Originally Posted by Adam@PCTorque
Wow, guess YOU didn't read my post where I explained why it was $200 for the exact reason of them NOT doing that.
Anything else to share? Except maybe this time AFTER you read the thread you're posting in
Yes, you did articulate the new policy very well Adam, thank you. I too feel it's a little steep but also won't claim to know all of the "cost" variables involved. Overall, truly a great policy.
Now in defense for Groston, even after reading the new policy myself, my gut reaction was: "sure they won't use the rejected screens for "non-policy" purchasers".... Besides, why wouldn't you????? If all it has is one or two bad pixels and they fall outside the center say around the outer edge,,,, it perfectly falls within the "standard" screen specs. Why would PC-T waste money by selling it at a "discounted rate via other channels" when it meets everyday specs??
As groston eluded to - and I would have to agree, it's quite a leap of faith for any logical thinking consumer to believe that the ratio of single bad pixel screens wouldn't
increase for "non-policy" purchasers due to the new policy.
But, this is just a gut reaction and PC-T deserves the benefit-of-the-dought.
I commend them if the "rejected" screens (regardless of degree, ie one or ten bad p's) are taken out of normal build selection.
Just my humble opinion