Perhaps the reality is that manufacturers don't want qualified techs to work on their instruments, because the sooner they breakdown, the sooner new pianos will need to be bought. Wim -----Original Message----- From: G Cousins <cousins_gerry at msn.com> To: CAUT <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Sun, Nov 22, 2009 10:37 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] Jeanie's brain storm - was Boston changed to dealers... C'mon gang... realty check! Here's another or perhaps THE missing part of the equation. This business just isn't big enough! Too much stuff competing in the leisure time industry and we're no longer a part of it. The majority of people,with exception to us, don't care more than the southbound end of a northbound rat to learn the how to of any musical/mechanical product. Those that do, value our craft and are willing to pay something for what we do. Sure in the next life there may be $500.00 (retail) 12 foot long grands with hair trigger action, tapered soundboards, riblets, variable adjustable 48.795 gram touch weight, variable weighing systems, endless singing octaves that sustain for hours, tone that matches ever musicians adn listeners preferences in real time and require only basic servicing or tuning. ANd THAT one tuning a year that pays $650,000. but.............As the late Walter Cronkite used to say "That's the way it is" Hang in there, live one day at a time, keep learning, do the best work to your abiulities at that point in your life, and remember, when that challenges come, like a kidney stone........this too shall pass. Respectfully, GerryC To: markwisner at earthlink.net; caut at ptg.org Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:09:01 -0500 From: wimblees at aol.com Subject: Re: [CAUT] Jeanie's brain storm - was Boston changed to dealers... You're suggesting manufacturers should have staffing requirements for dealers? What about a small dealer that doesn't need a full time tech? And if a dealer didn't hire an approved tech, what should the consequences be? Mark Wisner Yes, I'm suggesting that manufacturers require dealers to hire only "qualified" technicians. The technician doesn't have to work full time for the dealer, but that tech should have taken, and/or passed, a manufacture's "exam". The requirement could be as low as taking two classes at a PTG sponsored seminar, or as high as attending a week long semianr at a factory, like the LRS. The consequence would be loosing the franchise. This has nothing to do, per se, with the PTG. Manufacturers could set up their own day or weekend seminars, or they could utilize PTG seminars to teach those classes. You probably get calls all the time from technicians in the field asking for help on basic regulation problems that a RPT level technician should know. The bottom line is that if manufactures are really concerned about who works on their instruments, perhaps they should be more pro-active in making sure those techs have the basic knowledge to work on them. Now, if Yamaha, for instance, wants to recognize that all RPT's are "qualified" to work on Yamaha pianos, that's a decision Yamaha needs to make. That is why I asked how the LRS exam is different than the RPT exam. Would an RPT need additional training to become a "factory trained" technician? Wim -----Original Message----- From: Mark Wisner <markwisner at earthlink.net> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Sun, Nov 22, 2009 2:57 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] Jeanie's brain storm - was Boston changed to dealers... You're suggesting manufacturers should have staffing requirements for dealers? What about a small dealer that doesn't need a full time tech? And if a dealer didn't hire an approved tech, what should the consequences be? Mark Wisner But the continuing education concept won't do any good unless there is an incentive for the tech to take the classes. One of the best incentives would be for the manufactures to require dealers to hire only techs who have attended a certain number of instruction hours. Although these classes can be offered at PTG seminars and convention, piano techs do not necessarily have to be a member of the PTG to be able to take them, just as those who attend the LRS have to be members of the PTG. It won't have an impact on all techs, but it will certainly have an impact on the dealers. I recognize that there are some dealers who hire qualified techs, but if this can become an industry wide requirement, where all dealers will have to hire "qualified" techs, it might encourage more techs to take the seminars, especially if they want to be considered by dealers. Wim -----Original Message----- From: Mark Wisner <markwisner at earthlink.net> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Sat, Nov 21, 2009 8:02 pm Subject: [CAUT] Jeanie's brain storm - was Boston changed to dealers... Jeanie, Your "brainstorm" is a little like my wife's profession. In order for Stella to keep her license valid every year she has to pick up a specific number of continuing education credits, which she earns by attending classes at any one of a number of professional conventions, classes, seminars, etc. I'm not seriously suggesting we can apply this to PGT at this time, but in a world where pianos are more important than they are.....what a great way to increase skills, event attendance, and importance to the "RPT" title. Mark Wisner -----Original Message----- >From: Diane Hofstetter <dianepianotuner at msn.com> >Sent: Nov 21, 2009 9:39 PM >To: College and University Technicians <caut at ptg.org> >Subject: [CAUT] Boston changed to dealers techs mfgrs and other such > > >Jeannie, > > I like your "just brainstorming"! It seems with the changes in the economy it is becoming essential that the different parts of the piano industry find a way to work together and support each other. Someone said on one of these lists that one of the manufacturers lost 300 dealerships this year. That adds up to LOTS of pianos not sold, and even more tunings that don't need to be done over the coming years. And, that's only one manufacturer. > >Diane Hofstetter > > > >Jeannie said: > In fact, I had >to turn down one of the Steinway sessions one year because I couldn't afford >it. I think it would be a mistake to make it so pricey that even less >people could attend. > >Manufacturer's classes at Conventions and Regional Conferences can be >documented. Paying a small fee and pre-registering for such a class, or >series of classes might be doable for many. In the past I've been willing >to pay $50 or $60 for a special class and might even consider paying more if >it would save me the hotel and airfare of going to another facility. >Attendees could be given some sort of certificate to attest to the fact that >they were there. Instructors could actually give feedback as to whether the >student was on the right track or needed some additional training. This >certificate could be requested by dealers if the manufacturers expected them >to use such accredited technicians. > >Just brain storming... >jeannie > > > >Diane Hofstetter = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20091122/38cdebfc/attachment.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC