[Leica] Hugh's M8 issue ? Is it intentional?

[douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp)]

>
> On Jan 18, 2007, at 10:22 PM, Hugh Thompson wrote:
>
>> Dealer told Leica we needed a replacement, and it arrived on 
>> Wednesday. Strangely enough, with an earlier Serial Number.
I suggested a long time ago that Leica would do this (in jest, and about 
the DMR to be quite honest): Still in jest, I hope. It's a clever way of 
making people think you've produced more cameras than you actually have.

1) send out cameras with known defects to your customers and let them 
praise you for having them available on time.
2) The first cameras are returned to have the defects "repaired" - 
waiting time several weeks
3) Quick repair and back to the next customer on the list (hence the 
earlier number)
4) Send a letter to customer from 2 saying : alternative 1: we are 
sending you a replacement (actually a camera from someone else who 
suffered earlier than you under 2, or Alternative 2: we are afraid the 
repair may take longer, please bear with us (meaning - we haven't got a 
backlog of returns yet)

This can be extended almost indefinitely.

Unimaginable? There was a German company called Flowtex
In 1998 and 1999, Leasinggesellschaft der Sparkassen (LGS) concluded 
several leasing agreements for a total of 159 horizontal drilling 
systems with a total acquisition value of approximately DM 17 million. 
The six saving banks refinanced this sum by way of a cash-value purchase 
of LGS?s claims against FlowTex under the leasing agreements. The cover 
on the FlowTex fraud was blown in February 2000 - the owners had 
concluded around 3,000 leasing agreements, although there were only 
around 300 drilling systems in existence.
>
>