05-18-2015, 02:30 PM
Here's my take: There was an issue with a part. It was replaced with one from a new bike. A comment was made.
That's the extent of what we know. The comment could have been serious or flippant. Regardless, at this point the reasoning behind the comment cannot be truly known. Assuming it was made seriously is indeed, only an assumption.
Also not known? Anything past that. The remaining is conjecture.
Making some assumptions of my own, the next prospective purchaser might not mind the defect and be willing to negotiate a little bit better price because of it. Scratch and dent. Or the dealer might be willing to throw in a slip on at a nice discount, their cost would likely be cheaper than that of replacing the stock can. If represented as a new machine but sold with used parts, scratched or not, then there would be the basis for a complaint.
It seems unreasonable to me, to assume the imagined motives and potential future actions of others are somehow valid before they actually happen.
That's the extent of what we know. The comment could have been serious or flippant. Regardless, at this point the reasoning behind the comment cannot be truly known. Assuming it was made seriously is indeed, only an assumption.
Also not known? Anything past that. The remaining is conjecture.
Making some assumptions of my own, the next prospective purchaser might not mind the defect and be willing to negotiate a little bit better price because of it. Scratch and dent. Or the dealer might be willing to throw in a slip on at a nice discount, their cost would likely be cheaper than that of replacing the stock can. If represented as a new machine but sold with used parts, scratched or not, then there would be the basis for a complaint.
It seems unreasonable to me, to assume the imagined motives and potential future actions of others are somehow valid before they actually happen.