Caveat Emptor- Should it apply to group buys?

LED Flashlights – General Info
1

I was going to post this as a reply to FreeMe’s JETBeam JET II MK group buy, but I didn’t want to clutter up his thread. Perhaps he will be willing to comment here.

I’ve seen what I quoted in several of the more recent group buys here on BLF; I can’t remember if they were all Freeme”s or if someone else is putting up a Caveat Emptor warning too.

I agree, of course, that the membership should realize that there is risk associated with any transaction… especially with budget lights. We all have received the occasional dud. And, yes, there have been major issues in group buys involving semi-custom, built to order, pushing the envelope lights.

But this is a factory light produced not to some special spec, but to the manufacture’s own. There is absolutely no reason anyone buying this light should expect anything other than a working light.

What you, Freeme, are saying with what I quoted is that either you don’t want to be bothered with the fallout if something goes awry and/or that JETBeam absolves itself of any responsibility if it does not deliver what it is offering for sale; i.e., a functional light.

When Ford comes out with a new model car, the salesman does not say, “This is a new model, it is untested, so don’t purchase unless you accept that it might never run properly.” That would be absurd, right? None of us would buy from Ford, would we?

We should ask ourselves this, if we were to purchase this light without participating in a group buy, would any of us feel like it is our problem alone that the light doesn’t work as advertised or even at all? Or would we hold JETBeam accountable and expect satisfaction in a reasonable form and time?

I don’t know about anybody else, but when I purchase something NIB from a well known company, I expect it to perform as advertised. I certainly do not believe the risk of receiving a faulty product should be assumed by me.

I always keep to my end of the bargain when I purchase a light, right? I mean, I always send them the money. It is not unreasonable to expect that they will do likewise and send me a working light. It’s really that simple.

But, hey, maybe it’s just me. I’d like to hear what y’all have to say on the subject.

Oh, and the statement that it has not been reviewed by any party is simply not true. This YT video review is three weeks old.

Granted, this guy might be a vender of some sort- I did’t look too deeply into what his business is- so he might not be the most objective.

Oh, and before I go… Freeme, this is just a philosophical discussion and in no way to I mean or intend to call into question your motives or integrity. It’s not a personal attack. I hope you don’t feel like it is.

2

I take it to mean that freeme has not reviewed this light nor has any other member. Therefore he is not endorsing this light, just negotiating a sale price for those who would like to buy it. If you like this companies products or it sounds like a good deal, go ahead and buy. If you do get a dud, it isn’t freeme’s or this forum’s fault. Freeme cannot speak for the manufacturer, so this warning does not absolve them of any responsibility.

edit because David brought up a good point: His warning also says nothing of the light not functioning, just that it might not meet the buyer’s expectations (which could be ridiculous).

In any case, I can see this thread going downhill fast. I hope not, but it wouldn’t be the first time.

3

Well, I’d say there are at least two legitimate ways to look at this. Your opening post describes one way. The other way is this: Forum members can be some of the most demanding and unforgiving ‘customers’ around! People literally demand perfection for a pittance. If a light doesn’t come with premium quality and premium features, they say it is ‘utter junk’. Yet, the premium brands that cost more are ‘way too overpriced’. If it doesn’t have their personal favorite mode group, it’s worthless. See where I’m going? To say that a ‘new’ light may not perform to their expectation is a valid warning! Complaints that the ‘Moon’ mode is too bright (or not bright enough - useless!) or the tint is too green, or the button is too springy, or the light is 2mm longer than its competitor, etc. can make for weary manufacturers and dealers.

Regardless, the light should function to spec. Caveat Emptor should never be applied to the basic working of the light. That is all I would hold anyone accountable for.

4

I hope not as well.

5

To be clear, I’m saying that we should collectively get wrapped around the axle because the moon is too brite or that the run times are overstated. I’m talking about major problems like shorting out or being DOA. It’s the latter to which I think caveat emptor should not apply, not the relatively minor issues of the former.

6

[quote=cone]

I don’t think it was meant to apply to the latter.

7

If you want to be picky (Hey, who, me?) look up the definition:

[emphasis added]

So — “caveat emptor” was possible and appropriate in situations where you could lay hands on the thing before you purchased it
(as well as lay hands on the seller afterward, of course)

Caveat emptor literally cannot apply to long distance purchases (anything after the invention of the mule-drawn wagon) nor to purchases where the cost of return postage exceeds the value of the thing bought.

Thus we invented QA (checking samples during production to assure quality in the factory processes) and QC (checking samples of the product being delivered to the retailer to control for problems missed in QA).

8

The light should function as Jetbeam designed it to function. Whether it works the way people want is a different, and non-valid, thing. If I buy a Honda Fit and it gets me from point A to point B doing all the things it’s designed to do then I have no valid complaint. The fact that it’s slower, handles worse, and is not as much fun to drive as my neighbors Porsche 911 is not an a valid complaint.

Group buys, discount codes, etc doesn’t change this fact. But as we’ve all seen far too many people expect a Porsche at Honda Fit prices and that also incorporate special custom features at no extra charge :person_facepalming:

I think caveat emptor really applies to getting what you’re supposed to be getting as opposed to getting what you want to be getting.

9

IMO that warning should be removed… in any case if someone receives the light and is not happy with it, probably because he doesn’t feel it makes 510 lumens that someone will still complain and start a new thread to talk about it… Remember the klarus Mi7?

I can understand the purpose of this thread if it was a more expensive product such as a Zebralight, when the sc600 mk3 was released there were big red warnings all over the description pages about tint shift, whine noise, battery compatibility, which are not expected from a $90 flashlight, but this Jetbeam is definitely budget and some flaws are always expected.

I guess lately there have been just too many complains about highly expected lights not living up to the hype by underperforming or coming with massive flaws: nitecore tip, klarus g20, klarus xt11s, and many more.

10

Will, I’d quibble with this statement. While I agree the light is inexpensive, I think JETBeam is not a budget manufacturer. They are well known and have a fairly long history. They should be able to produce a light, regardless of MSRP, that works the way they say it will work.

11

The seller can be blind but the buyer needs a thousand eyes
Can’t remember if this is an old Chinese proverb or what but I always liked this saying

12

I don’t mind the warning but I will heed it. I don’t want to pay to be a beta tester, which seems like it has been going on in some group buys lately.

13

There is nothing worse- well actually there are all sorts of RL things that are far, far worse than this- than thinking you’ve made a deal to purchase a light only to find out after the fact that the deal you really made was to be a guinea pig.

14

I think it should especially apply to group buys where we are asking for changes outside of the standards for a light. The assumption there should be that you are a beta tester since until there has been a production run mere one off samples won’t be able to reproduce the conditions of mass production. If you are unwilling to take that risk for the sake of being an early bird you simply shouldn’t participate. If you proceed anyway then be prepared to either join in determining what the problems are and how to fix them or politely deal with customer service to resolve issues that cannot be repaired. Until there’s a sufficient sample size to evaluate quality there’s simply no way to know what you will get.

15

Not much of a risk with the Jet II MK. The Jet I MK is an outstanding high quality 14500 twisty light. Other than the wonky clip (that I won’t use anyway), have no reason to believe the II MK won’t be the same high quality light.

16

Agreed.

17

I have no doubt that the light is fine; as defined by the whole production run being poop.

18

If one is worried about the whole production run being poop, just don’t buy those couple beers at the bar tonight and you will have covered the cost of the risk. Can only get better from there :slight_smile:

19

LOL, that presumes I drink.

20

As an aside, I suddenly have a rudeness point. LOL, so much for the polite exchange of ideas.