Dear Pumakid
Thank you very much indeed for taking the time to share your views on GM protective equipment and our Customer Service. Whilst I am naturally disappointed to read that you have had issues, we live in an increasingly transparent internet age and GM as a Company value real world feedback and constructive criticism.
As much as we would only ever like to have positive feedback, our development process is aided greatly by evaluating product shortcomings, reviewing and moving forwards. We very much appreciate you taking the time to write about your GM experiences.
I see from our email archive that our correspondence started back in 2005, and over the years you have contacted us directly about a number of matters. I hope and believe that we have responded to you appropriately as and when you have contacted us. I thank you very much indeed for being such a firm supporter of GM over the years.
At 22:50 on February 22nd this year, you emailed us about a pair of LE gloves. At 22:57 that same evening, you posted vigorously on this Forum about the gloves. You and I got into email correspondence, I personally went through our Assist email database and our corporate SPAM filters but I was unable to trace your initial email.
Both I and Steve Wilkinson, our Head of QC, corresponded with you about the gloves. I believe that you subsequently returned them to a dealer for repair.
In terms of your LE pads, you emailed us on June 7th at 10:19. Steve Wilkinson responded on June 9th at 13:25 with a suggested course of action for you. I don’t know what your decision on the pads is, as yet, but I do believe we have set out the best course of action for you in our correspondence.
You have made reference to what you view as a decline in quality. That would certainly be a concern for us. Our returns rate this year on the LE Pad is 2.1%, on the Glove 0.4%. The pad is a little higher than I would like, but one must consider that pads can get a measure of abuse in the game, and whilst we may strive for zero defects we are realistically unlikely to achieve that. Cricket software is mostly handmade and because of the nature of the supply chain and the physical strain put upon the items in use, there will always be a nominal failure rate.
We have spoken to the retailer you mention, with whom we have a long and strong relationship, who is not aware of any general declining trends in the quality of our software, either in absolute terms or in relationship to our competitors. I have spoken with our Marketing Director and his team who report that failure rates on the category as a whole are unexceptional this season thus far.
Coincidentally, I am meeting with the manufacturer of the LE products tonight in London and will raise your concerns personally. We have worked with this particular firm for about 40 years and we hold them in the highest regard.
I fully accept that our overall view of the software market does not help you and your specific experiences, and I can but apologise on behalf of GM if you feel that we have let you down. I also apologise that I have not personally responded to you on this Forum before now – I must make more time for catching up with what real cricketers are saying.
I can assure you that our product team strive to deliver premium features and benefits at reasonable prices to the marketplace. We are not complacent.
It is not my role to advise about effective consumer complaint strategies. If we have fouled up, we have to take that on the chin and analyse all complaints howsoever they may be presented to us. I would however probably agree with a number of your colleagues on the Forum that complaints are most effectively resolved with a measure of calm and respect on both sides of the supply transaction. We would not wish to use phraseology that one could guarantee would aggravate unnecessarily our valued customers.
Since 1885, I do believe that GM have been an upstanding firm and this is Edward Lowy, Group Managing Director, standing up.
With kind regards
Edward
Author
Topic: A note from GM (Read 6123 times)