Skip to main content

Samsung's Note 7 Recall Doesn't Put Safety First


Samsung has suspended sales of the Galaxy Note 7 whilst it replaces stock with devices without the faulty battery pack responsible for a number of fires. It looks like the company is doing its best to reduce the risk to consumers but there are several weaknesses in the way that has actioned the recall that fails to protect consumers.

Firstly it hasn't made the recall official, which would ensure that unsold handsets from all outlets have been recovered. Particularly relevant in countries where there is a large gray-market for imported handsets. There will be a level of temptation for smaller retail operations to either continue selling those devices or to hold onto to them to sell once the hoo-ha has died down, rather than to re-export them back to their point of origin to have them replaced. Meaning that potentially dangerous hardware continues to find its way into consumer's hands.

Then there are reports of retailers (including Amazon) issuing refunds but not asking for handsets to be returned. Again there is nothing preventing these potentially dangerous devices finding their way back into the market, once again endangering owners.

If Samsung wants to do the right thing it needs to ensure that every single Note 7 gets returned, checked and refurbished before it does anything else. It also needs to ensure that 'safe' handsets can easily be distinguished from 'dangerous' handsets, which will also go some way to protecting the resale value of the Note 7 in future.

However, I can't help bat feel that the Note 7 has had its image tarnished forever and despite its obvious capabilities Samsung will struggle to find buyers, leading to low sales, discounting and an early launch for the Note 8.

With the new iPhone just days away this couldn't possibly have worked out worse for Samsung.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…