Showing items 31 - 45 of 51 results.
I, as EasyM states, am a "little guy". I have no problem with manufacturer's having to develope new technology to meet new government standards. I also have no problem with them passing their costs onto dealers who in turn pass them on to users. The problem I have is when they lock out anyone else from accessing the information needed to repair the new technology. If a user is trapped into using only a dealer for repairs, then a monopoly is in place. This then dictates to the user the downtime & price of repairs. The user cannont make an informed decision on what brand of equipment to buy because only with experience can the dealers service & pricing be found out. Imagine what it would be like to buy a new car & have no service options other than the dealer you bought it from. I don't think any one of us would enjoy that senario.
If the monies spent on developing the technology is really the issue- then the dealers could charge a fee to access the information to recoup their costs. I believe this would only happen if they were forced to, as having a monopoly would be much more profitable.
As far as small companies not discussing risks with customers, I take issue with EasyM. Maybe some don't, but I most certainly do. I've never risked ruining a warranty for my customer, as that would ruin the trust my customer has with me. If I can run my business with less overhead & pass that savings onto my customer, that's what free enterprise is all about. Some companies like having full service dealers, some don't. I don't think any company would like being forced to only have 1 option.
In my experience the so called trained manufacturers engineers are not always that great at repairing their own product either, we have had the manufacturer of German yellow trucks, engineers in the UK go to jobs we have had to end up sorting because they either were struggling or just part fitting until the truck is repaired on their own product!
We have done motor, strip skim and rebuild jobs for £800 rather than £4000 quoted to just replace, customers cant and should not put up with this way of working and having to pay for the lack of common sense of so called factory trained engineers!! so what happens when the crap hits the fan with them??
Customers like the labor rates charged by the "little guys" but when a truck is misdiagnosed in the field by a non trained mechanic, they try and hold the manufacturer responsible. Extended warranties on most equipment can be voided if service is not being performed by authorized dealers. Small independent service companies don't usually discuss these risks with the customer. All is well and good with these independents until the crap hits the fan.
I thought all the OE's were getting tired of the bellyaching and were going to quit making it so difficult for the average mechanic to fix someone's forklift!
PS I have a 1974 Clark for sale and it will not take a laptop to tell me if I should change the sparkplugs!
Proshadetree, It's good for you that you own your own laptop and most of the cables. If I used my own laptop, I wouldn't have access to any software the company( dealership) has purchased the right to use. Might change,but for now, I'll use theirs. And by the way, if it hits the floor, I'm responsible for the repairs, or if it gets damaged or stolen, unless the truck is broken into. I have a bunch of customers who have lifts old enough not to need the new technology, and most stay where they are not because of the company name.
Convincing the people I deal with to purchase equipment is easy, convincing the bean counter in another state is another.
edward t.... I'm not quite the jerk I appear to be....
The market demands, Government requires, or Lawyers force R and D. The customer comes to expect faster lift speeds, "SAS", "Intrinsic Stability", smoother operations, more visibility, higher lift, narrower aisles, cameras, auto leveling forks... etc.... The manufacturer pays upfront for all that technology that is demanded. They are the first named in lawsuits. The manufacturer frequently use suppliers, yes, but it based on the manufacturer's specs in many cases, not just going parts shopping through the SMH website. Should they not protect their investment?
Those tools are the property of the technician, he can employ them however he sees fit. I got no problem with competition, as a matter of fact I live that competition every day. My frustration is the apparent "entitlement" attitude that a manufacturer should be compelled by law to turn over all of their "secrets" to any and everybody.
Let the freemarket work. If you as a mechanic bring so much value to the table, convince your customer to buy equipment that you can work on, and the other manufacturers will bow to the pressure. Trust me, I have seen the ugly side of not meeting ITA sales expectations.
I think meliftman is using the term 'trademark law' to indicate 'all intellectual property law', and (IANL) I think it is proper to refer to the law governing manuals and software as 'trade secret' and/or 'copyright' (mainly copyright). But he does have the correct idea about someone paying the license fees to own the right to distribute the information and software.
AND, actually what was done in the automotive world was to create an 'open standard', where the copyright for the standard is owned by some organization that allows it to be used/licensed without added fees, like the IEEE or in the forklift world, if not the IEEE, then ITSDF.
I think it is also a great point that 90% of what breaks does not require a laptop to fix, some people seems to stop hearing right after the "on this truck you need a laptop" and don't hear the "to only do about 5 things".
Trademark law was not repealed when auto manufacturers were made to comply. Now as for the cost of all the crud. I own my laptop. I have to fix my laptop when it eats to much floor. I own 85% of all my cables. I own all my tools. Now as for programing yes my dealership has provided what is required to preform work on most models. The best training I ever had was from hard knocks and a bunch of help after the fact.
I believe that most stealerships have found out that they can do bad service if they lock a customer in. As someone stated earlier customers will vote with their wallet and the value of such lifts will lessen. I have witnessed older non controlled lifts selling for more than newer models.
