Rocna Anchors acquired by Canada Metal Pacific

[rickym]

18 months ago I nearly bought a Rocna anchor based on the performance and quality of materials. I am sure glad that I didn't. Snakes are snakes and should be avoided at all costs. I don't mind buying lower quality as long as I know what I am getting so I can make the decision. Fraud is Fraud however you dress it up. If you say you are using x material and are using y there is no arguement. We have laws against these things to protect the consumer.

The brand will survive as they are now saying we are using 'z' material and 'z' is OK the question is do you believe them?

Personally no, as corporate greed will always win over engineering practices. As a chartered engineer I have argued this many times against corporate accoutants and resigned on principle on more than one occasion. As a C.Eng it is you that will be in the dock when things go wrong not the MICA.

Accountants cannot rule the world nor can they change the laws of physics.

Engineering rules-- Rant over!!

Appologies. Bad day at the office!

 

[Djbangi]

CMP might not have a legal obligation to replace or refund every Rocna made from 420 (or 620 steel) or those that do not meet the RINA certification. They might not even have a moral responsibility to do so.

However the puchasers do have a right to a refund, they were not sold the item advertised. Consequently the chandler must carry that burden. Fortunately the chandler can pass that burden to the distributor (who is usually the importer).

This is where CMP come back into the frame. They can cut the distributors (and chandlers) off at the knees, but this will destroy their sales base. Or they can cover the costs. Its a pretty simple commercial decision, well it might actually be complex - but the dilemma is simple.

If CMP want to minimise costs then the best way to do this is to constrain as far as possible the dissemination of news to ensure the knowledge base is restricted. Discredit sources of information, never acknowledge, certainly do not advertise etc. This might not be moral - but morality possibly is not part of the dilemma.

Not associated with any anchor makers, their agents, distributors etc etc.

 

[sailingjoy]

Well I am pleased that for your first posting on this forum you are a happy man and in support of the new regime.

Perhaps you could tell us how you would feel if had purchased it and found that is was a 420?

Then I would be very disappointed and change it for a 620 or change it for another anchor if a 620 was not available. Or maybe get my money back and go back to my aluminium Spade that has served me very well for years but is sometimes a bit to light.
And I am not so much in support of the new regime, I am in support of the Rocna. I think it is a good product and I hope it survives. And they happen to be the guys that have to do it.

 

[Hoolie]

... ... ... If CMP want to minimise costs then the best way to do this is to constrain as far as possible the dissemination of news to ensure the knowledge base is restricted. Discredit sources of information, never acknowledge, certainly do not advertise etc. This might not be moral - but morality possibly is not part of the dilemma ... ...

Sadly, this seems to be the way things are going. We had hoped for better ... ...

 

[BrendanS]

Have any of you worked for largish companies, where it takes weeks or months to gather information, decide on a plan of action. CMP have only just taken on the Rocna anchor, and are probably uncovering lots of information, and deciding a plan of action. It won't surprise me if it takes a few more months before you get concrete details,and the constant howls of outrage on here on a daily basis aren't going to speed that up.

 

[sailingjoy]

Welcome to the forum CMP, shame you also had to use a pseudonym though. How's the show going? Tell me honestly, do you regret getting into this, it's just that the post above smacks of desperation...

Wow, do you realy think I’m CMP??? Then I would call myself RocnaTwo ;-). I had to read your post twice before I understood it. Maybe that’s because I’m Dutch and English is my second language. Or maybe I’m just to naive for this forum, then I will gracefully withdraw…
And BTW, I don’t use a pseudonym, Jan Jaap is my real first name, I’ll give you my phone number in Rotterdam in a PM if you want to.

 

[sailingjoy]

And surely not a third identity from you know who Shall I send a pm asking to place an order and see what response I get?

When I answered your PM I did not know it was a test (I had not read this post yet). Did I pass?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Have any of you worked for largish companies, where it takes weeks or months to gather information, decide on a plan of action. CMP have only just taken on the Rocna anchor, and are probably uncovering lots of information, and deciding a plan of action. It won't surprise me if it takes a few more months before you get concrete details,and the constant howls of outrage on here on a daily basis aren't going to speed that up.

Yes, I have. A few years ago I led an acquisition team for a largish company so I know how much work goes into the due diligence work prior to purchase. It was at that stage that much of the decision making was made for the future. I also know that, immediately post acquisition, is the best time to hit the road, to put your stamp onto the new regime and to be seen to be making plans for the future. It is astonishing how much can be done in the first few weeks and you only have a relatively short period to create whatever new culture you may be aspiring to.

For that matter I also know how dissappointing it is when your due diligence uncovers facts that mean you have to withdraw from an acquistion which initally you really hoped would proceed. But that is another story.

I also know that you have to make a real effort to "engage" with your customer base to get them "on side". Get it right and you can inject new enthusiasm into tired brands. Get it wrong and you can screw up a successful brand.

