Customer (pronounced kuhs-tuhm-ah)
(1) A
habitual patron, regular purchaser, returning client; one who has a custom of
buying from a particular business (obsolete in its technical sense).
(2) A
patron, a client; one who purchases or receives a product or service from a
business or merchant, or intends to do so.
(3) In
various slang forms (cool customer, tough customer, ugly customer, customer
from hell, dream customer etc), a person, especially one engaging in some sort
of interaction with others.
(4) Under
the Raj, a native official who exacted customs duties (historic use from
British colonial India).
Late
1300s: From the Middle English customere
& custommere (one who purchases
goods or supplies, one who customarily buys from the same tradesman or guild), from
custumer (customs official,
toll-gatherer), from the Anglo-French custumer,
from the Old French coustumier & costumier (from which modern French gained
coutumier (customary, custumal)),
from the Medieval Latin noun custumarius
(a toll-gatherer, tax-collector), a back-formation from the adjective custumarius (pertaining to custom or
customs) from custuma (custom, tax). The literal translation of the Medieval Latin
custumarius was “pertaining to a
custom or customs”, a contraction of the Latin consuetudinarius, from consuetudo
(habit, usage, practice, tradition). The
generalized sens of “a person with whom one has dealings” emerged in the 1540s
while that of “a person to deal with” (then as now usually with some defining
adjective: “tough customer”, difficult customer” etc) was in use by the 1580s. Derived terms are common including customer
account, customer base, customer care, customer experience, customer-oriented, customer
research, customer resistance, customer service, customer success, customer
support, direct-to-customer, customer layer, customer-to-customer, ugly
customer, tough customer, difficult customer etc. Customer is a noun; the noun plural is
customers.
William
Shakespeare (1564–1616) used the word sometimes to mean “prostitute” and in his
work was the clear implication that a buyer was as guilty as the seller, the law
both unjust and hypocritical, something which in the twentieth century would be rectified
in Swedish legislation.
Shakespeare: All's Well That Ends Well (circa 1602), Act 5, scene 3
LAFEW: This
woman’s an easy glove, my lord; she goes off and on at pleasure.
KING: This ring was mine. I gave it his first
wife.
DIANA: It might be yours or hers for aught I know.
KING (to
attendants) Take her away. I do not like
her now. To prison with her, and away
with him. Unless thou tell’st me where thou hadst this ring, Thou diest within
this hour.
DIANA: I’ll never tell you.
KING: Take her away.
DIANA: I’ll put in bail, my liege.
KING: I think thee now some common customer.
DIANA (to
Bertram): By Jove, if ever I knew man,
’twas you.
In
Sweden, the law was amended in a way of which Shakespeare might have approved, Chapter
6, Section 11 of the Swedish Penal Code making it an offence to pay for sex, the
act of “purchasing sexual services”
criminalized, the aim being to reduce the demand for prostitution. The law provides for fines or a maximum term
of imprisonment for one year, depending on the circumstances of the case. So selling sexual services is not unlawful in
Sweden but being a customer is, an inversion of the model for centuries applied
in the West. Individuals who engage in
prostitution are not criminalized under Swedish law, which is intended to
protect sex workers from legal penalties while targeting the customers, now
defined as those who “exploit them”. The Swedish model aims to reduce prostitution
by focusing on the demand side and providing support for those who wish to exit
prostitution and as a statement of public policy, the law reform reflected the
government’s view prostitution was a form of gender inequality and
exploitation. The effectiveness of the
measure has over the years been debated and the customer-focused model of
enforcement has not widely been emulated.
The
customer is always right
Reliable return customer: Lindsay Lohan in the Chanel Shop, New York City, May 2013.
The much
quoted phrase (which in some areas of commerce is treated as a proverb): “the customer is always right” has its origins
in retail commerce and is used to encapsulate the value: “service staff should give high priority to customer satisfaction”. It is of course not always literally true, the
point being that even when patently wrong about something, it is the customer
who is paying for stuff so they should always be treated as if they are right. Money being the planet’s true lingua franca,
variations exist in many languages, the best known of which is the French le client n'a jamais tort (the customer
is never wrong), the slogan of Swiss hotelier César Ritz (1850-1918) whose name
lived on in the Hôtel Ritz in Paris, the Ritz and Carlton Hotels in London and
the Ritz-Carlton properties dotted around the world. While not always helpful for staff on the
shop floor, it’s an indispensible tool for those basing product manufacturing or
distribution decisions on aggregate demand.
To these counters of beans, what is means is that if there is great demand
for red widgets and very little for yellow widgets, the solution probably is not to commission an advertising campaign for yellow widgets but to increase production
of the red, while reducing or even ceasing runs of the yellow. The customer is “right” in what they want,
not in the sense of “right & wrong” but in the sense of their demand being
the way to work out what is the “right” thing to produce because it will sell.
