I apparently read this differently than some folks. I saw nothing which
said RoHS was a good thing or that they were trying to be Green. What I
read was a call for a single national approach rather than the ongoing
and inevitable patchwork of state legislation.
Dan Kallin
-----Original Message-----
From: Leadfree [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Burke
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 6:02 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LF] Anyone know this company, want to boycott their
products?
Those studies by ERA - interestingly, are a few more than the European
Parliament prior to implementing the law.
Like others on this forum I would be very interested to know where the
driver is in this "Green company" approach. They state publickly that
there
is a need for "standards"
If I was distributing components I would want a global compliance
classification system that everyone signed up for in order to reduce
inventory and maximize inventory turns (for this read profit).
This might seem cynical but after all it is business. I cannot imagine
that
if the officers of Newark are that environmentally concerned that they
have
not read the EPA report and realized that the most major component based
change due to RoHS - lead in solders - is environmentally damaging.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Leadfree [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lester Subrattee
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LF] Anyone know this company, want to boycott their
products?
Newark In One is a subsidiary of Premier Farnell plc, a Global
distributor.
They have conducted a few RoHS studies or had studies done on their
behalf
by ERA.
Regards,
LS
-----Original Message-----
From: David Shaff [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Anyone know this company, want to boycott their products?
Don't think that this is "Newark". It is not logical to expect
distributors to want this type of documentation. Having worked
senior-level for Avnet (in "another life"), I do not see why they would
want to have potentially multiple sets of same items but with different
documentation status (for new versus old) that would also add to
supplier-differentiation plus requiring sort/selection "to where" they
can ship. Documentation review and staffing would add to overhead
which is where they are fighting to hold costs.
Regards,
David Shaff
General manager
Southwest Microwave, Inc.
Tempe, AZ
http://www.southwestmicrowave.com
.
MA/NY DDave wrote:
> Hi Dennis, IPC LF Listsevers,
>
> Believe this is from the Distributor company "Newark"
>
> Prior to boycotting them, I would check if all the large electronic
> distributors are asking for the same thing via their association.
>
> Yours in Engineering, Dave
> YiEngr, MA/NY DDave
>
>
This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this
information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly
delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other
than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Leadfee Mail List provided as a service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Leadfree
To temporarily stop/(start) delivery of Leadree for vacation breaks send: SET Leadfree NOMAIL/(MAIL)
Search previous postings at: http://listserv.ipc.org/archives
Please visit IPC web site http://www.ipc.org/contentpage.asp?Pageid=4.3.16 for additional information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-615-7100 ext.2815
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
