- Location
- Pukalani, Hawaii
where can i get a kong kills shirt? how much
broken ring and funny world
- Thread starter jaybutcher
- Start date
Tobe_Sherrill
New member
- Location
- North Carolina, USA
To whom it may concern,
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. SherrillTree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. SherrillTree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
I guess I still don't buy it Tobe, I wish i could believe otherwise because I think you run a stand up company.
This carefully worded statement smacks of legal wrangling and settlement, not fact.
I suspect your personal opinion is at variance with what you've written but you're bound legally to not share it. I'm OK with that, doesn't change my opinion of you or Sherrill Tree, business is business and you have employees in your care.
Questions remain...
If not Kong, where did the rings come from? Rings still broke... who and why?
How was Jay's use of the ring 'NOT normal'? What the hell IS normal in tree climbing?
Kong's reputation for quality was in question long before these rings broke... they've been making dinky, rickety feeling crap for as long as the name has been Kong.
Kong has good engineers, you can tell by the innovative ideas they come up with... but like many great engineers, their designs are compromised by purchasing and management. The whole thing about engineering is... it's precise. If you compromise it AT ALL, you undermine the fundamental design calculations. It's obvious in Kong's finished parts that they take great designs and water them down to make them cheaper.
I will never buy gear I know to be made by Kong... but I wouldn't have even before the rings broke. I think their stuff is lame.
This carefully worded statement smacks of legal wrangling and settlement, not fact.
I suspect your personal opinion is at variance with what you've written but you're bound legally to not share it. I'm OK with that, doesn't change my opinion of you or Sherrill Tree, business is business and you have employees in your care.
Questions remain...
If not Kong, where did the rings come from? Rings still broke... who and why?
How was Jay's use of the ring 'NOT normal'? What the hell IS normal in tree climbing?
Kong's reputation for quality was in question long before these rings broke... they've been making dinky, rickety feeling crap for as long as the name has been Kong.
Kong has good engineers, you can tell by the innovative ideas they come up with... but like many great engineers, their designs are compromised by purchasing and management. The whole thing about engineering is... it's precise. If you compromise it AT ALL, you undermine the fundamental design calculations. It's obvious in Kong's finished parts that they take great designs and water them down to make them cheaper.
I will never buy gear I know to be made by Kong... but I wouldn't have even before the rings broke. I think their stuff is lame.
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
I call bull$hit
I know for a fact it's bull$hit.
Whoever is printing those kong kills shirts keep at it
I know for a fact it's bull$hit.
Whoever is printing those kong kills shirts keep at it
treebing
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Detroit, Mi.
Tobe, the question remains. Has Jay Butchers medical bills and time off work bills been covered? that is the main question and the reason for this thread. This whole issue would not be what it is and people would still be buying gear from kong and from sherill had he been immediately taken care of and had people not tried to run from responsibility. Lawers should not have to be involved.
Myself, along with 50-100 other people watched as Jay fell to what could have been his death. That he did not suffer serious injury or death is a miracle. His requests were humble. His main concern was the recall and its good to hear that sherrill and Kong have been able to work together on that recall.
As far as I understand, Jay Butcher has yet to receive any money although Kong has offered more than half. Who is going to pony up and do right by Jay? If Kong is as you say an upstanding company and they have offered some money to Jay, who is going to pay the rest? If Kong is not entirely at fault, and I accept that conclusion as it appears to me to have been a chain of errors (it usually is in accidents), than someone else needs to step up and give Jay what he asks for if not more. Make the situation right. everyone that touched that ring before Jay bought it should contribute and make sure that Jay is taken care of. I see no reason that Jay should be punished for purchasing a harness and wearing it the way it was intended to be worn.
Myself, along with 50-100 other people watched as Jay fell to what could have been his death. That he did not suffer serious injury or death is a miracle. His requests were humble. His main concern was the recall and its good to hear that sherrill and Kong have been able to work together on that recall.
As far as I understand, Jay Butcher has yet to receive any money although Kong has offered more than half. Who is going to pony up and do right by Jay? If Kong is as you say an upstanding company and they have offered some money to Jay, who is going to pay the rest? If Kong is not entirely at fault, and I accept that conclusion as it appears to me to have been a chain of errors (it usually is in accidents), than someone else needs to step up and give Jay what he asks for if not more. Make the situation right. everyone that touched that ring before Jay bought it should contribute and make sure that Jay is taken care of. I see no reason that Jay should be punished for purchasing a harness and wearing it the way it was intended to be worn.
southsoundtree
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Olympia, WA
Ah...lawyers.
