Does anyone know if AS has volunteered to offer a refund for the OP's? I have worn mine but am wondering what recourse I may have...or if I am SOL. Adam has been quite accomodating in the past and displayed extreme integrity wrt business values, though this is certainly going to put him and those values to the test.
I think we are all missing the point. We are Bond collectors here and are solely interested in the screen used product. We were severly misled into buying something that was close but not at all screen used. If I was buying the glasses as purely functional non Bond glasses then fine, as QOS Bond glasses and as a possible future collectable, then the OP's are not fine, not at all. Be they better quality or not, they are not screen accurate, screen used Bond glasses, and I'm miffed at the gross misrepresentation of them being such. And now that I have seen the differences between the two glasses, those differences shout out at me everytime I see Craig wearing them.
Hit the spot exactly Asp9mm!
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Not missing the point at all, just defending my choice of lens type and giving an objective view rather than subjective statements without all the information.
I personally would never have been interested in the TF glasses had they been identified first. Happy accident that I have glasses I like thanks to incorrect information. I do understand and hate it for those who rightly feel mislead, but AS and OP had no reason to believe otherwise from pics and receipts. OP's design was obviously copied(ever so slightly modified, but only up close) from the evidence so far. It's only now with clear pics of the frame that the continuous top bar is obvious, rather than the welded bridge. The hinges look identical.
If you feel ripped off, imagine how they feel, ripped off and embarrased by a designer who's making a habit of claiming other designs for this movie.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
Not missing the point at all, just defending my choice of lens type and giving an objective view rather than subjective statements without all the information.
But your choice of lens was not our concern with this topic, hence my statement
I do understand and hate it for those who rightly feel mislead, but AS and OP had no reason to believe otherwise from pics and receipts.
Actually, they did change tack and back pedal when confronted with statements that they made which were misleading. In fact, some emails Markus got were rude and downright lies. All of this has been confirmed and compounded in the last few days and answers and solutions do need to be given.
Does anyone know if AS has volunteered to offer a refund for the OP's? I have worn mine but am wondering what recourse I may have...or if I am SOL. Adam has been quite accomodating in the past and displayed extreme integrity wrt business values, though this is certainly going to put him and those values to the test.
I think once OP back down and accept they were wrong, no one will have the slightest problem demanding a refund on the grounds of misrepresentation. However, OP are still identifying the shades as there own on their website... and on the grounds of the embarrassement, costs, and the fact that Ford's have clearly just ripped off a design they were given, OP might not be ready to chuck the towel in just yet.
That said, I know the Mantis is asking OP in the USA for a refund, and ASP9mm seems so incensed at AS for misrepresentation I suspect if he doesn't use his ASP9mm on them, at least he'll ask for a refund very soon. So see how they go on...
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
I'm not happy at the denials some of us got when confronting them with this news some months back to the point where we were mocked by AS. Very incensed that they are still advertising them on their site as screen used. That is very mis-representational as they now know the truth X-(
I'm not happy at the denials some of us got when confronting them with this news some months back to the point where we were mocked by AS. Very incensed that they are still advertising them on their site as screen used. That is very mis-representational as they now know the truth X-(
Have you asked them for a refund on the basis of misrepresentation?
What's there attitude been? A think many purchasers would be anxious to know.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
I'm not happy at the denials some of us got when confronting them with this news some months back to the point where we were mocked by AS. Very incensed that they are still advertising them on their site as screen used. That is very mis-representational as they now know the truth X-(
Have you asked them for a refund on the basis of misrepresentation?
What's there attitude been? A think many purchasers would be anxious to know.
I think you'll see a few feedbacks on that question quite soon. Not from me though, Bondtoys and I thought something was going on months back when the OP's were due for delivery and the answers we got to certain questions were 'fuzzy' to say the least. Unhappy with this fuzziness and evasion, we cancelled. I'm unhappy for my friends who are really mad about this and kept their orders open.
But your choice of lens was not our concern with this topic, hence my statement
Actually, they did change tack and back pedal when confronted with statements that they made which were misleading. In fact, some emails Markus got were rude and downright lies. All of this has been confirmed and compounded in the last few days and answers and solutions do need to be given.
I didn't start the discussion of lens materials, I just finished it.
About the backpedalling and such by OP, that info hasn't been made public so far as I know. Still seems obvious they were copied. Screen used or not, why reward TF for bringing you possibly inferior product at double the price? What's the motto, "It's my money and I'll waste it as I see fit!"?
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
Has the price been made known on the Fords yet? I won't be buying them either way, but as a Bond collector, if I did buy either one, it would be based on which was used in the film as a Bond collectable and not shades on their own merit. I'd rather wear my Sama Slams than that particular style of shade. They're not for me.
As for your lenses, who cares, you look good in anything :x
Has the price been made known on the Fords yet? I won't be buying them either way, but as a Bond collector, if I did buy either one, it would be based on which was used in the film as a Bond collectable and not shades on their own merit. I'd rather wear my Sama Slams than that particular style of shade. They're not for me.
As for your lenses, who cares, you look good in anything :x
Damn right I do!