Available at Gullwing Motor Cars: Your choice at US$129,500 apiece.
The notion
of “the customer is always right” manifests in the market for pre-modern
Ferraris (a pre-1974 introduction the accepted cut-off). While there nothing unusual about
differential demand in just about any market sector, dramatically is it
illustrated among pre-modern Ferraris with some models commanding prices in
multiples of others which may be rarer, faster, better credentialed or have a notionally
more inviting specification. That can
happen when two different models are of much the same age and in similar
condition but a recent listing by New York-based Gullwing Motor Cars juxtaposed
two listings which left no doubt where demand exists. The two were both from 1972: a 365 GTC/4 and
a Dino 246 GT.
Some reconditioning required: 1972 Ferrari 356 GTC/4
The 365
GTC/4 was produced for two years between 1971-1972 during which 505 were
built.
Although now regarded as a
classic of the era, the 365 GTC/4 lives still in the shadow of the illustrious
365 GTB/4 with which, mechanically, it shares much.
The GTB/4 picked up the nickname “Daytona”,
an opportunistic association given 1-2-3 finish in the 1967 24 Hours of Daytona
involved three entirely different models while the GTC/4 enjoyed only the less
complementary recognition of being labeled by some
il gobbone (the hunchback) or
quello alla banana (the banana one).
It was
an unfair slight and under the anyway elegant skin, the GTB/4 & GTC/4
shared much, the engine of the latter differing mainly in lacking the dry-sump
lubrication, the use of six twin-choke side-draft Weber carburetors rather
than the downdrafts, this permitting a lower hood (bonnet) line and a conventionally mounted gearbox rather than the the Daytona's rear transaxle.
Revisions to the cylinder heads allowed the
V12 to be tuned to deliver torque across a broad rev-range rather than the
focus on top-end power which was one of the things which made the Daytona so
intoxicating.
Criticizing
the GTC/4 because it doesn’t quite have the visceral appeal of the GTB/4 seems
rather like casually dismissing the model who managed only to be runner-up to
Miss Universe.
The two cars anyway,
despite sharing a platform, were intended for different purposes, the GTB/4 an
outright high performance road car which could, with relatively few
modifications, be competitive in racing whereas the GTC/4 was a grand tourer,
even offering occasional rear seating for two (short) people.
One footnote in the history of the marque is
the GTC/4 was the last Ferrari offered with the lovely Borrani
triple-
laced
wire wheels; some GTB/4s had them fitted by the factory and a few more were
added by dealers but the factory advised that with increasing weight, tyres
with much superior grip and higher speeds, they were no longer strong enough in
extreme conditions and the cast
aluminum units should be used if the car was to
be run in environments without speed restrictions such as race tracks or certain
de-restricted public roads (then seen mostly in the FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany) 1949-1990), Montana
& Nevada in the US and Australia's Northern Territory & outback New
South Wales (NSW)).
The still stunning
GTB/4 was the evolutionary apex of its species; it can't be improved upon but
the GTC/4 is no ugly sister and when contemplating quello alla banana, one
might reflect on the sexiness of the fruit.
Gullwing’s
offering was described as “a highly
original unrestored example in Marrone Colorado (Metallic Brown) with a tan
leather interior, factory air conditioning, and power windows; showing 48K
miles (77K kilometres) on the odometer. It has been sitting off the road for several
years and is not currently running.” It was certainly highly original and seemed
complete but properly should be regarded as a “project” because of the uncertainty about the extent (and thus the
cost) of the recommissioning. At an
asking price of US$129,500, it would represent good value only if it was
mechanically sound and no unpleasant surprises were found under the body’s shapely curves although, given the market for 365 GTC/4s in good condition, it was a
project best taken on by a specialist.
Some assembly required: 1972 Dino 246 GT by Ferrari
The days
are gone when the Dino 246 was dismissed as “
more of a Fiat than a Ferrari” and even if the factory never put
their badge on the things (although plenty subsequently have added one), they are now an accepted part of the range.
The 246 replaced the visually almost similar
but slightly smaller and even more jewel-like Dino 206, 152 of which (with an all-aluminium 2.0 litre (122 cubic inch) V6 rather than the V12s which had for some years been de rigueur in Ferrari’s road cars) were built
between 1967-1969, all with berlinetta (
coupé) bodywork.
Mass-produced by comparison, there were 3569
Dino 246s produced between 1969-1974, split between 2,295 246 GTs (coupés)
& 1,274 246 GTSs (
spyders (
targa)).
Fitted
with an iron-block 2.4 litre (147 cubic inch) V6, the Dinos were designed
deliberately to be cheaper to produce and thus enjoy a wider market appeal, the
target those who bought the more expensive Porsche 911s, a car the Dino
(mostly) out-performed.