If only there could be some third party not-for-profit organization involved who could accept donations for injured arborists/ arborist medical bills/ or tree climbing competitors medical bills. The NFP could accept a tax-deductible donation with no admissions of anything. The NFP could donate some money to cover TCCompetitors medical bills, if anyone knew of someone that had been injured in a TCC.
If only there could be some third party not-for-profit organization involved who could accept donations for injured arborists/ arborist medical bills/ or tree climbing competitors medical bills. The NFP could accept a tax-deductible donation with no admissions of anything. The NFP could donate some money to cover TCCompetitors medical bills, if anyone knew of someone that had been injured in a TCC.
- Location
- Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
[ QUOTE ]
(by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG.
[/ QUOTE ]
The wording of that does not rule out the possibility that manufacture was OUTSOURCED, to china or elsewhere.
The relevent questions are "who supplied them?"
They had to of came from somewhere.
How did they get in Kong boxes?
Who imported them?
Was there a middleman?
Do the numbers of genuine Kong rings shipped to importers by Kong match up to the numbers of rings supplied to resellers?
Could someone along the way tried to substitute cheaper copied imports as Kong?
(by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG.
[/ QUOTE ]
The wording of that does not rule out the possibility that manufacture was OUTSOURCED, to china or elsewhere.
The relevent questions are "who supplied them?"
They had to of came from somewhere.
How did they get in Kong boxes?
Who imported them?
Was there a middleman?
Do the numbers of genuine Kong rings shipped to importers by Kong match up to the numbers of rings supplied to resellers?
Could someone along the way tried to substitute cheaper copied imports as Kong?
[ QUOTE ]
To whom it may concern,
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. SherrillTree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
[/ QUOTE ]
Disgusting. Don't bother sending me another master catalog.
To whom it may concern,
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. SherrillTree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
[/ QUOTE ]
Disgusting. Don't bother sending me another master catalog.
yeah, that's BS.
do you want to go down with Kong?
I guess you guys protesting Kong have done a good job with this, because Kong finally is noticing this is a problem with their public image.
i guess they contacted Sherrill and had a talk about things, maybe made a deal
do you want to go down with Kong?
I guess you guys protesting Kong have done a good job with this, because Kong finally is noticing this is a problem with their public image.
i guess they contacted Sherrill and had a talk about things, maybe made a deal
- Location
- Pukalani, Hawaii
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
To whom it may concern,
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. Sherrill Tree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
[/ QUOTE ]
Disgusting. Don't bother sending me another master catalog.
[/ QUOTE ] ok ok now lets not get too carried away. were not banning sherrill here, were banning kong.
if a stihl dealer sent me a stihl saw straight from the box it's not the dealers fault if the saw blows up. it's the stihl companies fault for selling a flawed saw to the dealer. so my point is sherrill has allways been good to us arborists so lets not start up issues with sherrill just because they continue to sell kong gear. just dont buy the kong products they are selling. there are other brands to choose from ya know.
[ QUOTE ]
To whom it may concern,
In August 2009 SherrillTree enacted a recall of “a very specific looking” unmarked aluminium ring not marked” following breakage that we believed was NOT normal under the circumstances of use. No serious injury or death was reported, therefore no recall was requested of either party. SherrillTree found similar but perhaps unrelated UNMARKED RINGS within our Kong inventory and assumed that these might be culprit.
Today, over a year later, deep investigations (by and according to Kong) and common reason (from our perspective) have indicated that the ring in question, although we have found some unmarked pieces among KONG boxes, WAS NOT manufactured by KONG. Indicators to this judgment include a track record of meeting or exceeding rigid European standards on all safety products made by KONG. Sherrill Tree and a great many resellers of life safety goods have indeed come to recognize a record of innovation and quality in KONG’s chosen field of alpine, work-at-height and rescue equipment.
