Wet and Wild Steinway

[Yardarm103669107@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 7/23/2001 7:44:15 PM Central Daylight Time, A440A@AOL.COM 
writes:

<<       Agreed,  I know from experience that insurance companies don't 
question 
 Steinway restoration prices.  I like to use them as a baseline for deciding 
 what the loss is. Then, if a technician  has a good relationship with a 
great 
 restoration facility, then it is easy for them to put their reputation on 
the 
 line for the quality of the finished piano.  
         The factory is not infallible, it is not the final, ultimate, 
 forever-ever-amen facilty to get the most out of an old piano. And with the 
 recent prices I saw posted in Reno, it is more expensive than any other 
place 
 I have seen.  But it is a legitimate standard to arrive at a restoration 
 figure.  I dunno, this has worked well for me in the past, others have 
better 
 angles on complete restoration projects? 
 REgards, 
 ED Foote RPT  
  >>
I've been thinking about your comments for a few days, trying to figure out 
my discomfort with the concept. I think it boils down to legitimizing 
unethical marketing practices. You are aware, as many are, that Steinway in 
the past few years has made such claims as "if it isn't rebuilt by a Steinway 
technician, it isn't a Steinway", and "Non-Steinway technicians can't get 
Steinway parts", and "if all of the parts aren't Steinway, it's not a 
Steinway". Variations on these themes have been being bruited about by SW and 
by their dealerships for too long now, and I know that there has been some 
discussion of this in this forum. I'm not trying trying to restart that 
discussion. But to set up Steinway as the be-all and end-all reference source 
for value and pricing for restoration, particularly through such an 
institutionalized routes as insurance companies, indirectly adds strength and 
credence to them and their claims, albeit unintentionally. I'm sure they're 
very happy to be considered the "base-line". I, personally, am not so happy 
for them to be considered so. There is an inherent conflict between the 
conscious restraint of trade marketing stance of Steinway and the PTG's own 
set of published ethics. As soon as Steinway begins to have quality again, 
instead of just selling itself as having quality, I will have no problem 
using them as a baseline. I don't mean to come across to shrilly here, but 
I'm starting to have a visceral reaction to Steinway's bending of ethical 
practices.
PR-J