I don't know about the price of the glasses, just combining info about the non Sunspel polo and the glasses into one big generalization.
Has the price been made known on the Fords yet? I won't be buying them either way, but as a Bond collector, if I did buy either one, it would be based on which was used in the film as a Bond collectable and not shades on their own merit. I'd rather wear my Sama Slams than that particular style of shade. They're not for me.
As for your lenses, who cares, you look good in anything :x
Damn right I do!
I don't know about the price of the glasses, just combining info about the non Sunspel polo and the glasses into one big generalization.
/quote]
I'm not happy at the denials some of us got when confronting them with this news some months back to the point where we were mocked by AS. Very incensed that they are still advertising them on their site as screen used. That is very mis-representational as they now know the truth X-(
Have you asked them for a refund on the basis of misrepresentation?
What's there attitude been? A think many purchasers would be anxious to know.
I think you'll see a few feedbacks on that question quite soon. Not from me though, Bondtoys and I thought something was going on months back when the OP's were due for delivery and the answers we got to certain questions were 'fuzzy' to say the least. Unhappy with this fuzziness and evasion, we cancelled. I'm unhappy for my friends who are really mad about this and kept their orders open.
I think for someone who cancelled some months ago with the concerns you have had your present moral outrage on behalf of others is commendable.
Its a great shame neither yourself nor Bondtoys felt able to pass on this information "some months" ago to avoid other being victim to, appartently, £255.00 worth of "misrepresentation"...
Have you asked them for a refund on the basis of misrepresentation?
What's there attitude been? A think many purchasers would be anxious to know.
I think you'll see a few feedbacks on that question quite soon. Not from me though, Bondtoys and I thought something was going on months back when the OP's were due for delivery and the answers we got to certain questions were 'fuzzy' to say the least. Unhappy with this fuzziness and evasion, we cancelled. I'm unhappy for my friends who are really mad about this and kept their orders open.
I think for someone who cancelled some months ago with the concerns you have had your present moral outrage on behalf of others is commendable.
Its a great shame neither yourself nor Bondtoys felt able to pass on this information "some months" ago to avoid other being victim to, appartently, £255.00 worth of "misrepresentation"...
As we had no proof, this would have been foolhardy. We just an underlying sense of something wrong. As soon as the proof was in hand Bondtoys did and was shot down for it. I for one have been working away for the last few months (hence no posts during that time) and had little or no computer access.
I think for someone who cancelled some months ago with the concerns you have had your present moral outrage on behalf of others is commendable.
Its a great shame neither yourself nor Bondtoys felt able to pass on this information "some months" ago to avoid other being victim to, appartently, £255.00 worth of "misrepresentation"...
oh, could you please give yourself a break!
As we have pointed out before, AS has been more than vague in all of his statements. Noone knew, what was really going on, so noone could give a final reply on all this.
I am sure, Asp9mm did not want to risk a legal war with AS without knowing exactly what was going on and so did I. I don't want to imagine, how strong your reactions would have been if you would have disguised us with such a story without knowing 100%, what is going on.
I have cancelled my orders just after my gutts where telling me, that the replies, which I have received from A.S., where misleading and false. And he was kind of laughing at me, that I'll never get these shades somehwere else anytime. So, what should I have posted on the board?
And only for the record: Asp9mms and my cancellations were due to the fact, that we did not get a clear word on, if the OP Airman are now done in a unique edition of 2x150 or not.
We have had then NO idea about TFs shades in the movie. This broke out after Arlington Beache's breaking news thread, which has been long after we both have cancelled our orders.
And after I came up telling slightly my concerns about AS, wasn't it you particularly, who started sniping on me?
And if you would have read my comments on AS's statements carefully, you could have asked back anytime.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,533MI6 Agent
Sigh, I remember a time when all we had to do was find a blue polo made Sunspel and internally fight over whether we should pay $95 for a polo. Ah, those were the days (he said as he rocked in his rocking chair and pulled his shawl tighter against his feeble shoulders...).
Sigh, I remember a time when all we had to do was find a blue polo made Sunspel and internally fight over whether we should pay $95 for a polo. Ah, those were the days (he said as he rocked in his rocking chair and pulled his shawl tighter against his feeble shoulders...).
We still have all the props and little things to find when we've seen the film, that's when the good times start {[] Oh and getting our Maddy shirts sometime
According to the description, they are model 108S 19V, silver frames with blue lenses! Hopefully, this is a typo. It does list the James Bond branded case. Also, there appears to be a Tom Ford logo in the left lens' upper left corner. Hopefully, the pictures are wrong and these are grey/black lenses. If not, there might not be any screen accurate sunglasses available.
What are the Tom Fords selling for? I have heard $600 but the ebay retailer has them for $475. Is it safe to assume that the general run will be less price wise than the "limited edition". I'd prefer to not have any 007 logos if I bought this item so I would be more inclined to go with the general run and not the limited.
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
So is it 100% certain that the TFs are the ones Craig wears? Or do we still not really know for sure - only that both OPs and TFs were at the shoot? ?:)
Comments
Hit the spot exactly Asp9mm!
