As someone who worked in outdoor specialty retail (including bikes) for 15 years I have endured my share of conflicts with customers. Most were resolved successfully but some were not.
I think Paul had every right to ask for what he wanted, but apparently Cyclart felt it was difficult if not impossible to deliver the job Paul had asked for. And I'm sure they had very good reasons for offering the alternatives they did after actualy seeing the frame "in the flesh." Cyclart has the experience of dealing with hundreds of customers and the irreplaceable perspective that brings over time. Most of us who are customers have not dealt with as many frames, paint jobs, and challenges as the vendors whose help we seek.
It may be that Paul was within his rights to ask for what he wanted and to not be patronized, but Cyclart also should be credited with proposing what they felt were superior alternatives to the original request. They are quite familiar with "the art of the possible" when it comes to refinishing and restoring bike frames. Apparently they were not able to communicate these proposals to Paul in ways that he could hear and accept them for what they were--sound, professional advice based on Cyclart's long experience.
It is unfortunate that Paul now seems to mistrust Cyclart: both parties are dedicated to cycling and vintage rides, and I am certain that Cyclart never intended to throw out Pauls' frame or disrespect the emotional attachment he has to his Bianchi. Did Cyclart make that commitment clear to Paul? Apparently not in terms that he could accept...
"What we have here...is a failure to communicate..."
Especially when one is embroiled in a substantial disagreement, it helps to just take a deep breath and remember that the person on the other end of a conversation or transaction is a person of good will with genuine feelings. Here's to reconciliation between parties who disagree over the means to reaching shared goals...
Jon Spangler Alameda, CA USA
Message: 9 Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 10:23:56 -0700 (PDT) From: gillies@ece.ubc.ca (donald gillies) Subject: Re: [CR] Disappointing Cyclart Experience To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Message-ID: <20100519172356.4303119D8D@ug6.ece.ubc.ca>
One other issue in retouching is the color changes that paints naturally exhibit over the years. Paints from the 1970's are especially unstable, as anyone with a Raleigh Team Pro knows about. Those bikes started out red, but by now, almost all the original finishes are orange and are still changing color.
This is not a Raleigh/Ilkeston-specific problem, it affects ALL paints of the on-topic CR era. My roommate in college did a GM-funded undergrad research project in the EE department of MIT to predict paint color changes, because car makers of the mid-80's were forced to CHANGE touchup paint colors EVERY YEAR to match the never-constant paint colors of older cars. So a 1996 altima paint retouching can has a different formula in 2000, 2005, and 2010.
Anyway, even with a perfectly invisible touchup, in a few years you could expect to see a bicycle filled with leopard spots, especially if it gets any UV exposure, as the 1970's paints, which were less stable, will change color and fade faster than the modern paint retouching colors.
THis is just another reason to prefer a full repaint with accurate decals vs. a touchup of original paint, if the bike has no historic value.
I agree however, that emotionally its hard to lose part of your old friend, i.e. the original paintjob on your original bike.
- Don Gillies San Diego, CA, USA
Jon Spangler
Writer/editor
Linda Hudson Writing
TEL 510-864-2144
CEL 510-846-5356
JonSwriter@att.net
http://www.linkedin.com/
http://www.twitter.com/