[Elecraft] K3 2nd run priority via-a-vis deposit

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft]

Hi Doug,

We were taking great pains -not- to give this impression at Dayton, 
since we were already into the 2nd run. I apologize if there was 
confusion on this issue.

I am very clear on this and made sure we kept everyone informed of what 
we were doing. Prior to Dayton we had already changed the web order form 
to reflect this change and we had also noted from the first day of 
orders that deposit priority for low serial numbers -only- applied to 
the first run numerous times on the reflector.

We absolutely did not want to penalize those who ordered during the 
first run without deposits. If we had continued moving later orders with 
deposits (received after the first run was full around May 14th) ahead 
of the earlier orders received -without- deposits, those early 
deposit-less orders would have been bumped well into next year. Not a 
fair thing for those people. Basically we took orders, both with and 
without deposits, until we filled the first production run. At that 
point we set up that groups to ship first from the deposit group and 
then from the non-deposit group. After that, all orders will be shipped 
in order received.

A side note - All deposits are always refundable (though we take a 3% 
hit from the CC company on each one.) We will gladly refund a deposit to 
anyone who asks.

73, Eric  WA6HHQ
(Now back to testing and packing K3s!  :-)
=====

DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:
> I ordered my first K3 at Dayton 2007 and I was certainly under the
> very clear impression that those who placed a deposit would be given
> priority over those who did not.  I happened to pay in full.
>
> Yes, it does seem that the rules changed somewhere in mid-stream (an
> unannounced change).  I know that I am not the only one who felt this
> way because others who ordered at Dayton and did not place a deposit
> felt that having to wait until the "end of the run" was fine with
> them.
>
> I suppose that this entire concept never made a whole lot of sense to
> me because "why should Run #1 guys w/o a deposit receive priority over
> Run #2 guys who did include a desposit?"  Now I know why I was
> confused about that "logic"....because those of us ordered at Dayton
> were operating under an incorrect pretense.
>