downtube

I changed the bike dimensions to the dimensions of the box ( which is bigger than the bike in all 3 planes). I concluded doing so would keep these problems away in the future.

Note the OP had no issue with our listed dimensions....just the 8H ( VIIIH ) page.

Om,
Yan

badrad

Okay, so you are saying now that the original dimensions on the FS product page for the bike "approx 30 x 60 x 81 cm (12" x 23.6" x 33")" are the true dimensions of the bike, and that the new dimensions (13" x 24" x 34") you updated the page to are the dimensions of the shippng box?

downtube

yes but the box is 35" not 34" my bad I will fix that.

The frames have not changed since 2008 and those easily fit in the Airporter. Around 2010 we introduced a new stem which does not increase the height of the bike, however the stem does create a packing problem.

The Airporter is tallest in the middle and curves down on both ends. Our stem lays on one side ( not in the middle which is the tallest part of the suitcase ) and sticks out, hence it does not fit. The 9FS fits in Downtube Suitcases which are the same size as an Airporter, however it does not taper down on the sides.

Om,
Yan

badrad

Future problems (wrt dimensions) solved!

Sorry to be nitpicking, but being the owner of any business is tough. If your business presence is purely by the internet and that what you present on the website faithfully represents you and your product, you really do need to make sure of the accuracy and currency of all the data. Unfortunately with building websites and including data, it's often times it's too easy to just copy or link bits into the site in order to add content. But at the end of the day, all content in your site is ultimately considered owned by you (whether you created it personally or not). So accuracy is important.

Good luck!

downtube

Thanks badrad!

Yan

bhkyte

Hi yan.
Sorry I did not realise the finer details about the other thread. Ie that the customer was quoting information posted on your site not your official specifications. That's a different sineriao. Comparable to be criticising Bike Forum for information posted by a user. Its sometimes difficult to tease out the information in a thread, and this is where I feel it's not great way for customers and sellers to resolve a dispute.
So, sorry for my slightly misinformed comments around this.
I will edit my previous post.

downtube

No need to apologize. I think my response to his post was unclear in many ways....hence I deserved some slack.

FYI I looked over the communication with this customer and I really don't think I did anything improper ( until my last email ). His last email to me was improper and I responded foolishly. I will gladly forward the entire conversation to anyone interested....I have nothing to hide.

Om,
Yan

cplager

But the page in question is not a forum page, but rather one that was entirely under Yan's control. I don't know what the page originally said, but it was Yan's responsibility to make sure the info was right.

downtube

Charles,

I do not believe the information was wrong. The OP correlated information about a page based on a 2008 8H to a 2013 9FS.....I believe using such an argument is kind of a stretch.

Om,
Yan

cplager

And you might be absolutely correct about that. But since the page context has changed, it's hard to tell.

I'm not saying you did anything wrong in this case. I'm not saying the info on the page was wrong. I am saying that you are/were responsible for the content and if it was wrong, that would have been on you.

Cheers, Charles

downtube

Charles,

Agreed

Om,
Yan