In recent
decades, the Dino 246 has been a stellar performer in the collector market,
selling typically for three times the price of something like a 365 GTC/4;
people drawn to the seductive lines rather than the significantly better fuel
consumption.
Most
coveted of the 246s are those described with the rhyming colloquialism “
chairs and flares” (C&F to the
Ferrari cognoscenti), a reference to a pair of (separately available) options
available on later production Dino 246s.
The options were (1) seats with inserts (sometimes in a contrasting
color) in the style used on the Daytona & (2) wider Campagnolo Elektron
wheels (which the factory only ever referred to by size) which necessitated
flared wheel-arches.
At a combined
US$795.00 (in 1974), the C&F combination has proved a good investment, now
adding significantly to the price of the anyway highly collectable Dino.
Although it's hard to estimate the added
value because so many other factors influence calculation, all else being
equal, the premium is usually between US$100-200,000 but these things are
always relative; in 1974 the C&F option added 5.2% to a Dino GTS's list
price and was just under a third the cost of a new small car such as the
Chevrolet Vega.
It was a C&F Dino
246 GTS which in 1978 was found buried in a Los Angeles where it had sat for
some four years after being secreted away in what turned out to be an unplanned
twist to a piece of insurance fraud.
In
remarkably good condition (something attributed to its incarceration being
during one of California’s many long droughts), it was fully restored.
Not in
such good condition is the post-incineration Dino 246 GT (not a C&F) being offered by
Gullwing Motor Cars, the asking price the same US$129,500 as the 365 GTC/4. Also built in 1972, Gullwing helpfully describe this as “a project”, probably one of history’s less necessary
announcements. The company couldn’t
resist running the title “Too Hot to Handle” and described the remains as
“…an original
car that has been completely burnt. Originally
born in Marrone Colorado with beige leather. It comes with its clear matching title and
this car clearly needs complete restoration, but the good news is that it's
certainly the cheapest one you will ever find. The Dino market is hot and shows no signs of
cooling. An exciting opportunity to own an iconic 246GT Dino. This deal is on
fire!” It’s still (technically)
metal and boasts the prized “matching numbers” (ie the body, engine &
gearbox are all stamped with the serial numbers which match the factory records) so there’s
that but whether, even at the stratospheric prices Dinos often achieve, the
economics of a restoration (that may be the wrong word) can be rationalized would
need to be calculated by experts. As
with the 365 GTC/4, Gullwing may be amenable to offers but rather that the customer always being right, this one needs "the right customer".
Aggregate demand: The highly regarded auction site Bring-a-Trailer
(BAT, their origin being a clearing house for “projects” although most were
less challenging than Gullwing’s Dino) publishes auction results (including “reserve
not met” no-sales) and the outcomes demonstrate how much the market lusts for
Dinos. BAT also has a lively comments
section for each auction and more than once a thread had evolved to discuss the seeming incongruity of the prices achieved by Dinos compared with the rarer Berlinetta Boxer (365 GT4 BB, BB 512 & BB 512i) (1973-1984) which was when new much more expensive, faster and, of
course, a genuine twelve cylinder Ferrari.
In such markets however, objective breakdowns of specifications and
specific performance are not what decide outcomes: The customer is always
right.
Digging up: The famous "buried" 1974 Dino 246 GTS, being extracted, Los Angeles, 1978 (left) and the body tag of a (never buried) 1974 Dino 246 GTS. While it's true the factory never put a "Ferrari badge" on the Dino 206 & 246 (nor did one appear on the early Dino 308s) the Ferrari name does appear on the tags and some parts. Gullwing's Dino would be a more challenging "project" and even with today's inflated values, the financial viability of a restoration might be dubious.
Although
it's in recent years the prices paid for the things sharply have spiked, the
lure of the Dino is not a recent thing.
In 1978, a 1974 246 GTS was discovered buried in a Los Angeles yard and it
transpired it was on the LAPD’s (Los Angeles Police Department) long list of stolen
vehicles. The department’s investigators
concluded the burial had been a “rush job” because while it had been covered
with carpets and some plastic sheeting in an inexpert attempt to preserve it
from the sub-terrain, one window had been left slightly open. Predictably, the back-story was assumed to be
an “insurance scam”, the owner allegedly hiring two “contractors” to “make it
disappear” in a manner consistent with car theft, hardly an unusual phenomenon in
Los Angeles. The plan was claimed to be for
the Dino to be broken up with all non-traceable (ie not with serial numbers
able to be linked to a specific vehicle) parts on-sold with whatever remained
to be dumped “somewhere off the coast”. In theory, the scamming owner would bank his
check (cheque) from Farmers Insurance while the “contractors” would keep their “fee
for service” plus whatever profits they realized from their “parting-out” which,
even at the discount which applies to “fenced” stolen goods, would have been in
the thousands; a win-win situation, except for the insurance company and,
ultimately, everyone who pays premiums.
