Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

[Scotty_Tradewind]

If this below is to be believed to be an official posting from a true Rocna company representative, why the mystique of not using your name?
It makes me doubt the integrity of such a posting!

I shall be phoning retailers Piplars of Poole wishing to change my Rocna 15kg to an anchor having correct steel specifiactions today. I'll report back.

Just a bit of background for everyone.

Under contract, I am helping Rocna via the new owners CMP, with some practical advice on restoring the brand's reputation - which has been under a bit of cloud recently.

I knew the press release might stir up a debate again, so some time ago I approached the YBW web manager for permission to enter the lists if needed. This permission, under certain pragmatic conditions, was granted, and the opportunity is much appreciated.

Some ground rules first;
CMP is a company with a strong ethical background with a passion for high standards. Have a look at the website page, for a flavour.

http://www.canmet.com/content/aboutus/quality.htm

As part of that approach CMP will not be engaging in rough housing, name-calling, or astroturfing. We are concentrating on

• sorting out the Q420 reduced spec steel problem
• identifying and replacing when requested any 420 anchor
• building up the quality controls which Rocna had properly implemented in the production factory early last year
• strengthening the supply chain management
• rebuilding the website, and ensuring that it is always accurate and timely
• working with our distributors and sales points to provide full technical information to customers
• providing a source of clear and accurate information to the yachting press
• joining in the relentless forum debates on anchors, with dignity and useful data

We have been actively engaged in providing backup information to Laura, and to the various IPC yachting mag editors, and this will continue apace over the next few days.

There will Technical Bulletins on the steel issue, with information to clear up confusions about bending, ultimate tensile strength, deformation, breaking strain, etc. We hope these will enable owners and prospective purchasers to understand that the strength of Rocna anchors is not only from the steel used, but also from the advanced and effective design, proven by many deep sea cruising sailors all over the world - and for example in the recent hurricane in Vlikho, where a Rocna 33 held a 52 ft heavy steel ketch firm, in recorded winds of 91 knots.

The steel issue is being dealt with. We are looking at a testing process using various advanced systems to see if any anchor presented is a 420 steel one, or the 'standard' Q620. By the way, Q is an acronym in Chinese for Yield Point. (There's a nice little question for the next yacht club quiz night ).


So there we have it.

What went wrong:
We should have sorted production issues out earlier and more proactively.
Article authors could have approached Rocna directly for information, but didn't.
We should have picked up on wrong or tendentious information being put out on social media



What we are doing:-
We are working very very hard to put everything right as quickly as possible.
We will update the website as soon as we can.
We will work with our customers, and the design and technical teams, and our distributors, to identify any anchors which do not meet spec.
We will offer to replace them if owners are not happy to continue using them when they see the results of the lab tests (due out this weekend).
We will build Rocnas with the best and most appropriate materials we can find.
We will answer questions as fast as we can (bearing in mind that Rocna is now working in three different times zones round the world, and even techies have to sleep sometimes !)


OK, that's all for now from me, folks. Go ahead and post; I'll join in as and when I think it necessary. And thanks again to YBW for the opportunity to do so.

R1

 

[Blueboatman]

Hi longJohn.Hope you've had some good travels.

Please tell Jeff that the quality of coffee and refreshments available to potential rescuers has been raised, in anticipation!

And nope I still don't have dive gear onboard yet.....

Have to say, this weeks weather ranks up there with St Agnes but the beer isn't quite there. Thsts an also YET...

 

[RocnaONE]

returned anchors

As TK has been told privately, all returned anchors identified as made with Q420 shanks will be taken out of use - and probably sent back to China for melting down into battleships: an ironical end.

And as a point of clarification for the conspiracy theorists, RocnaONE is not Craig Smith.

 

[RichardS]

I shall be phoning retailers Piplars of Poole wishing to change my Rocna 15kg to an anchor having correct steel specifiactions today. I'll report back.

The bit about the 33kg Rocna feels like deja-vu as I also picked up on that the other day. http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=288450

Interested to see how you get on with Piplers as if any Rocna-swaps are in the offing I might as well take the safest course of action and follow your lead!

Richard

 

[Laura Nineham]

Just to clarify, I have personally spoken with member RocnaONE and I can assure you they are not Craig Smith.

We have given this user access to the forums in order to let Rocna respond to posts about their anchors.

I hope you find it a useful way of understanding more about this.

 

[RichardS]

As TK has been told privately, all returned anchors identified as made with Q420 shanks will be taken out of use - and probably sent back to China for melting down into battleships: an ironical end.

And as a point of clarification for the conspiracy theorists, RocnaONE is not Craig Smith.

That is very reassuring but is there any way we can identify this Q420 before we return the anchor?

Richard

 

[RocnaONE]

The question of identifying the Q420 anchors prior to bringing them in, has caused much head-scratching.

There is no practical test (and we have considered portable X-ray diffusion machines, Brinell hardness testers, rebound testers, deflection tests) to identify a 420 shank.

We have narrowed down the production schedule and delivery dates to the UK, and if you contact your dealer or distributor they will be able to identify the Q rating from that data.

One poster has already contacted Piplers this morning, and his anchor has been identified as a 620.


If anyone has a practical suggestion to identify 420 steel while the anchor is on the boat, we would be very happy to investigate it.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

I have had a talk with the representative of Piplars and two PM's from R1
(i'm still not convinced as to the necessity for R1's anonymity??)

I have been given a very lengthy and detailed explanation of the situation and had it confirmed that my 15kg was made from Q620D steel in the area of concern and been assured that this should have qualities of 730-840mpa whereas the design spec' for bissalloy was 800mpa.

I will not try to give further explanation of my discussions because as a layman in terms of metallurgy, I'm liable to make errors and misquote, if I've not already done so.
I am told that a full explanation will be made from the new owners shortly.

