Absent a recall, would you have returned your Note 7 due to the reported issues?

[team420]

The argument of "I'm knheeping it and I'm alone in assuming the risk" is only valid if one lives alone, works alone, and never goes anywhere or lived in a home without shared tenants or people around them - like stores, apartment buildings.

Unless that's you, you are choosing to risk everyone around you. Over something as stupid as a cell phone.

By all means, take the risk...but don't act surprised when someone around you who doesn't want to take that risk voices their displeasure.

If someone around me didn't want to take that risk, I would politely remind them that they don't have to, and to take a hike

 

[wcourtois]

Just a question for all those who are so upset that some want to hang on to it... Is it safe to assume you NEVER talk while driving, eat while driving, have conversations with passengers, etc? A vehicle has a much higher chance of injuring/killing an "innocent bystander" than the N7. It's not a case of "when" it will happen, but "if" it will. Also, how many incidents have involved the injuring of a person other than the user? There are so many things that have a higher probability than this, but some are acting like it's the end of the world. SMH

 

[bmitchell1876]

No i would not returned it because of a very very low failure rate... Especially since it has a manufacturer warranty plus i pay $9 month for extended warranty.... 0.5 percent failure rate is not enough to scare me into a return.

In fact I'm typing on it right now and I'm not going to return it until Verizon drops the price of the Note 5-64gb... Currently it's $399 for the 2 year upgrade and i refuse to pay another $100 for a phone that's 1 year old !!

 

[7AndTRT]

If someone around me didn't want to take that risk, I would politely remind them that they don't have to, and to take a hike

Wow.

 

[jacques200]

No I would have kept the phone.

 

[Milt K]

I returned mine the day after my office put up signs saying that Note 7s were not allowed on the premises. Seemed like a lot of work for maybe a handful of of employees that even had the phone. It wasn't worth the risk of being caught and possibly terminated because of this.

 

[Almeuit]

It's about Samsung's potential liability, not peoples' safety. Recall is a risk calculation question, not a feel-good exercise.

How are they different? Yes they don't want to be liable for putting people's safety at risk. They go hand-in-hand.

 

[dejanh]

How are they different? Yes they don't want to be liable for putting people's safety at risk. They go hand-in-hand.

Fundamentally different. If the potential liability in direct monies and brand equity was lower than the cost of the recall Samsung would not have done it, public safety and all. Liability in direct monies isn't even the issue. The loss of public trust and impact on future revenue is the issue. The cost to brand equity is too much therefore a recall happens. Don't fool yourself that this is somehow altruistic and done in public's best interests. What's that? Recal optional? Samsung is treating the second Galaxy Note 7 recall as an optional scheme in South Korea - SamMobile

 

[dejanh]

No i would not returned it because of a very very low failure rate... Especially since it has a manufacturer warranty plus i pay $9 month for extended warranty.... 0.5 percent failure rate is not enough to scare me into a return.

In fact I'm typing on it right now and I'm not going to return it until Verizon drops the price of the Note 5-64gb... Currently it's $399 for the 2 year upgrade and i refuse to pay another $100 for a phone that's 1 year old !!

Ha 0.5% failure rate. No, the failure rate is somewhere south of 0.008%.

 

[jgraves1107]

Ha 0.5% failure rate. No, the failure rate is somewhere south of 0.008%.

Well I was giving it more like .2%. Even then it's not high. Others have had closers to 10% and still did not recall. I will still buy what ever new spen device Samsung makes. Stuff breaks it's the nature of the beast. I have had laptops burn up repeatedly only to discover it was a piece of software causing it.

 

[dejanh]

Well I was giving it more like .2%. Even then it's not high. Others have had closers to 10% and still did not recall. I will still buy what ever new spen device Samsung makes. Stuff breaks it's the nature of the beast. I have had laptops burn up repeatedly only to discover it was a piece of software causing it.

This whole fiasco is all about saving face and protecting the brand. If it weren't for the massive sharing of the stories about Note7s going up in flames a recall never would have happened because brand damage would be minimal.