Dug Up: The 'buried" Dino after restoration. Two of the Campagnolo wheels are said to be original and the 14 x 7½ wheels & fender flares combo was at the time a US$680.00 (about a third the cost of a new, small car); their presence can now add US$100,000 to a 246's value so they proved a reasonable investment.
However, it’s
said that when driving the Dino, the hired pair found it so seductive they
decided to keep it, needing only somewhere to conceal it until they could
concoct another plan. Thus the hasty
burial but for whatever reason (the tales differ), they never returned to
reclaim the loot and four years later the shallow automotive grave was uncovered
after a “tip-off” from a “snitch” (tales of children finding it while “playing
in the dirt” an urban myth. The matter
of insurance fraud was of course pursued but no charges were laid because
police could not discover who had done the burial and rather than being scraped
and “parted-out” (this time lawfully) as might have been expected, the Dino
was sold and restored. That was possible
because it was in surprisingly good condition after its four years in a pit, something
accounted for by (1) the low moisture content of the soil, (2) the degree of
protection afforded by the covers placed at the time of burial and (3) its time
underground coinciding with one of the prolonged droughts which afflict the
area. So, although Dino values were not
then what they became, purchased at an attractive price (a reputed US$9000), it was in good enough shape
for a restoration to be judged financially viable and it was “matching numbers”
(#0786208454-#355468) although that had yet become a fetish. The car remains active to this day, still with
the Californian licence plate “DUG UP”.
Sandra West with her 1964 Ferrari 330 America.
Cars (for fraudulent
purposes being buried or otherwise secreted away is a not uncommon practice
(some have even contained a dead body or two) but there’s at least one
documented case of an individual being, in accordance with a clause in their
will, buried in their Ferrari. Sandra
West (née Hara, 1939-1977) became a Beverly Hills socialite after marrying Texas
oil millionaire and securities trader Ike West (1934-1968) and as well as
jewels and fur coats (then socially acceptable evening wear), she developed a
fondness for Ferraris. Her husband died “in
murky circumstances” in a room of the Flamingo Hotel in Las Vegas and while the
details of his demise at a youthful 33 seem never to have been published, he
had a history of drug use and “health issues” related to his frequent and rapid
fluctuations in weight. His widow
inherited some US$5 million (then a considerable fortune) so the LA gossip columnists
adjusted their entries from “Mrs West” to “Sandra West, Beverly Hills Socialite
and Heiress”. Her widowed life seems not
to have been untroubled and her death in 1977 was certainly drug-related
although sources differ about whether it was an overdose of some sort or
related to the injuries she’d suffered in an earlier car accident.
Sandra West's burial. The legal proceedings related to the contested "burial clause" had been well publicized and the ceremony attracted a large crowd.
She left
more than one will but a judge ultimately found one to be valid and it included
a clause stating she must be buried “…in my lace nightgown … and in my Ferrari with the seat
slanted comfortably.”
Accordingly, after a two month delay caused by her brother contesting
the “burial clause”, Mrs West’s
appropriately attired body was prepared while the Ferrari was sent (under armed
guard) by train to Texas where the two were united for their final
journey. Car and owner were then encased
in a sturdy timber box measuring 3 metres (10 feet) x 2.7 m (9 feet) x 5.8 m (19
feet) which was transported by truck to San Antonio for the ceremony, conducted
on 4 May 1977 in the Alamo Masonic Cemetery (chartered in 1848, the Ancient
Free and Accepted Masons in 1854 purchased this property because of the need
for a burial ground for Freemasons). It
was an unusual ceremony in that a crane was used carefully to lower the crate
into an obviously large grave while to deter “body snatchers” (who would be
interested in exhuming car rather than corpse), a Redi-mix truck was on-hand to
entomb the box in a thick layer of concrete.
In a nice touch, her grave lies alongside that of her husband and has
been on the itinerary of more than one tourist operator running sightseeing tours. Mrs West owned three Ferraris and it’s not
clear in which her body was laid; while most reports claim it was her blue, 1964 330
America (s/n 5055), some mention it as a 250 GTE but 330 America #5055 has not
since re-appeared (pre-modern Ferraris carefully are tracked) so that is plausible
and reputedly it was “her favourite”. Inevitably
(perhaps sniffing the whiff of a Masonic plot), conspiracy theorists have long
pointed out the only documentary evidence is of “a large crate” being lowered
into the grave with no proof of what was at the time within. However, given burial clause was ordered enforceable
by a court, it should be assumed that under the remarkably plain gravestone
which gives no indication of the unusual event, rests a Ferrari of some tipo.