I have no other associations with Rocna other than having been a satisfied customer in the past.
I have not used my 15kg Rocna yet, but I'm convinced from using my 10kg anchor that it will do the job well.

 

[Laura Nineham]

For everyone who is interested, I've just updated the YBW news story online after speaking with RocnaONE over the phone.

http://www.ybw.com/news/rocna-anchors-acquired-by-canada-metal-pacific/529811?cccc

 

[RichardS]

I have had a talk with the representative of Piplars and two PM's from R1

I am also in contact with R1 who is demonstrating commendable pro-active customer service.

With the benefit of hindsight, it's a shame that Rocna did not adopt this approach when the issue originally arose - it might have given rise to some earlier replacement costs but I suspect that the kudos gained by taking pro-active action would have resulted in a lesser impact on the business overall as, in my opinion, the Rocna design itself is one of the very best!

Richard

 

[Twister_Ken]

Judging by a PM I've just had, I think we are about to see a return of Craig Smith and rocnaspam slag-off marketing.

Look out for posts from RocnaONE.

Happy to accept that RocnaONE is not Craig Smith.

I'd also be happy to hear that, as part of the reputation restoration exercise, Craig is being kept under lock and key and won't be allowed near the Internet.

Seems a shame Rocna won't be made in Canada, but will continue to be Chinese.

 

[RichardS]

Seems a shame Rocna won't be made in Canada, but will continue to be Chinese.

Actually, that doesn't bother me as the Chinese, Taiwanese and Koreans have some world-class manufacturing facilities with excellent quality control. The quality of the final product depends upon the specifications they are contracted to achieve.

Richard

 

[Djbangi]

Interesting developments

But we seem to have lost part of the thread - the spec on the Rocna website from beginning to early this year was Bisplate 80, or Q&T800 - not Q620D. So to offer a recall on any Q420 shanked anchors is great - but what about the people who bought Q620D shanked anchors thinking they were Q&T800. We also seem to be ignoring the point that the website describes the anchors meeting RINA Type Approved certification - but this only covers anchors made to the original spec of plate (not cast flukes) and made with Q&T800 or Bisplate 80 shanks. Most people who read this forum have smaller anchors (with no disrespect to those who have larger vessels) - is there to be a refund for those who bought thinking the anchor was Type Approved by RINA - when in fact RINA did not know cast flukes were used?

Its nice to know RINA have been as misused as the public?

Q620D might be as good as Q&T800/Bisplate 80 - but I do not like the idea of someone advertising one thing and doing another. RINA might not be relevant - so take it off the website.

It would also be interesting if RocnaOne advised the difference between Q620D and Q&T800/Bisplate 80 - because the implication is that Q620D will be used in the future - even though Bisplate 80 is made and is freely (freely might be the wrong word) available in China.

So if Q620D is as good - tell us, and why were we not told earlier. Do not tell us it is good enough - tell us why it was changed.

Finally - One might think that the man who developed a product and then licensed its production (and possibly developed an income from that license arrangement) would keep a pretty close watch on his income source. Why did he not notice the 'Venice Lagoon' incident etc etc - or why early this year when the furore grew to such intensity did he not step in and do something. Peter Smith is pleased to work with CMP - but, should we also be pleased?

Interesting developments - but, surely, this can only be the beginning.

 

[Twister_Ken]

I have to go out to meet a client. From PMs it seems there may be more to be revealed. I'll tune in as soon as I'm back, in the expectation of further enlightenment.

PS - why have the Canucks retained the services of Mr Bambury?

 

[RocnaONE]

Djabangi. I am neither Graig Smith nor Steve Bambury.

Are you indeed Jonathan Neeves ? As Private Eye says, " I think we should be told".

 

[RichardS]

Djabangi. I am neither Graig Smith nor Steve Bambury.

 

[Laura Nineham]

Hi everyone,

Can we please focus on the issue of Rocna anchors and avoid trying to guess who other users are? I don't think it's fair to focus on this when the discussion about Rocna is far more interesting.

Thanks

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Djabangi. I am neither Graig Smith nor Steve Bambury.

Are you indeed Jonathan Neeves ? As Private Eye says, " I think we should be told".

You're likely to be getting off to a bad start if you start playing games again.

There is a difference between Djbangi and you. He is not representing a company which got itself into deep doo doo by playing fast and loose with the boating community. You are.

You maybe being up front with us or you may just be putting up a smoke screen for good effect but, whatever the case, you will also be under probation in the eyes of many boaters.

So, don't try to be clever with Djbangi or any other forumites. Just pay heed to your own posting. When it comes to the question of your identity you are right with your Private Eye quote.....we should be told.

 

[Scotty_Tradewind]

Hi everyone,

Can we please focus on the issue of Rocna anchors and avoid trying to guess who other users are? I don't think it's fair to focus on this when the discussion about Rocna is far more interesting.

Thanks

Hi Laura, 'Fair'??

I'm not sure you are grasping the gist of some peoples arguments either.
It is only right that individuals who represent a company, who are holding their hands up and admitting that their company effectively sold an article that was substandard to that of the specification in some areas, should be known.
I, and possibly like many others, do not want reprisals just the truth and not from those with a pseudonym.
many thanks
S.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Hi everyone,

Can we please focus on the issue of Rocna anchors and avoid trying to guess who other users are? I don't think it's fair to focus on this when the discussion about Rocna is far more interesting.

Thanks

Laura,

I was typing my last post as yours went up so I didn't see it until after I had posted.

However, I am sorry to say that I don't agree that an anonymous discussion about Rocna is necessarily more interesting......particularly as Rocnaone has already started to make comments about the identity of other forumites.

A company is made up of the people who work for it. That is why it is relevant.