I understand Bryston's reasoning for their policy change, it is to protect the interests of their
authorized dealers, not to try to cut down on warranty costs.
I have the same problem as mentioned by others, the same people that Bryston are trying
to protect (their dealers) are the same people that must be causing the problem.
Bryston always has and still does stand behind their products better than any other brand,
Agreed. The problem is not the quality of support Bryston offers.
The problem is that, in order to discipline some rogue dealers, Bryston is hurting possibly unsuspecting customers.
I've seen the same issues with cameras. There's a large grey market in Nikon cameras (as well as others). Nikon USA (the US importer) does not want to pay to support cameras that didn't come from them. Ok, can't argue with that. So Nikon USA clamped down and won't provide service for Nikon cameras, just Nikon USA cameras. In this case, Nikon seems to be unwilling to stop the problem by shutting down the importers or dealers outside the US who are selling product into the grey market.
If you're buying a Nikon product from a large national chain of stores, you're probably getting legit product. From anywhere else, you don't know until you look at the warranty cards. Even those could be fake, because there are some dealers out there that open the factory-sealed box and reseal it.
Microsoft has done a whole bunch of things designed to foil software pirates. They haven't been noticeably effective at doing so. In fact, the main thing curbing piracy of Linux in some places seems to be the availability of Linux.
All of these anti-piracy measures that are supposed to harm the illegitimate sellers and users really wind up harming the end user, even the ones who bought legit copies of MS software. (Legit users get to jump through hoops to use their purchase. Also, wanna
Similarly, the new Bryston policy will only harm unsuspecting customers who paid good money for a Bryston product. (And Bryston still gets a chunk of that money unless there are large numbers of counterfeit Bryston products being sold.)
Bryston should be able to readily zero in on their dealers that are causing the problem. They know where the product was shipped to originally. Tehy could even require dealers to supply customer information to justify each sale, if that would help.
So why harm the end user who bought a product with the Bryston name? Why not go after the real culprits?