NIKON TO END IT'S 3RD PARTY REPAIR PROGRAM

Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,180
Location
Los Angeles, USA
What are the repair options and policies from the competition (Canon, Sony, etc)?
Sony farms repairs out to Precision Camera Repair. Same as Olympus. Panasonic has a huge repair hub out in Texas. Their repairs are so slow, I'm turned off buying any Pany gear. Canon has pay-in CPS services, though I'm not sure how strict they are with gray market Canon equipment. I don't understand why independent authorized repair facilities can't handle repairs? Mirrorless cameras should actually be more easier since there are less moving parts at least with bodies. When Nikon made the first V1 and J1, they bragged how few parts go into their construction. Also I don't see much difference between mirrorless and DSLR lenses, they should be pretty much the same...a barrel with glass inside!
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,650
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Sony farms repairs out to Precision Camera Repair. Canon has pay-in CPS services, though I'm not sure how strict they are with gray market Canon equipment. Also I don't understand why independent authorized repair facilities can't handle repairs? Mirrorless should actually be more easier since there are less moving parts at least with bodies. Also I don't see much difference between mirrorless and DSLR lenses, they should be pretty much the same...a barrel with glass inside!
Add to that the fact that third-party repair shops should be a less expensive way to deliver service. When Compaq bought DEC I began working on Compaq's certification program for resellers and third-party service vendors. Compaq never had much of an in-house service component and relied on the third parties. Much earlier I was part of a team negotiating with Apple to have DEC provide service for Apple gear in Fortune 500 companies. Apple had investigated creating their own service division and the math caused them to come to us. The infrastructure for services is dauntingly expensive. That is why this move is so concerning to me. If anything, Nikon should move ALL its service work to contractors if cost-cutting is the goal. Either they are really stupid or there is something more disturbing behind it.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
13,357
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
I've needed my camera serviced only three times in the last 20 years, so this is not a big deal to me. I'm skeptical about expecting high quality repair and service of any mass-market item, so I simply chalk this up to more of the same old same old. I wouldn't expect to receive great service from any of the major camera manufacturers, so it's not as if I would choose a camera manufacturer largely because of its reputation for delivering high-quality repairs and service.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,180
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Come to think of it, this might be good for independent repair facilities. They now don't have to abide by Nikon's rules as authorized repair centers, meaning they can repair things like gray market cameras, if they can source parts from places other than Nikon. APS Repair can now repair that discounted gray market Nikon Z6 body from Ebay for example, when they couldn't before. These shops won't just close because Nikon abruptly ended business with them, they'll definitely find a way to survive.
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
4,371
Location
CT USA
And more: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2019-news/december-2019-nikon-canon/nikon-cuts-back-on-third-2.html

Thom notes, "The irony is that many of the repairs NikonUSA claims to do themselves are actually not done by them, but are farmed out to others. The Nikon LA repair center even ships some product across the border to be repaired in Mexico."
I know this first hand. Nikon Melville sent out my D5 and 70-200 EFL to two different contractors last year. Neither came close to the quality that Melville used to give. At least when you got a repair back, it looked as close to new as possible. Last year, my D5 came back from repair dirt marks on it from the fall I took. Melville has one contractor a few miles away and another in Brooklyn. To be honest, APS isn't allowed to repair the D5 or the 70-200 EFL anyway.....I had called them first and was told I had to send them to Nikon.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
6,108
Location
Upstate SC
Come to think of it, this might be good for independent repair facilities. They now don't have to abide by Nikon's rules as authorized repair centers, meaning they can repair things like gray market cameras, if they can source parts from places other than Nikon. APS Repair can now repair that discounted gray market Nikon Z6 body from Ebay for example, when they couldn't before. These shops won't just close because Nikon abruptly ended business with them, they'll definitely find a way to survive.
My understanding of the new rule is that they will no longer have access to Nikon OEM parts. That’s what will grind things to a halt.
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,650
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
I've needed my camera serviced only three times in the last 20 years, so this is not a big deal to me. I'm skeptical about expecting high quality repair and service of any mass-market item, so I simply chalk this up to more of the same old same old. I wouldn't expect to receive great service from any of the major camera manufacturers, so it's not as if I would choose a camera manufacturer largely because of its reputation for delivering high-quality repairs and service.
I mostly agree. But I suspect some pros count on timely, high quality service and a company's reputation for such is likely a consideration for them (and some others like the serious amateurs here). My concern is that this move does not make financial sense to me. Unless they know something (bad) about the future need for warranty repairs and thus the ongoing need for non-warranty maintenance? I am probably over-thinking this. It could be that they are as inept as they seem.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
459
Location
SE Michigan
Real Name
Chris
This isn’t going to hurt their sales. It’s just a way to shore up financials on a business unit that’s losing money as they position themselves to battle Sony for the pole position. Sucks for us but as a business decision I get it and would have made the same decision, prolly a year or two ago if I’m honest.
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,650
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
This isn’t going to hurt their sales. It’s just a way to shore up financials on a business unit that’s losing money as they position themselves to battle Sony for the pole position. Sucks for us but as a business decision I get it and would have made the same decision, prolly a year or two ago if I’m honest.
It is unlikely to hurt sales, I agree. But using third parties to deliver services is almost always cheaper. Depending on how the business relationship is structured it could even save on inventory costs if the third party providers paid for parts they stock themselves. This is why this makes zero sense to me. Someone has to do the work. If those someones are your employees you eat the fully loaded cost for them. If they are someone else's employees, all you have to bear is the reimbursement expense for repairs done on your behalf.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
13,357
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
More than anything else, this decision reminds me of the waves of senior management decisions that happen over the decades in business. Examples: Let's change from management by objective to management by participation (or at least making the underlings think they are participating). Let's change from decentralization to centralization and back again to decentralization. Let's change from limiting ourselves to our core business to diversifying and back again to focusing on our core business. Every time there's a change, there's also an explanation as to why it's such a great idea...until it proves not to be such a great idea.

