tower now says mid august

[jreckner]

I really hope this is some sort of mistake. They are getting a bad rep of such long delays on releases. The exo was a nightmare.

[ROWDY RACING]

Has Axial given a release date?

[imthatguy]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Has Axial given a release date?

No, they have not.

[k7zpj]

Originally Posted by jreckner

I really hope this is some sort of mistake. They are getting a bad rep of such long delays on releases. The exo was a nightmare.

Here is what I am seeing from the back order section of my Tower Hobbies account.



Note: Personal information removed to prevent someone from changing the deliver to address to their house.

[ROWDY RACING]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

Has Axial given a release date?

Originally Posted by imthatguy

No, they have not.

#whatstheprob™

[TSK]

Originally Posted by ROWDY RACING

#whatstheprob™

™

[jreckner]

Said mid July this morning and now shows mid August. Axial has not released a date but I just hope this doesn't become the string of delays I had getting my exo. Frustrating

[ROLANDROCKSHOP]

from what ive gathered..from the internets.

1st batch is sold ot..

the mid august date is for 2nd batch.

Again..just what ive come across here and there..

[birdy233]

Originally Posted by ROLANDROCKSHOP

from what ive gathered..from the internets.

1st batch is sold ot..

the mid august date is for 2nd batch.

Again..just what ive come across here and there..

If that was the case, some people who pre-ordered would have gotten shipping notifications from the first batch pre-orders. This is a simple case wishful thinking on a Mid-July release I would guess.

[birdy233]

Originally Posted by jreckner

I really hope this is some sort of mistake. They are getting a bad rep of such long delays on releases. The exo was a nightmare.

This isn't just Axial it's all of them. I have the new Proboat Rockstar boat and the new Losi Five Mini WRC on preorder, the boat was supposed to be here on June 1st, then Mid-June, then July 1st, now Aug 4th...sure it is ..... The mini was supposed to be available right around now, now it's Sept!!!

[badger]

Originally Posted by jreckner

I really hope this is some sort of mistake. They are getting a bad rep of such long delays on releases. The exo was a nightmare.

Originally Posted by birdy233

This isn't just Axial it's all of them. I have the new Proboat Rockstar boat and the new Losi Five Mini WRC on preorder, the boat was supposed to be here on June 1st, then Mid-June, then July 1st, now Aug 4th...sure it is ..... The mini was supposed to be available right around now, now it's Sept!!!

You guys have to keep in mind Axial is no longer just Axial, they have a parent company Hobbico so it's a much larger operation now with more people involved.

Also, things happen that are sometimes out of their control (Axial, Losi or any other RC brand) which can be any number of things that can cause delays.

With all that said, I don't know which date is correct but historically I'm typically the first person to one of Axial "media kit's" because they are in So-Cal and I'm in Nor-Cal. And if I remember correctly, it's usually about 1 month after I get the "media kit" (I got mine on July 3rd) that they start showing up in dealers hands. Now I don't know if that is going to be the case with the Yeti but hopefully it will be.

[MeanTT]

Originally Posted by badger

You guys have to keep in mind Axial is no longer just Axial, they have a parent company Hobbico so it's a much larger operation now with more people involved.

Also, things happen that are sometimes out of their control (Axial, Losi or any other RC brand) which can be any number of things that can cause delays.

With all that said, I don't know which date is correct but historically I'm typically the first person to one of Axial "media kit's" because they are in So-Cal and I'm in Nor-Cal. And if I remember correctly, it's usually about 1 month after I get the "media kit" (I got mine on July 3rd) that they start showing up in dealers hands. Now I don't know if that is going to be the case with the Yeti but hopefully it will be.

I respectfully disagree. A parent company has nothing to do with a delivery date. As a corporate attorney, I can confirm that a parent company usually authorizes someone at the subsidiary level (Axial) to take all action necessary to consummate transactions. This is done in a series of Board Resolutions. If Axial were smart, they would have a Master Service Agreement with various manufactures and distributors whereby the manufacturer would GUARANTEE delivery of a certain amount of product on a certain date. Failure to do so would entitle Axial to a rebate paid to Axial from the manufacturer. Similarly, if quality control fell outside of the terms of the contract, Axial could either return the products to the manufacture, or receive a rebate to handle returns and additional costs that would fall on Axial.

Basically, all of the terms of manufacturing, delivery, and distribution are in writing somewhere. To the extent schedules slip, it is because the manufacturer could not meet its deadline, quality thresholds were not met, or in some cases, a company can't pay for the goods when they arrive in port (where payment is due) and the goods sit there until the purchaser (Axial or Parent) can pay off the manufacturer so that title is transferred.

Unless there is some sort of NDA in the agreement (most of the time there is but it can be waived by both parties) the delivery and shipping dates should be public.

Axial, if you need me to draft a proper Master Service Agreement I am happy to provide such services.