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Not missing the point at all, just defending my choice of lens type and giving an objective view rather than subjective statements without all the information.
I personally would never have been interested in the TF glasses had they been identified first. Happy accident that I have glasses I like thanks to incorrect information. I do understand and hate it for those who rightly feel mislead, but AS and OP had no reason to believe otherwise from pics and receipts. OP's design was obviously copied(ever so slightly modified, but only up close) from the evidence so far. It's only now with clear pics of the frame that the continuous top bar is obvious, rather than the welded bridge. The hinges look identical.
If you feel ripped off, imagine how they feel, ripped off and embarrased by a designer who's making a habit of claiming other designs for this movie.
But your choice of lens was not our concern with this topic, hence my statement
Actually, they did change tack and back pedal when confronted with statements that they made which were misleading. In fact, some emails Markus got were rude and downright lies. All of this has been confirmed and compounded in the last few days and answers and solutions do need to be given.
I think once OP back down and accept they were wrong, no one will have the slightest problem demanding a refund on the grounds of misrepresentation. However, OP are still identifying the shades as there own on their website... and on the grounds of the embarrassement, costs, and the fact that Ford's have clearly just ripped off a design they were given, OP might not be ready to chuck the towel in just yet.
That said, I know the Mantis is asking OP in the USA for a refund, and ASP9mm seems so incensed at AS for misrepresentation I suspect if he doesn't use his ASP9mm on them, at least he'll ask for a refund very soon. So see how they go on...
Have you asked them for a refund on the basis of misrepresentation?
What's there attitude been? A think many purchasers would be anxious to know.
I think you'll see a few feedbacks on that question quite soon. Not from me though, Bondtoys and I thought something was going on months back when the OP's were due for delivery and the answers we got to certain questions were 'fuzzy' to say the least. Unhappy with this fuzziness and evasion, we cancelled. I'm unhappy for my friends who are really mad about this and kept their orders open.
I didn't start the discussion of lens materials, I just finished it.
About the backpedalling and such by OP, that info hasn't been made public so far as I know. Still seems obvious they were copied. Screen used or not, why reward TF for bringing you possibly inferior product at double the price? What's the motto, "It's my money and I'll waste it as I see fit!"?
As for your lenses, who cares, you look good in anything :x
Damn right I do!
I don't know about the price of the glasses, just combining info about the non Sunspel polo and the glasses into one big generalization.
I know the prices here in Germany at least:
OP Airman with polarized (glass:v) lenses: €350,-
TF 108/s: € 285,--
And I did not know, that ebay is now selling the products, which are listed there
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
The most well used and accurate words of Bondtoys
I think for someone who cancelled some months ago with the concerns you have had your present moral outrage on behalf of others is commendable.
Its a great shame neither yourself nor Bondtoys felt able to pass on this information "some months" ago to avoid other being victim to, appartently, £255.00 worth of "misrepresentation"...
it was only a short time, that I Leeeeeely liked you...
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Now these can't be right:
The case doesn't seem to have the "Tom Ford 007 James Bond" logo quoted by the Sunglasses Shop and quoted to the Mantis by a TF rep....?
As we had no proof, this would have been foolhardy. We just an underlying sense of something wrong. As soon as the proof was in hand Bondtoys did and was shot down for it. I for one have been working away for the last few months (hence no posts during that time) and had little or no computer access.
oh, could you please give yourself a break!
As we have pointed out before, AS has been more than vague in all of his statements. Noone knew, what was really going on, so noone could give a final reply on all this.
I am sure, Asp9mm did not want to risk a legal war with AS without knowing exactly what was going on and so did I. I don't want to imagine, how strong your reactions would have been if you would have disguised us with such a story without knowing 100%, what is going on.
I have cancelled my orders just after my gutts where telling me, that the replies, which I have received from A.S., where misleading and false. And he was kind of laughing at me, that I'll never get these shades somehwere else anytime. So, what should I have posted on the board?
And only for the record: Asp9mms and my cancellations were due to the fact, that we did not get a clear word on, if the OP Airman are now done in a unique edition of 2x150 or not.
We have had then NO idea about TFs shades in the movie. This broke out after Arlington Beache's breaking news thread, which has been long after we both have cancelled our orders.
And after I came up telling slightly my concerns about AS, wasn't it you particularly, who started sniping on me?
And if you would have read my comments on AS's statements carefully, you could have asked back anytime.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I think Mantis was referring to the forthcoming Limited Edition. The regular edition is available as the 2009 range and will be mass-produced.
We still have all the props and little things to find when we've seen the film, that's when the good times start {[] Oh and getting our Maddy shirts sometime
http://www.sunglasses-shop.co.uk/uk-sunglasses/Tom-Ford-Sunglasses/Tom-Ford-James-Bond-007-Silver/7986.htm
According to the description, they are model 108S 19V, silver frames with blue lenses! Hopefully, this is a typo. It does list the James Bond branded case. Also, there appears to be a Tom Ford logo in the left lens' upper left corner. Hopefully, the pictures are wrong and these are grey/black lenses. If not, there might not be any screen accurate sunglasses available.