Enough is enough.

You're agument here is not making a true comparison. Now if you want to talk specifically about an editorial in said newspaper you be more on the mark. In that case I would respond with an editorial of my own. Obviously I would still have to buy the paper in the first place and again to see that my editorial ran. Newspapers incidentally are not held responsible with regard to liable for what they print in the op/ed section.

Few lawsuits with merit run out of money. They are done on contingency. Those not done on contingency are usually those with so little merit that no lawyer would take them on contingency. As far as running out of will, if that's the case it should never have been filed in the first place. As I said before entirely too many people simply role the dice because for the plaintiff there is usually little downside, other than a potential countersuit. At the very least the losing plaintiff should be entirely responsible for the defendants legal and other expenses to defend. That is only reasonable and logical. If you don't have a good case don't sue.

I suppose if you consider money out of pocket for filing fees, cost of travel, lost productivity etc for a judgement that will likely be on appeal for years (in the defendants home state of course) or outright unenforcable "no big deal" then I suppose you're right.

The entire basis of the lawsuit is that the letter was posted on Clearstar. Webb didn't have to travel further than his closest internet connected computer. The allegation by Mr Gravelle was that a competitor of his(Gravelles) then posted the letter at ALOA 2000. At any rate one trip is hardly enough to resolve a lawsuit. There are depositions, continuences, etc. The smart defendant will maximize these when it is the palintiff who must travel, as it virtually always is.

Smart business is not "always" subject to 20/20 hindsight. If that were true no one would conduct buiness intelligently. In this case it was a no-brainer because the letter, as you yourself stated, isn't even libelous. Also the point that you seem to consistently be missing is that those conducting the "attack" weren't doing so because of a deficiency in the machine but because of what they percieve as obnoxious etc behavior by the company owner with regard to filing of the frivolous lawsuit for the non-libelous letter.

Sorry about the split posting this got left off.

If the "Webbs letter" you refer to is the one that started the whole controversy it doesn't mention anything about agreeing to meet Mr Gravelle at ALOA 2000. If there is another which ackowledged this arangement I haven't seen it. My point is that so far as I know the only person stating this arangement ever existed is Mr Gravelle. That being the case there is no certainty that that arangement ever existed.

It's good that you like the machine. However computerized code machines are reasonably complex and require precision. The problems Webb described could easily have existed with the machines he used. His letter could well be entirely factual.

This is probably why no one attacked the quality of the machine directly. The long and short of it is when the vast majority of people read Webbs letter they don't see a scathing defametory attack. They see a rather polite statement of simple dissatisfaction with a product. That said those same people become somewhat understandably angry with a business owner who files a frivolous lawsuit to silence or punish a customer who certainly appears to simply be stating a legitimate criticism of a product.

AND SOME USE NOTHING ELSE!

I wonder how much less comment his blurb would have inspired if he hadn't mentioned Treskat software? (Should he have been aware of the dynamics surrounding that product?)

Also even the (supposedly) indentical copies of one model can vary from each other. The machine tolerances can cancel out on one copy and add up on another. (as can happen with locks) Materials can be non-uniform. Etc. Therefore it is possible to get "lemons".

Maybe this was a "lemon" found in a production run of a generally acceptable model?

Good for you Roger.

Front wheel Drive??? The Tucker was a rear engine rear wheel drive.

Were the other design innovations and safety innovations Tucker

Survival of the best connected. GM had a senator in their pocket and they knew that if the Tucker were allowed into production GM would have to scrap all of their designs and play catch up with no assurance they'd be able to compete. They would be out of business. (like Kaiser, Willys, American Bantam, Nash, Desoto, Packard...etc.)

snip again

How Do you Justify the Cost??? It's almost three times the cost of regular code machines. Does having the key cutting machine tied into a computer make that much difference?? not in my book. I too would like to see gordon contribute to the news group with something other than messages telling us that now is the time to buy one of his machines. Phil

I don't have one - but a local shop has this capability, and it appears to make a big difference. It saves a good fraction of the time, cuts way down on mistakes - and so ends up giving faster service to the customers.

IMHO, if a shop's volume will support it, it's a win.

Phil,

I paid a little over $2k for my machine. I got no interest financing, and I had a week to decide if I wanted to keep the machine. I rejected the first machine because of design considerations (wear bushings) and when changes were made that addressed my concerns I accepted the second one.

I justify the cost in comparison to lets say a 1200 or a Framon no. 2.. If you start out with a 1200 and then buy all of the additional cards, and cutter wheels the price is about the same or more. I also find that I never really liked the 1200 as it was a real pain to adjust.

When compared to a Framon, the price was also about the same after all of the spacing blocks and cutter wheels and while the Framon is reliable, and versatile, I really like the idea of popping the key in the vise and pushing a button.

I can also program the Code Pro to make my own tryout keys and it would make short work of the task. In short it takes the drudgery out of the process.

It is so easy to use I find myself using the duplicator in my truck less and less as it is just as easy to make originals as duplicates.

Glen,

Some transactions are contingent on satisfaction, some sales are final unless you can prove fraud. If you buy a car or a house as an example all of the problems with the house or car become your problems unless there is a warrantee, and then only the terms of the warrantee are at issue.

When you bought the house you live in or the car you drive, do you have the right to a refund if you decide after the purchase that you have remorse? Not likely.

If you want to try before you buy those terms need to be discussed before the sale.

It's important to note that with both types of sellers you mention above disatisfied buyers will still bad-mouth the company. In so doing they can do a LOT of damage. As long as the statements they make are true they are completely within their rights to do so.

Steve,

What does your ITL do that my Code Pro doesn't? For the bucks they get for them it must be really something special.

G'day Roger, MATE, .... mines BLACK and yours is not, that's about it. I know sweet bugger all about your machine, but I thought I'd stir the pot anyway. I mean really, if I got duded with a crappy $3500 (or more) code machine, and I could get no satisfaction from the manufacturer, then it would pay me to jump on the next flight to the manufacturers destination, and walk into his office with the bloody thing under my arm and confront him face to face. What would the air fair be, a couple of hundred bucks, and of course a genuine tax deduction anyhow.