With that said, KONG, who has always denied responsibility as all their rings, marked (when sold as spare parts) or unmarked (when used as components of a system like for instance a harness) are tested, demonstrates to be a serious company, accepting to ultimately participate in this recall even though strongly doubting that unmarked rings used as “spare parts” were distributed among their Italian made products. In short, KONG has taken serious and measurable steps to assure that only KONG products or those under their close scrutiny ship beneath the Kong mark. This we have been assured without terms by the president of KONG Spa.
Please all, join Sherrill in avoiding unmarked life safety goods (outside of a tested and certified “system”) at all costs!
[/ QUOTE ]
Disgusting. Don't bother sending me another master catalog.
[/ QUOTE ] ok ok now lets not get too carried away. were not banning sherrill here, were banning kong.
if a stihl dealer sent me a stihl saw straight from the box it's not the dealers fault if the saw blows up. it's the stihl companies fault for selling a flawed saw to the dealer. so my point is sherrill has allways been good to us arborists so lets not start up issues with sherrill just because they continue to sell kong gear. just dont buy the kong products they are selling. there are other brands to choose from ya know.
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
[ QUOTE ]
Kong Kills shirt at TCIA winter management conference.
[/ QUOTE ]
Awesome.
Kong Kills shirt at TCIA winter management conference.
[/ QUOTE ]
Awesome.
I hate getting political and try to stay out of that type of posting, but after just reading this thread I will jump on this wagon.... All my Kong gear is now retired which inculded 2 biners which were my least favored anyway.
Also my gear from a certain dealer will be phased out. Just another reason to shop elsewhere with better prices and free shipping.
If I sold a piece of gear to a fellow climber and it failed in normal operation i know i would do all that was needed to make sure that climbers needs were met (even if it was made by someone else). We are all in this together as an industry and morality matters and it seems to be missing from the two companies involved. (It's nice to see that the injured party only wanted what was owed to him and didn't want to sue. I know a company that is willing to sue for a lot less of a crime).
climb safe, check your gear, care about others.....
Also my gear from a certain dealer will be phased out. Just another reason to shop elsewhere with better prices and free shipping.
If I sold a piece of gear to a fellow climber and it failed in normal operation i know i would do all that was needed to make sure that climbers needs were met (even if it was made by someone else). We are all in this together as an industry and morality matters and it seems to be missing from the two companies involved. (It's nice to see that the injured party only wanted what was owed to him and didn't want to sue. I know a company that is willing to sue for a lot less of a crime).
climb safe, check your gear, care about others.....
So if Kong didn't make the rings, and they mysteriously got into the Kong box at the Sherrill warehouse, wouldn't it be Sherrill's fault?
Also, what is normal use for aluminum rings sold by a tree climbing supply company, considering the claim that they were not used correctly?
Also, what is normal use for aluminum rings sold by a tree climbing supply company, considering the claim that they were not used correctly?
boreality
New member
- Location
- boreal forest
In orientation training for a ski resort job once the thing that stuck with me was "if there's an accident never say sorry, it admits guilt". Or, I don't think Jay is expecting that much money but if they gave him a nickel it would open the door for a lawyer to shut down a major business putting alot of people out of work. Have the scales of justice been balanced?
You know how lawyers are. Take all they can get. It's a tough position to be in even if you'd like to do the right thing those lawyers have twisted what the right thing is.
Do I think cheaping out on life support equipment is acceptable? Of course not. That counterfiet stuff out of China is absolutely criminal. If something happened because of that I'd hope a Rambo would step up, but that was a movie.
I'm just trying to give a walk a mile in their moccasin view. Keep up the good fight.
As a small business owner I could so easily find myself on the recieving end of a lawsuite it's scary. Like the one time, had the pylons out, had told the ground man his job was to control pedestrians, did the clear/all clear call and as the tree was going down the client's wife decides to run underneath it. She made it but whoa. I would have been done.
You know how lawyers are. Take all they can get. It's a tough position to be in even if you'd like to do the right thing those lawyers have twisted what the right thing is.
Do I think cheaping out on life support equipment is acceptable? Of course not. That counterfiet stuff out of China is absolutely criminal. If something happened because of that I'd hope a Rambo would step up, but that was a movie.
I'm just trying to give a walk a mile in their moccasin view. Keep up the good fight.
As a small business owner I could so easily find myself on the recieving end of a lawsuite it's scary. Like the one time, had the pylons out, had told the ground man his job was to control pedestrians, did the clear/all clear call and as the tree was going down the client's wife decides to run underneath it. She made it but whoa. I would have been done.