[k7zpj]

Time to keep calm and drink a Guinness™.

The Yeti will be here when it's here.

[badger]

Originally Posted by MeanTT

I respectfully disagree. A parent company has nothing to do with a delivery date. As a corporate attorney, I can confirm that a parent company usually authorizes someone at the subsidiary level (Axial) to take all action necessary to consummate transactions. This is done in a series of Board Resolutions. If Axial were smart, they would have a Master Service Agreement with various manufactures and distributors whereby the manufacturer would GUARANTEE delivery of a certain amount of product on a certain date. Failure to do so would entitle Axial to a rebate paid to Axial from the manufacturer. Similarly, if quality control fell outside of the terms of the contract, Axial could either return the products to the manufacture, or receive a rebate to handle returns and additional costs that would fall on Axial.

Basically, all of the terms of manufacturing, delivery, and distribution are in writing somewhere. To the extent schedules slip, it is because the manufacturer could not meet its deadline, quality thresholds were not met, or in some cases, a company can't pay for the goods when they arrive in port (where payment is due) and the goods sit there until the purchaser (Axial or Parent) can pay off the manufacturer so that title is transferred.

Unless there is some sort of NDA in the agreement (most of the time there is but it can be waived by both parties) the delivery and shipping dates should be public.

Axial, if you need me to draft a proper Master Service Agreement I am happy to provide such services.

Sorry to laugh but it appears your corporate attorney experience doesn't apply to the RC manufacturing world, at least from what I know. I'm probably wrong with my original "parent company" comment, but I love this "As a corporate attorney, I can confirm........."!

[crockins]

Originally Posted by MeanTT

I respectfully disagree. A parent company has nothing to do with a delivery date. As a corporate attorney, I can confirm that a parent company usually authorizes someone at the subsidiary level (Axial) to take all action necessary to consummate transactions. This is done in a series of Board Resolutions. If Axial were smart, they would have a Master Service Agreement with various manufactures and distributors whereby the manufacturer would GUARANTEE delivery of a certain amount of product on a certain date. Failure to do so would entitle Axial to a rebate paid to Axial from the manufacturer. Similarly, if quality control fell outside of the terms of the contract, Axial could either return the products to the manufacture, or receive a rebate to handle returns and additional costs that would fall on Axial.

Basically, all of the terms of manufacturing, delivery, and distribution are in writing somewhere. To the extent schedules slip, it is because the manufacturer could not meet its deadline, quality thresholds were not met, or in some cases, a company can't pay for the goods when they arrive in port (where payment is due) and the goods sit there until the purchaser (Axial or Parent) can pay off the manufacturer so that title is transferred.

Unless there is some sort of NDA in the agreement (most of the time there is but it can be waived by both parties) the delivery and shipping dates should be public.

Axial, if you need me to draft a proper Master Service Agreement I am happy to provide such services.

Maybe I'm a little confused but it seems to me like your entire argument actually supports Badger. You say a "parent company usually authorizes someone" which implies that sometimes they don't. I, for one, work for a company who's product release is dictated completely by the parent company because they have to coordinate releases between multiple potentially competing brands. I don't think that's very uncommon at all. Your argument goes on to talk about the Master Service Agreement. Just the existence of a Master Service Agreement is an admission that sometimes things go wrong!
Sorry to call you out there guy!
But when you make such a big deal about being a corporate lawyer and then follow it up with such a flawed argument you gotta expect a little razzing.

[badhoopty]

probably just on the slow boat from china or something. no big deal.

[MeanTT]

Originally Posted by crockins

Maybe I'm a little confused but it seems to me like your entire argument actually supports Badger. You say a "parent company usually authorizes someone" which implies that sometimes they don't. I, for one, work for a company who's product release is dictated completely by the parent company because they have to coordinate releases between multiple potentially competing brands. I don't think that's very uncommon at all. Your argument goes on to talk about the Master Service Agreement. Just the existence of a Master Service Agreement is an admission that sometimes things go wrong!
Sorry to call you out there guy!
But when you make such a big deal about being a corporate lawyer and then follow it up with such a flawed argument you gotta expect a little razzing.

I won't gum up the thread by making any more statements after this comment, but basically the contracting decisions is a question of whether someone at Axial signs the contracts or someone at the parent company. Period, full stop. Often you let the subsidiary continue to operate and you authorize the board of the subsidiary or a particular officer (who is often on the board of the parent) to sign all the contracts. Either way, the existence of a parent company doesn't affect the terms of a contract or the remedies upon default.

As to Badger, man I do really like your threads and am greatly appreciative of your review. In my opinion you give a perfect mix of technical and personal commentary. That said, my comment was not intended to discredit you. It was intended to supplement your statements and give a greater understanding. All I said was that (i) the existence of a parent company has no effect on timely shipping, (ii) it's simple for parent companies to consummate contracts through their subsidiaries, and (iii) all of the terms of a production SHOULD BE in a Master Services Agreement and known to either Axial or its parent.