Congress will have to repeal the trademark law or the companies who want information will have to pay the copyright fees in order for the information to be made public. 99% of the repairs, except some electrics, can be made by any intelligent technician with mechanical aptitude. I work for a dealer and find that most repairs do not require the codes and/or access to the system to complete. It costs the dealer a ton of money to train us, which means we might not get that next raise. Why should the information be available to the general public for free when it costs the dealer? Don't think the dealer doesn't have to pay for access to the information, then they have to train the techs, supply the equipment,ie laptops, testers, cables. And for some of us, if we don't have it on our trucks, we won't have access for at least 24 hours, or drive two hours one way to the shop.
Great point of the majority of the systems being developed outside the dealer. Impco still has a great hand on many of the control systems used by various manufacturers today.
Your argument is somewhat flawed in a few spots there, AftrmktSales, but I do appreciate the discussion and your view. please allow me to address what I see as the inconsistencies in your viewpoints.
1.) No end user should have to pay for the research and development of extra bells and whistles that does not benefit the end user, and only benefits the dealer with 'lock-in'.
2.) The forklift manufacturer buys from their suppliers and does not do the research and development of the controls systems that are the causes of this "lock-in". However the dealer does respond to government regulations, and this response is where this 'lock-in' is generated, as it is a response to the regulation that says only trained and authorized people may work on and adjust the controls, and that the controls must be 'tamper proof' to prevent those not properly authorized to work on those controls from accessing the controls and adjustments. The law does NOT require the manufacturer to control who the employer is, of the people who will access the controls.
3.) The profit margin that a dealer gets for his goods and services are that dealers choices, based upon market forces and choices made by that dealer, and in no manner are the 'fault' or responsibility of the end user, and the same is true of the expenses the dealers decides is needed to sell their machine.
4.) Customers are not property of the dealer who sold the equipment. Competition is a good thing for the end user/consumer and to work to defeat competition is self defeating in the long run (you may win every race you run if no one else is running, but you will never have a championship). Customers will vote with their wallet and feet in the long term.
5.) While dealers find they have no choice but to train their techs on the particulars of the machines they warranty, in all but very rare cases, the techs have invested thousands of their own money in tools and years of industrial education prior to ever being considered as a possible hire in a forklift dealership. I do not think this web site's technical section forum board would exist if your assumption about tech training was true, that it was the dealers who provided all the training to the techs.
Techs find their training where they can get trained.
6.) While I don't doubt there are people who would like to be able to, as you claim " who has not taken a single risk", this is insulting to those techs who recognize their 10 to 20 thousand dollars* in tools is an investment in the distribution processes of the dealer they work for.
* a techs tool investment often is more than their investment in anything other than their home, should they be so fortunate to be able to own a home after purchasing the tools they need to do their job without having to add a few thousand dollars in computers, cables, and software licenses.
Again, thanks for your input into this discussion.
Forklift Dealers make in the low single digits % for profit on the sales of a forklift. By the time a dealer pays for all of the sales process including the salesman paycheck, he probably losses money to sell a new forklift.
It is parts and service that turns the lights on and pays for everyones salary in a dealership. So, you want to pass a law that says after the manufactuer has invested $miilions into R&D and Training and distribution etc... to just just hand over all of their potential profit to a guy who has not taken a single risk in the whole development and distribution process? That same dealer is who probably trained you to be a good technician, and now you want him to just hand over the keys to operation.
I got an idea.. Go build your own forklift, market it and sell it yourself. Then come back and tell me how "unfair" it is that you have to give all your potential profit to someone else.
i remember in 1996 when OBD 2 came into effect. We tossed thousands of dollars of hand scanners out and bought one that fit all cars. Now anyone can purchase a scanner at Wal-mart and access codes for their car. Not all the codes, just basic ones. But lift trucks are no where near as popular as cars. Lift manufacturers cannot afford to give their software out. Some makers wont even sell you a manual!
Onboard access to codes and learn features should be made manditory with the right to purchase manuals as well.
I work on 3 wheel Daewoo's that give access codes on the dash. But when replacing some items, you need the software to learn the new steer pot position. If you dont set it with the laptop, the drive motors will go full current on turns, this causes blown power amps or logic modules. I'm just luckey that a disgruntled tech gave me the software do these adjustments because it would cost an arm and a leg to call them each time! Some makers do allow learn without using software. I agree that we should be allowed better access!
monte_j e-mail me we can talk further about your issue.
I know that TVH (used to be SMH) in the USA offers a course to learn the impco spectrum system.
I see it being addressed by people voting with their wallets, with the resale of units, where a unit a year older sells for more money because it doesn't have the "lock in" to the brands dealer.
Forkliftaction.com accepts no responsibility for forum content and requires forum participants to adhere to the rules. Click here for more information.