Pax Vape Not Getting Any Smoke...

 
Yup.   Low tolerance plus the very best weed that SoCal has to offer along with using an efficient vaporizer.    They all kinda work together in keeping my usage down.

 

I don't know if it's just me but I just looked at the listing and a close up of the X where the light shows looks like it's rectangular, which can mean that the units are fake. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I did a lot of research on fake and authentic Paxes. Just double check that!
 
Also, I noticed that this user doesn't really have a history of selling Pax. I see feedback mostly for them selling Atmos products...

 

I ran a PAX tobacco pod through mine. I learned how they packed the pods, And how to draw vapor, KEEP THE PAX CLEAN AND LUBED! Take your PAX to a dispensary, shop, etc. and compare appearances. In California, the warranty is valid, even if you purchased it online or other not-authorized vendor. Medical device makers are notorious for trying to stop 'grey market' buying by seniors, intimidation with lies and half-truths. If you have the real product bought on Amazon, eBay, etc. and are denied support, take the mfr. to court for illegal price-fixing.

 

Lol dude you are so butt hurt. And why do you single out seniors?

 

 
So are you suggesting that people that live in California should just ignore the warranty qualifications and expect that a grey market product will be covered rather than purchase the product from an authorized dealer?    If so, WTF kinda advice is THAT?

 

Very, Very bad advice...Also terrible advice talking about bring a manufacturer to court over a $250 vape. 

 

Especially being that he didn't read and/or heed the warranty qualifications before he purchased his vape and now he's putting the blame on the manufacturer.
 
He's just taking his over the top stance from here >>> http://forum.grasscity.com/vaporizers/415176-vaporizer-club.html/page-1041
(scroll about halfway down) to this thread and even suggesting that people follow his lead.    The mods even suggested that rather than dilute existing threads with his diatribes, that he start a thread of his own, which he has ignored so now he's diluting this one as well.
 
Please, to anyone else reading his posts, please ignore.     This guy just LOVES playing the victim card.

 

may i ask why are you not on the side of the consumer?

 

 
I am not on the side of a consumer who doesn't take personal responsibility in making wise purchasing decisions, such as not reading the qualifications of a warranty and then complains AFTER their purchase that the warranty qualifications are not ethical.

 

I knew the 'authorized dealer' provision was illegal in California.PAX is wrong to put the clause on its website. Again, why do you want the consumer to pay illegally inflated prices?

 

 
If that's the case, why in the hell did you not challenge Ploom on this BEFORE you purchased the product?    What you are claiming and what you are now doing makes no sense.
 
And regarding "illegally inflated prices", that too is a bunch of hooey.    It is a common practice for manufacturers of any product to protect their distribution channels by setting MSRP's on their product and one of the tools in which manufacturers can protect their distribution channels is allowing warranties to only exist on product purchased through those channels who maintain those MSRP's.

Gray marketeers fall outside of these constraints, for they are not authorized distributors and therefore are totally unregulated in their business practices in regards to these manufactures.   These marketeers can:
 
1) Purchase product that is not designed for (as in this example), the US market.
2) Purchase counterfeits and clones and pass them off as original equipment.
3) Not honor some of the benefits offered by the manufacturer, such as warranties, exchanges, returns and after-the-sale service.
4) Take payment but not ship.
5) And many other unscrupulous business practices.
 
Manufacturers as well as retailers set their business plans based upon being able to maintain their net and gross profit margins.    If a gray marketeer is allowed to operate in any given market, it puts the viability of the manufacturer and their authorized retailers in financial jeopardy. 
 
The bottom line is that gray marketeers can operate on slimmer gross profits because they can maintain their net profits by not incurring the costs necessary to serve their customers in an ethical way that is mandated by most manufacturers.
 
For me and many others, we don't mind paying a bit more for the piece of mind of buying product from a retailer who is supported by the manufacture of the product that they sell.    For others though, they would rather save some money and forgo the perks that come with buying from an authorized dealer.
 
You though, feel that for some strange reason, deserves both, that is, getting all the perks that you would get from an authorized dealer but not purchase it from an authorized dealer.  Sorry, but it just doesn't work that way.

 

 

Are you a dealer?

 

 
Nope.    I'm retired.   But I did work in the retail consumer electronics marketing arena for over 45 years so I have empathy for both the consumer, the manufacturer and the distributors/retailers.

 

I would think volume would important to a mfr. A higher price lowers demand and volume, So why have agreements to maintain a highprice?

 

 
A higher price lowers demand and volume?    Not always.   The exact opposite can be true.  It's all about perceived value.     Attaching a premium price to a product, can in fact, increase sales due to customers perceiving that it must be of high quality to demand a such a price.    The Volcano and the PAX vaporizers are prime examples of this.   They have both successfully carved out a nice piece for themselves in the vaporizer market as premium product within their categories.     They both have a high precieved value.
 
On the other end of the scale, you have inexpensive product like the MFLB, which has also carved out a nice piece of the market for themselves and it to has a high perceived value as well, albeit 5 times less than the Volcano and 3 times less than the Pax.
 
Then you have to take into consideration the business model of any particular manufacture.    You can have one manufacturer whose business model is based upon low gross profit margins, but high volume.   You can have another manufacturer operating in the exact opposite realm, that is, they have based their model on high gross profit but low volume.  The net profits of each of these companies could be exactly the same.
 
Then you can have the fortunate hybrid who has both high gross profit AND high volume, and that is where the Volcano resides and to a lesser extent, the Pax.

So yeah, volume is important to a manufacturer,  but the question will always remain as to what kind of profit hit is the manufacture willing to take to get to a specific volume or.............what kind of volume hit is the manufacture willing to take to get to a specific gross profit margin?     It's all a balancing act with the goal being net profits.
 
And lets not get into operational costs cause that could take up a whole page here.

 

@[member="tomh925"] I'm pretty sure Mercedes, Audi, BMW, even Ferrari with the new boss would just so happen to disagree with you. Look at the new Corvette, or the Challenger Hellcat, these are high priced, specialty items, which have almost not enough production to keep up with the demand. Business is fickle and it is run by both the mfr and the consumer. 

 

This made me lol. Iwien a salesperson for PAX?! If that's the case he's not doing a very good job promoting his product!

 

This question remains. California does not recognize the mfr.'s right to 'authorize' dealers or set the retail price. Why should I waive my rights, and not ask for support? I know car franchises are different. Look at the fol-d'-rol they caused for Tesla. Why should I

 

cut them any slack. Ploom can ask for prima facie dismissal if my suit is baseless.