Nearly all contracts of this nature are referred to as "Master Service Agreement" and then you have 1 to 2 page supplements or "Work Orders" that are add-ons to the existing MSA. Basically, this allows for new orders to be processed in an agreed 1 to 2 page form and all breaches, notice provisions, governing laws etc. are contained in the Master Services Agreement. It's the standard across most industries where there are numerous purchase orders. As to Crockins, good businesses always put agreements into the written form so that there is less chance for disagreement about the terms of the contract in the first place. It's a sign of good business, not bad business.

Furthermore my comment was intended to support the notion that all of the information regarding manufacturing, release and distribution is available somewhere as it was in a written contract. The only reason not to disclose it is if it is subject to a NDA (which makes sense because it would reveal the per unit price for each model to the customers or to competition). Axial should be able to provide its customers information about their orders and should be able to say something to the effect "The first allocation of Yeti's has shipped and we hope you are as excited to receive them as we are to deliver them to each of you!"

Finally, don't be hating on me :-). I don't chase ambulances or sue doctors, or represent someone who slips and "falls" at Wal-Mart. I just push stacks of paper, and draft contracts like the one that was most certainly used in this case to acquire goods and services (the manufacturing, assembly, and distribution) related to the Yeti.

If you want to flame me that's fine. However, I am certain that I have seen and drafted more of these agreements than anyone else on this board. My point once again was that Axial should know that status, and the allocation has been determined and is in a written agreement somewhere. They have a heightened responsibility to disclose information to a larger group of awaiting customers for pre-orders and should do more to keep the Yeti customer/potential customer base fully informed.

[OFF SOAP BOX]

[Rockpiledriver]

Or the ship hit an iceberg.

[crockins]

Originally Posted by MeanTT

I won't gum up the thread by making any more statements after this comment, but basically the contracting decisions is a question of whether someone at Axial signs the contracts or someone at the parent company. Period, full stop. Often you let the subsidiary continue to operate and you authorize the board of the subsidiary or a particular officer (who is often on the board of the parent) to sign all the contracts. Either way, the existence of a parent company doesn't affect the terms of a contract or the remedies upon default.

As to Badger, man I do really like your threads and am greatly appreciative of your review. In my opinion you give a perfect mix of technical and personal commentary. That said, my comment was not intended to discredit you. It was intended to supplement your statements and give a greater understanding. All I said was that (i) the existence of a parent company has no effect on timely shipping, (ii) it's simple for parent companies to consummate contracts through their subsidiaries, and (iii) all of the terms of a production SHOULD BE in a Master Services Agreement and known to either Axial or its parent.

Nearly all contracts of this nature are referred to as "Master Service Agreement" and then you have 1 to 2 page supplements or "Work Orders" that are add-ons to the existing MSA. Basically, this allows for new orders to be processed in an agreed 1 to 2 page form and all breaches, notice provisions, governing laws etc. are contained in the Master Services Agreement. It's the standard across most industries where there are numerous purchase orders. As to Crockins, good businesses always put agreements into the written form so that there is less chance for disagreement about the terms of the contract in the first place. It's a sign of good business, not bad business.

Furthermore my comment was intended to support the notion that all of the information regarding manufacturing, release and distribution is available somewhere as it was in a written contract. The only reason not to disclose it is if it is subject to a NDA (which makes sense because it would reveal the per unit price for each model to the customers or to competition). Axial should be able to provide its customers information about their orders and should be able to say something to the effect "The first allocation of Yeti's has shipped and we hope you are as excited to receive them as we are to deliver them to each of you!"

Finally, don't be hating on me :-). I don't chase ambulances or sue doctors, or represent someone who slips and "falls" at Wal-Mart. I just push stacks of paper, and draft contracts like the one that was most certainly used in this case to acquire goods and services (the manufacturing, assembly, and distribution) related to the Yeti.

If you want to flame me that's fine. However, I am certain that I have seen and drafted more of these agreements than anyone else on this board. My point once again was that Axial should know that status, and the allocation has been determined and is in a written agreement somewhere. They have a heightened responsibility to disclose information to a larger group of awaiting customers for pre-orders and should do more to keep the Yeti customer/potential customer base fully informed.

[OFF SOAP BOX]

Just givin' you a hard time! It's so easy to give lawyers a hard time! My sister is a lawyer as well as one of my close friends (also not ambulance chasers!) and I give them both grief (in jest of course!) about it all the time! Of course they both give me grief about what I do as well. By the way, I noticed you're from Dallas. Me too!! Well, Denton actually but close. I'm in Cali now but I grew up there!

[rockhugger]

why can't people just chill, and when they get here they get here?

It's a toy after-all (high quality toy), are we that immature that we have to freak out at the thought of waiting any longer than initially implied... and start a thread about it. Let it play out, and relax.





guy.