Rick -- Well said. It continues to amaze me that we have folks on this FORUM who seem to represent the interests of HTM, which is not always the same as the interests of the rest of the FORUM members. Greg has been a big help to all of us, but does he represent an independent user or HTM? His thinly veiled threats that we may not get warranty support if we buy at less than list price makes me suspicious, to say the least. HTM doesn't make perfect products, and their pricing policies, IMHO, defy rational explanation (short of basic GREED). HTM support is hardly exciting (how are you MX-1000 folks doing with the latest software upgrade?). Maybe someone here should recognize that this forum is made up of the biggest fans HTM has. Threats and "do-gooder" actions hardly contribute to our feelings of support for either HTM or the objectivity of this forum. Can you imagine any other forum on the internet where a member would brag that he had contacted the manufacturer to complain that prices were too low!! Give me a break!!

Craig

I think everyone is looking after their own interest. Why are you so P.Oed, because you want the 231 price, but how is that in the best interest of some of the vendors and custom installers that frequent this site and help users? Many different users, many different interests


I never met Greg, but he has been on here a very long time, even before HTM and the MX remotes. Back then he was helping people with other remotes. And like you said, he has helped many, but I guess the minute you disagree with him you are ready to chastise him


agree


I thought the definition of objectivity is to look at all sides, not just to look at all things one sidedly

Rick: URC reads every thread in this forum.

Since URC reads every thread in this forum, hopefully they will read this one.

Hey, forget about the MX-700. This is obviously designed for yuppies who nave more money than brains and prefer to have someone else program their remotes. Forget about the ugly (IMHO) putty color that will show every fingerprint (which is ok if you can afford a maid to keep it clean)! Forget about the worthless MX-200 (I always thought the purpose of a universal remote was to reduce the number of remotes, not increase them)!

Instead, offer us an MX-500 with the memory capactiy of the MX-700 (20 devices with 4 pages per device)! Give it the PC connector with interface cable so the remote can be programmed from the PC and BACKED UP to the PC. Keep it the same color as the MX-500 so it doesn't have to be cleaned everyday. Price it around $250. Call it an MX-600 and you would make a lot of customers and potential customers very happy!

Brent

Brent:

Please email me.

... Greg

What I think is really annoying is that there is actually different policies that applies. It seems to not be Ok to advertise product below MAP but it's Ok to give a 30% discount on the same MAP price. It is happening with URC right now and it is happening with many other manufacturer. The fact that the word Internet is in the discussion seems to make it worst.
Moreover, let the price be decided by the people who are selling them. The MAP price applies to new products only. What is happening if I (as a reseller), open the box, stick the battery in it, remove the battery and put everything back in the box. I've verified that the remote is working properly but the remote is not "new in box". Does the MAP still applies? Most likely not! So now I should be able to sell any remote on Ebay for whatever price for a remote "like new" instead of "new in box" and the MAP price is circumvented! Right?
The only problem I have now is if I'm selling through Internet, URC will not support my customer and worst is threatening my distributor to not give them any URC remotes anymore. I can't explain myself why? Can someone give me a very good reason! I've heard several attempt of answering like: the customer is not supported and they go scream at the manufacturer when something is wrong. Well I would say to these people, too bad, you should have checked your source first. There is usually a reason if a product is more expensive in some places.

I'm retailling electronics and URC remotes in particular but part of my strategy is based on Internet and yes based on Ebay advertisement but NONE of my customer can complaint about services and support, yet I can not offer them the URC remote or even advertise anything from them. The only thing I can do is to advertise on other brand, mentionning URC in the ad and hope that someone will ask me about it because then, it is not an Internet sales anymore, there is no advertisement of the price made publicly and therefore I can price whatever I want. So this is turning to a ridiculous situation where I can sell at what ever price I want yet I can not advertise it properly.

This kind of behavior has been bugging me for the last year now and I would like to see some manufacturers taking the lead on defining and PUBLISHING clearly their Internet/Support/Sales policies on their web site. And if the worry is that customer will not have any support, please, define a quality program for Internet reseller. I will gladly go through it and advertise it anywhere I can.

My 2 cents if anyone was interested.

fcd

Apparently it's not OK. The 30% coupon has disappeared.

I definitely agree with you about clearly publishing their Internet/Support/Sales policies on their web site. The only one I can think of that makes their policy clear is Denon, but even their "authorized" resellers can set their own prices.

I wonder why exercising my First Amendment right of free speech is a problem?

Can anyone explain why contacting a company, and expressing displeasure with their policies is an incorrect action? To accept what is happening is the incorrect action.

If you want to stay with the herd, so be it.

I also mentioned I am in the process of filing a complaint with my state Attorney General (NY), and possibly with the FTC.

As I stated, I don't except any on this to change the MX-700 price, or URC leaning on Worthington's. I will however have done everything in my power, limited as it is, to express my opinion on this matter to the persons who CAN effect change.

If exercising my Constitutional rights makes me a jerk, I guess I am, and proud of it. I've been called worse in the past. Hasn't bother me yet. I don't expect it to start now. :)

PS I guess I wonder why filing a complaint with a company makes me a jerk? The company I work for has opinion forms available, in plain sight for customers. They are addressed to the CEO of the corporation.

Dave -- Your original message didn't say that you were expressing displeasure with HTM's policies. If you re-read that message, you will see that it could be read to expressing displeasure with the fact that some resellers were getting away with discounting the MX-700. The tone of this message is entirely different, and I support your complaint to the AG. This is the most blatant form of price fixing, and is serving to put extreme pressure on some of our favorite retailers - who do provide support, both to their customers and to the members of the forum. Randy and Mike have not been heard from on this issue - I wonder why?