"were not banning sherrill here, were banning kong.
if a stihl dealer sent me a stihl saw straight from the box it's not the dealers fault if the saw blows up. it's the stihl companies fault for selling a flawed saw to the dealer. so my point is sherrill has allways been good to us arborists so lets not start up issues with sherrill just because they continue to sell kong gear. just dont buy the kong products they are selling. there are other brands to choose from ya know.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you sold a product from a company that failed and almost killed someone would you still sell products from that company knowing the type of response it has had to this issue?
the way I see it, there is a problem on both ends. Don't offer gear from a company that doesn't care and are unwilling to own up to a mistake.
that last post from Tobe sounds like a CYA statement written by a legal team.
if a stihl dealer sent me a stihl saw straight from the box it's not the dealers fault if the saw blows up. it's the stihl companies fault for selling a flawed saw to the dealer. so my point is sherrill has allways been good to us arborists so lets not start up issues with sherrill just because they continue to sell kong gear. just dont buy the kong products they are selling. there are other brands to choose from ya know.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you sold a product from a company that failed and almost killed someone would you still sell products from that company knowing the type of response it has had to this issue?
the way I see it, there is a problem on both ends. Don't offer gear from a company that doesn't care and are unwilling to own up to a mistake.
that last post from Tobe sounds like a CYA statement written by a legal team.
[ QUOTE ]
So if Kong didn't make the rings, and they mysteriously got into the Kong box at the Sherrill warehouse, wouldn't it be Sherrill's fault?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is how I see it as well, Brendon.
So if Kong didn't make the rings, and they mysteriously got into the Kong box at the Sherrill warehouse, wouldn't it be Sherrill's fault?
[/ QUOTE ]
This is how I see it as well, Brendon.
- Location
- Pukalani, Hawaii
so what if petzle or cmi made an ice bolt or rock anchor that failed severly hurting a famous rock climber. i doubt anyone in the arboriculture community would even care because its ROCK CLIMBING. because it was a tree climber who got hurt, everyone seems to be getting after kong. there are lots of rock climbers who have been killed or hurt because of gear failing from petzl and cmi. kong petzl and cmi make a lot of gear and sells to thousands of people.
im not deffending kong here, all im saying is be logical about it.
would sherrill still be at fault if the ring was rated/marked and failed???? alot of it might come down to personal error and not making sure your gear has ratings etched or painted on it before you put it in a life support system.
i personally would never climb on anything that does not have the 5000lb rating. this accident could have happend to any of us, sure, and i am upset at the way kong has been handling this matter by being so quiet about it. i dont think they were right for being so lazy about what rings they put in their boxes marked as life support. rings are fairly new to tree climbing so every precaution should be taken with rings. sherrill can only go by what kong says and if kong said they tested the rings in a box, how is sherrill supposed to know weather or not they will fail? sherrill doesn't test gear they only sell it.
im not deffending kong here, all im saying is be logical about it.
would sherrill still be at fault if the ring was rated/marked and failed???? alot of it might come down to personal error and not making sure your gear has ratings etched or painted on it before you put it in a life support system.
i personally would never climb on anything that does not have the 5000lb rating. this accident could have happend to any of us, sure, and i am upset at the way kong has been handling this matter by being so quiet about it. i dont think they were right for being so lazy about what rings they put in their boxes marked as life support. rings are fairly new to tree climbing so every precaution should be taken with rings. sherrill can only go by what kong says and if kong said they tested the rings in a box, how is sherrill supposed to know weather or not they will fail? sherrill doesn't test gear they only sell it.
Josh,
The point is, sherrill knows how kong has handled this and still promotes their gear to us. If you were a dealer and you knew that a companies quality of gear was in question and their ability to respond to mistakes was below par would you still sell their gear to your customers?
I know I wouldn't.
The point is, sherrill knows how kong has handled this and still promotes their gear to us. If you were a dealer and you knew that a companies quality of gear was in question and their ability to respond to mistakes was below par would you still sell their gear to your customers?
I know I wouldn't.
New threads New posts
-
test
-
-
KBNest -Midline Attachable SRS Canopy Anchor.
- Started by TreeSteward
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
-