Just to illustrate how crazy this whole thing has gotten, at the time of the recall being issued, you were equally likely to die from Parkinson's disease as you were to have your Note 7 catch on fire. Nay, you were more likely to die of Parkinson's disease than your Note 7 catching on fire because I assumed 200 units were faulty for a total of 2,500,000 shipped (if you count the "safe" variants that went out the denominator also goes up higher, making the % probability of failure even lower).

Some stats on odds of dying... http://www.livescience.com/3780-odds-dying.html

 

[jgraves1107]

This whole fiasco is all about saving face and protecting the brand. If it weren't for the massive sharing of the stories about Note7s going up in flames a recall never would have happened because brand damage would be minimal.

Oh I agree with you on that.

 

[Almeuit]

Fundamentally different. If the potential liability in direct monies and brand equity was lower than the cost of the recall Samsung would not have done it, public safety and all. Liability in direct monies isn't even the issue. The loss of public trust and impact on future revenue is the issue. The cost to brand equity is too much therefore a recall happens. Don't fool yourself that this is somehow altruistic and done in public's best interests. What's that? Recal optional? Samsung is treating the second Galaxy Note 7 recall as an optional scheme in South Korea - SamMobile

We can agree to disagree .

 

[dejanh]

We can agree to disagree .

Sure why not

 

[recDNA]

Tired of reading about people telling others to return their Note 7s because they are endangering themselves and others. Really? I've seen videos of hammer tests and drop tests and abuse of the Note 7 and didn't see any explosions or fire. There is nothing wrong with this phone. Can anyone replicate the issue with normal use? Show me and I'll believe it. If it wasn't for the recall most of us probably wouldn't return the phone. I know I wouldn't have but I did cause I didn't want to deal with problems that may come from keeping it because I do travel. Or not being able to bring it in buildings or venues. There are risks with everything in life and the Note 7 wasn't one of them for me. People who are keeping it knows what the consequences are and that's their problem they have to deal with. Just because you returned your phone, don't use some lame excuse to why you think the next person should return theirs.

I would have returned mine due to lag and poor screen sensitivity. Mine also got very hot while charging. Even if none had ever exploded I would have returned mine. I did love the camera and bright screen. That was about it. Overall mine was a disappointment. I expected blazing speed with those specs.

 

[Jzamora1978]

I would not have returned mine. The Note 7 was by far the best phone made to date. I really felt sad by turning it in for a second time and just went back to . I was really thinking of the V20, but it's so unpredictable and seems to fail in comparison. My family has iPhones so it's just easier that way

 

[LeoRex]

Ha 0.5% failure rate. No, the failure rate is somewhere south of 0.008%.

Regardless of how small it was... On average, we were looking at about two Note 7s going up in smoke per day... that is a horrendous safety record that would get any product pulled from the market.

 

[dejanh]

Regardless of how small it was... On average, we were looking at about two Note 7s going up in smoke per day... that is a horrendous safety record that would get any product pulled from the market.

This is such a wrong metric to go by it's crazy that you would even bring it up. It is wholly dependent on aggregate failures relative to the shipped volume. Not to mention that it is not backed up by any form of substantiated proof. You don't know how many devices were failing or at what frequency. Nobody does except Samsung. Samsung had to contain brand damage, that's it.

 

[hasasimo]

I probably would not have returned it. While there was definitely a problem with the device, it was certainly compounded by a very biased media hysteria. I at least would have held onto it longer than I did.

 

[LeoRex]

This is such a wrong metric to go by it's crazy that you would even bring it up. It is wholly dependent on aggregate failures relative to the shipped volume. Not to mention that it is not backed up by any form of substantiated proof. You don't know how many devices were failing or at what frequency. Nobody does except Samsung. Samsung had to contain brand damage, that's it.

CPSC reported the figure at 96 failed Note 7s in the United States alone... 13 of which caused burns, 47 of which caused property damage. This isn't hearsay or media hype, or an unsubstantiated figure. And these are just the cases that they the CPSC was called in.