Nikon clearly has to make changes. My guess is that that's the mentality at HQ -- making change. Let's not be petty about whether the change is for the good. Instead, let's just make change. I've seen it happen countless times in business.
 

Butlerkid

Cafe Ambassador
Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
20,836
Location
Rutledge, Tennessee
Real Name
Karen
Unfortunately, businesses don't get an unlimited number of do-overs. And those decisions often have to be BIG product or process decisions, not fringe services like repair. If they don't get it right quickly, they often don't survive.

Nikon was hit hard by the tsunami. Then Nikon has been late to the game a lot in the last few years, perhaps beginning with the lack of a followup product for the D300, then onto other perceived mis-steps like ignoring the cell phone and mirrorless evolutions instead of trying to lead.

I'd love to see Nikon survive, but they really need to make big (and corrrect) changes quickly.
 
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
6,650
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Unfortunately, businesses don't get an unlimited number of do-overs. And those decisions often have to be BIG product or process decisions, not fringe services like repair. If they don't get it right quickly, they often don't survive.

Nikon was hit hard by the tsunami. Then Nikon has been late to the game a lot in the last few years, perhaps beginning with the lack of a followup product for the D300, then onto other perceived mis-steps like ignoring the cell phone and mirrorless evolutions instead of trying to lead.

I'd love to see Nikon survive, but they really need to make big (and corrrect) changes quickly.
I totally agree. Most often the biggest risk is not taking a needed risk. Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, just placed what is almost an all-in bet on streaming. But, if he had not, it is likely that Disney would have been boxed in by competitors and face a dauntingly expensive catch-up effort later. He placed his bet. The wheel is still spinning but I would bet on him winning.

The cliche metaphor for what Nikon is doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
 

Butlerkid

Cafe Ambassador
Moderator
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
20,836
Location
Rutledge, Tennessee
Real Name
Karen
I totally agree. Most often the biggest risk is not taking a needed risk. Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, just placed what is almost an all-in bet on streaming. But, if he had not, it is likely that Disney would have been boxed in by competitors and face a dauntingly expensive catch-up effort later. He placed his bet. The wheel is still spinning but I would bet on him winning.

The cliche metaphor for what Nikon is doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Totally agree. My experience was gained during the consolidation of the aerospace industry when government funding was cut WAY back. I remember, as part of the management team, issuing requirements to reduce overhead spending by 30%. If you reach for 10% savings....you lose. You need to force major changes in behavior and approach. We issued zero-based budgeting for the next year. I sure wish the Government would try zero-based budgeting. Only then would significant waste and inefficiencies be eliminated.

Nikon management, in my opinion, appears to be stuck in the past and unable to react quickly to changing business environments.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
13,357
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
I sure wish the Government would try zero-based budgeting.
Do you remember when they instead went for off-balance sheet financing? Sheesh!

Nikon management, in my opinion, appears to be stuck in the past and unable to react quickly to changing business environments.
As for the debacle about being so late to the mirrorless market, that's a classic case of the innovator's dilemma as explained by Clayton Christensen in his book of the same name.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom