Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Holy Crap Leica!

Canazes I know it sounds terrible to profit from the misfortunes of others;but c'mon ....... if you get in a fender bender, the auto body shop makes a profit on fixing your car;the insurance company makes a profit by charging you increased premiums...if your hunting gear is stolen,everyone from the rifle to scope manufacturer,and others who supply gear you lost, makes a profit on the new gear you buy to replace it....I think you get my point.

This is fun and games stuff for us,this hunting and shooting buisiness;hardly life and death options when we decide to drop a couple of grand on an alpha bin and then subject it to wear and tear afield.It's our decision and no reason for Leica NOT to profit from the abuse we inflict on the gear;they are in business to make money;and not let others dictate what they "should make" for profit...like Steve implies, maybe Leica buyers are suckers..... maybe a guy should not buy Leica if he does not want to pay the freight to fix his toy after he beats it up.

Besides, anyone expect me to believe that a guy who did not complain at dropping over $2k for a bin,now complains because he has to shell out roughly a third that cost to repair it? I have a solution...don't beat it up,or don't buy it in the first place!

And if you do, suck it up like a man and pay to fix your toy.

I don't expect any optics company to act as my personal surety in case I beat up a piece of optical gear....it isn't THEIR responsibility;it's mine.

Maybe a fella should take his money elsewhere and spend it with a company that will fix it for free;that's his choice and the benefit of a Free Market system.....Since Leica has been selling product in the US for longer than many on here have been alive, I doubt they're going anywhere soon...they must be doing something right...the free market system says so.

I'm sure Leica could build into their pricing a warranty like, for instance, some of the Asian companies have, where they could repair or replace their products regardless of what happened to them. That's what companies like Leupold and Vortex, for example, do with their products.

I have had two experiences with Leica's warranty department and both where 100% positive with no strong-arming required. Sounds like I am in the minority.

If you don't mind would you use the quote and show us where the OP stated he abused his toy. Often companies have recalls for defectives discovered by their customers.

This is not being argumentative, so please don't take it that way. But when you say "I'm sure Leica could build into their pricing a warranty like........" Swaro charges basically the same money as Leica does. How do they do it? Don't you feel that's probably why you see Swarovski's in hunting camp about 4-1 over Leica's? At least I do. Maybe more. As a matter of fact I see fewer and fewer every year. The only ones I've seen in the past 3-4 years have bee Geovids.

I like Leica products, but I really see them screwing the pooch with these policies.

While I'm with you on the warrany issue, I think some of the "I see more Swarovski vs. Leica" is due to marketing and dealership availability in the US.

You could be right PG. They really do a good job of marketing that's for sure. I'll admit too, sometimes, by the stories I read here and elsewhere, I wonder why Swaro fixes some stuff free of charge when they have no right to, but they did. What I do know is, when they do that, words of praise for the company spreads across the 'net like a house afire. Same goes when Leica or whomever "screwed me over" on a repair. Negativity spreads like wildfire too, probably moreso. There's even a guy on a birdforum pizzed off about what Leica did to him.

I'm going to venture a guess and say you probably answered your own question............they sell a lot more than the others. All I'm saying is that any company, whether it be sport optics or microwave ovens, figures out how much product they sell and of that amount, they know approx. how much will be defective or needing some service after the sale, and in order for them to turn a profit, they price the product accordingly. That's the bottom line. Do I think the price quoted for replacing two lenses is high ? Yes, seems very high. Should a company be obligated to repair stuff for free that was clearly the fault of the end user ? Absolutely not. If they do, great.

RINGMAN: Can you [bleep] read!LOL!

I tip my hat to Boise...he man'd up and admitted it!

That is probably the case. I was telling one of my hunting buddies about my new Leica ER scope and he had never heard of them before. I'll bet if I said I just bought a new Zeiss or Swarovski scope he would have said......... " holly crap, how much did that set you back Roy ".

Much like our friend E, he likes to type but his readin ain't so good.

Billy,

Well, yeah.

Leica has always had a problem with marketing in the U.S.

This doesn't mean Leica optics aren't great. But the great god Zeiss was here long before them, and the Swarovski marketing/advertising department kicked the butts of Zeiss AND Leica starting in the 1990's.

Eventually Zeiss recognized the American market was different than Europe's--which meant they had to sell a reasonably affordable riflescope. Most Americans are both scope- and brand-biased--and they buy a lot of rifles, which all need scopes. If they believe in a scope brand, then they'll buy the same company's binoculars.

Leica never has cracked the American scope market, probably because they haven't offered 1" scopes like Swarovski and Zeiss.

Until average American hunters are buying Leica scopes then I doubt they'll think about Leica binoculars like they do Swarovski and Zeiss binoculars.

I don't think Leica has their hands in as many markets as Zeiss and Swaro do from a global standpoint either John. I could be wrong about that too. I think the sport optics divisions of both are relatively small.

Yeah, because they're stupid.

Re-badging Leupold scopes as Leica in the past and offering them at a Leica price point didn't help matters.

Screw Leica and their [bleep] customer service, I'll take Swarovski or Zeiss.

I think RD may be right...doesn't Zeiss sell a bunch of optics to the medical and science industries?...and Swaro has the big crystal division.

Zeiss has a huge market in medical imaging, eye wear and photography too.

Like Nikon, I think Leica Sport Optics is just a hobby. They don't seem to take it very serious. Kowa (Kowa Optimed) also has a huge presence in the medical industry, and their sport optics take a back seat to no one, but they're relatively unheard of except by the benchrest shooters.

Well that really sucks, hearing this and talking to Sharpsguy several months back has me worried about Leica.

I have a pair of 10x42 Geovids and have wondered about customer service, or lack there of, should I have a problem with them, VERY glad to have won them in a bet after reading this.

Gunner

Leica has many irons in many fires, some of these postings notwithstanding.
They have an extensive high-end global camera and lens market, particularly in Europe.
We're talking *expensive* cameras with a devoted following.
They also manufacture microscopes for laboratory use, surgery etc.

Leica has cost and service billing consistency issues here in the U.S. My experiences have been stellar, but I know of others that have not been.

I'm going to forward this entire thread to their public relations and service department.
Leica makes products that are some are the best in the world. Hell, their Geovids revolutionized binoculars!
But they need a reminder and maybe this thread will help.

I really like those Geovids gunner. Hopefully they won't give you any trouble.