Craig

Thanks Craig.

Since most of my on-line time is 1AM+, therefore.... :)

Here's a link:

[Link: oag.state.ny.us]

Dave -- Thanks for the link. I have filed a complaint, and urge others who believe that HTM is in violation of the law to do so as well. URC is a New York State business and the NY Att. Gen. is the place to go.

Craig

I said Worthington violated their agreement. I am not privy to any agreement, except to surmise that if Worthington has a retail and wholesale division and is letting people buy from the wholesale price list that is meant for sale to businesses, then I assume that Worthington must be violating an agreement. I should have said "assumed" in the first place.


Who knows for sure they are cutting off sales to Worthington? But, IMHO, any manufacturer that sells to a retailer/distributor expects the retailer/distributor to sell at a higher price retail than the wholesale price that they sell to businesses. This is only logical.



BlueDo no longer has a 30% discount, since I last looked.


The remote was designed to be programmed BY the custom installers. No one ever mentioned here or URC that is was designed to be SHIPPED custom programmed. That would be ridiculous.


The whole idea of this remote was to sell to custom AV installers. IMHO, everyone is missing the point and expecting that they should have the remote for a cheaper price when the $499 pricing is designed to include some or all of the custom programming done by the installer. The dual remote package was not designed to be sold to the average user. Many companies have items that they don't/won't sell to consumers because they are designed specifically for a business to use or to incorporate into a sales package, etc.


The MX-500 is $189 retail already.


Custom installers already charge what they want for the programming. Many charge much more for the MX-700 due to the number of components needed to be programmed. This is not different than the Pronto in that respect.


Yes, Pronto's are used by custom installers and by the average user. Does that mean that URC has to follow another company's policies?


... Greg ..... in total, that makes four cents.

This message was edited by GregoriusM on 11/05/02 19:04.58.

Craig: You obviously are newer to this forum than I am and many others. It is well known that I am a URC/HTM supporter and have been for quite a while. I am in contact with them almost weekly. I wrote the MX-500's latest manual (except for a couple of insertions by URC). I beta test their software and their remotes for them (as I do for other manufacturers as well) - and yes, I think that MX Designer for the MX-1000 is far from the best software.

I have gone to URC many times fighting for the user, and URC's products have some features in them that I asked for in response to users requests for them, and submitted formally by me. The MX-500 was to ship with only 3 macros, no PowerOn/Off macros, no push-and-hold macros on the device buttons, etc. and I promptly emailed URC asking them to hold production, giving them a list of things I thought should be included. They stopped production, and then I polled the users as to what they would like to see in the MX-500 (the 500 had already been announced on this site including its features), and 95% of what the users asked were incorporated into the MX-500.

So, am I a proponent of URC? You bet I am! WHEN I agree with them.

Am I a proponent for the user. You bet I am! Even many times when URC disagrees with me.

I have made no thinly veiled threats. I have simply stated my opinion, and a lot of my opinion would apply to other companies as well, not just URC.


Do you really think any web site with a user forum is objective? It is more often than not SUBJECTIVE, even including the reviews that are displayed on the site.

I agree with you on some points, but agree to disagree with you on others.

... Greg

If the price is supposed cover the programming than there is here an issue because how much programming is expected to be delivered with the remote? What is the part of the remote itself and part the programming? How do I know a custom installer is giving the exact bang for the buck intended by URC?

I've seen some of the programming which have been done for several $1M+ houses and let me tell you: it sucks BIG time. No macro and a collection of device and big splash screen with the name of the custom installer when you boot the remote (that was a Pronto) and from house to house, I could find the same programming in the remotes. What does it tell you? That the custom installer has not done anything custom!!!!! Sorry they actually changed the name of the owner on the spalsh screen! How's that for custom!

As a consumer, I have 20 years of programming under my belt, 4 years in the custom electronics and a good 2 years in home automation. I don't need anyone to tell me how to sticks 4 devices on a stupid remote (being pronto, rti, urc or anyone other brand) and charging me $50 per device by someone who will not understand half of the programming of the remote and will most likely reuse a template found on our dear RemoteCentral or use the template that a student has done to make a buck or two!

As a retailler, I'm so glad I'm in this business. I just have to sell $50 per device (and maybe $75 per extra device after that). A work that would take me about 5 minutes to go to RemoteCentral and download the proper template. $10 per minute. That will make me the richest guy pretty fast! Bill Gates be careful! I'm coming! :-) I guess I should stop giving the URL away to RemoteCentral to my customer, they might become my competition!

URC is supposedely monitoring this web site, apparently they didn't get that people do not need the custom installer to pre programmed the remotes????? Is there anywhere in this site that says: "Beware! Programming remote control can be hazardous! Leave it to the pros, they know what they are doing!". Maybe they should not have send the MX-700 to RemoteCentral in the first place for testing and mentionned that the MX-Editor software is only for owners. I guess that would have sent a clear message: this one is not for you!!!


My 2 cents! (I guess I still have $199.98 to use from the last customer)

fcd

Greg -- I plead guilty to being newer to this forum than some others are. I believe that you have made a significant contribution to the forum, to HTM and, specifically, to my understanding of how to use my MX-500. That said, with respect to the current discussion I think you have been far too protective of HTM. As a practical matter, HTM is probably in violation of both state and federal law - that remains to be seen - and some other positive voices on this forum, ie. BlueDo and SRC, have been, to all intents and purposes, silenced. The approach of HTM in silencing their dealers through threats, etc. is not something that I admire or respect. Although I believe that HTM has superior products I do not support their position with respect to the marketing of their products. I do understand that we will disagree on some of these issues.

Craig