Of course, some things do take time but, by keeping the pressure up, perhaps forumites are making clear to CMP that, so far, they are not delivering what they promised.

Don't forget that it was largely due to earlier threads on this, and other sites, that the whole Rocna debacle was initially exposed. If that had not happened then, almost certainly, boaters would still be being fobbed off with 420 grade anchors.

Personally I think that what you describe as "howls of outrage" are entirely justified.

 

[BrendanS]

at the originators of the outrage maybe, but the current company are due some time and space to get things in order.

 

[sailingjoy]

Just because his first post is about how he managed to get a personal audience with nice Mr Smith and the charming top man at CMP. Or his claims of inside knowledge of the workings of his distributor. Or his claim about a cast iron (!!) warranty that covers any eventuality. Or how wonderful his Rocna is.

You're not suggesting that he is a Rocna stooge?

It’s much simpler than you think. Go to the Mets (you’ve got 1 day left) and you will find that Peter Smith and John Mitchell are just happy to talk to customers. That’s what this show is for.
And “claims of inside knowledge of the workings of his distributor”? I just phoned the guy (the phone number is on his site) and he told me. That’s all. Hallelujah, how suspicious can you get?!
I would feel flattered to be a Rocna stooge. How much would it pay?
Jan Jaap

 

[Djbangi]

Sailingjoy, I might agree that CMP started with the right attitude, except they employed the perpetrators of the fiasco and those same people are now stalking the uniniated, as either representing Rocna or CMP, or both, at METS massaging the story. CMP must know that doubts exist in the minds of many of the public of the integrity of the individuals previously involved and to openly support them looks to raise questions questions of the sincerity of CMP.

It might take large companies a long time to conclude on a policy - in the meantime owners of out of spec Rocnas are unaware of the risks imposed. There seems more than sufficient evidence, or doubt, of an under spec quality to bypass corporate tardiness and at least publicise some form of warning. When there was a minor problem with some liferafts West marine issued an immediate recall of all and every one. There was no corporate agonising.

 

[Colvic Watson]

at the originators of the outrage maybe, but the current company are due some time and space to get things in order.

But it's the current company that's still peddling the same line that the suspect anchors only relate to a small batch in 2010

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Brendan,

CMP promised to give fast and regular feedback. All they appear to have done is gone quiet and stuck their heads in the sand.

I don't think we'll agree on this one.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

And “claims of inside knowledge of the workings of his distributor”? I just phoned the guy (the phone number is on his site) and he told me.

Mmmmm!
You still haven't answered my question about how he tests the anchors.

For that matter you haven't explained why he tests the things. I certainly wouldn't expect a chandler to test every lump of metal that I bought from his shelves.

 

[BrendanS]

Brendan,

CMP promised to give fast and regular feedback. All they appear to have done is gone quiet and stuck their heads in the sand.

I don't think we'll agree on this one.

Given the posts on here, if I was the CEO, I'd bar anyone in the company from discussing anything in here, until I had all the facts, and had concrete plans. and maybe not even then.

But then again, I know these forums!

 

[youen]

Who is the starter of all these story if not CMP and Rocna 1?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

But then again, I know these forums!

I suppose that one could argue that their mistake was to start it off in the first place. But start it they did.
Perhaps they should have approached you rather than Sarabande for advice on how to handle the various websites?

 

[Djbangi]

There is a regular undercurrent that forums are at fault for perpetuating stories. It seems to be forgotten if Holdast had not deceived with regards to RINA certification and had not 'accidentally' used 420 steel then this thread would not exist. Its not the fault of the forum this deception was developed - so who should be blamed and how should it be done.

Still not associated with an anchor maker etc etc

 

[BrendanS]

I suppose that one could argue that their mistake was to start it off in the first place. But start it they did.
Perhaps they should have approached you rather than Sarabande for advice on how to handle the various websites?

I wouldn't take it on. I know Sarabande though, and he will be trying to do well for all, even if he can't say what is happening. I don't know by the way, I'm not privy to any such information

 

[sailingjoy]

Mmmmm!
You still haven't answered my question about how he tests the anchors.

For that matter you haven't explained why he tests the things. I certainly wouldn't expect a chandler to test every lump of metal that I bought from his shelves.

He tests them because of course he knows about this 420 business and he want to make sure for himself that he sells stuff he can support. And he want to be honest to his customers.
And I suppose he only tests the Rocna’s because unfortunately in that case there is (was?) reason for suspicion (those are my words)
You are right, he doesn’t test them all, he takes a sample from every shipment he receives. He has them tested in a laboratory here in Holland, I forgot the name (I phoned him a couple of weeks ago) but I can try to find out if you are interested. They are tested for strength, I don’t know how. I just spoke to him for a few minutes and as I said before, I am no technician.
But to be sure, I’m not his spokesman, I just share with you what I heard.