I ordered mine in April. I received an email 2 days ago saying I should expect it in October.
That is 6 months.
It is not ‘approximately 6 to 8 weeks’ It’s no where near that margin.
“They weren’t shipping in April.”
True, let’s look at the April shipping page, when I ordered.
“A few months.” Fair enough.
On the Wayback Machine, the first recorded change to “approximately 6 to 8 weeks” is June 05.
We are now coming up to 2 months (8 weeks) since June 05, but once again, it is approximate not definite.
However, two days ago I received an email that I can now expect mine in October, despite, once again, ordering in April.
If we disregard my order date of April and say I ordered in June, when it was advertised to be 6 to 8 weeks approximately, I would be receiving my order 21 weeks after my order date (presuming it is shipped in October) and this shipping expectation date has not changed since.
I cannot understate how awful this market practice is. Completely unrealistic expectations for new purchasers. Then the community come to Purism’s defense saying ‘they had difficulties’ and whatnot.
They have been having difficulties for 4 years now. After the first year or two, it becomes the company’s responsibility to take those ‘difficulties’ into consideration, due to the frequency, and add that to the shipping expectation date.
Now, I’ll be getting comments from Purism supporters coming directly to their defense and putting me at fault. Is no fault to be claimed by the company conducting this?
Set the shipping time for 20 - 24 weeks approximately. Stop luring new purchasers and then when they realise they’re not getting their purchase within the provided timeframe declining their refund because it’s against your policy?
Purism’s practice is maliciously or negligently baiting funding and then locking people in with their refund policy despite their misleading shipping time. For a company with a core principle of transparency, their transparency, or lack thereof, is unacceptable.