required starting the process all over again.
If the Swiss Arms debacle had not occurred during the time between when the production rifle was sent in for confirmation of faithful copy, we would have seen the final FRT in November of 2014.
 
Yeah I hate free market capitalism too. Government needs to step in and regulate NR black gun market!
It's nice to see some that get it. :cheers:


Because like it or not the Canadian consumer actually needs a little protection from shady business practices. That's why we have rules in regards to credit cards and interest, rent increases, auto warranty, gift card expiration dates, fast food calorie counts, etc.

Nonsense. We don't NEED protection from much aside from a government that thinks it knows better than we do how we should live our lives.

Anyway, back to the new gun stuff...


Mark
 
Back
Top Bottom