OR...it's because they, Dimond, does not have the resources, money and leverage that the other brands do and they are attempting to limit their liability and losses. Personally, the warranty should be built into the price of the product which is typical and would argue given the price point for a Dimond they should be offering a better warranty, but perhaps they can't afford to?
Great point. And exactly why a brand like this shouldn't be considered in the same breath as brands like Cervelo, Trek, Specialized, etc. If they don't have the resources to provide competitive warranties (or customer service for that matter), why even consider them in the first place? Especially when they command similar or higher prices at retail.
OK, gonna counter this one. If that makes me 'mafia', OK....
I think it is really important to consider what those 'lifetime' warranties cover. They cover manufacturing defects. Fact is, if there is a 'defect' in your frame that is gonna cause a failure/crack/whatever, its gonna show before 6 years!
I know I know, everyone has a story of a guy they know who got a free bike after xxx years, etc. But seriously, how long do most of us keep these bikes before replacing them, and how often have you had a 5+ year old frame and had it completely replaced for free under a warranty?
I'd been riding a trek SC for the past 4 years, awesome bike, but not without issues. Broke two of the expensive integrated stems (they cracked), first one wasn't covered because over a year old, second one that I bought was covered because it broke in 8 months. Some other issues related to the frame too, none of which are being covered under warranty.
I've always believed that 'lifetime warranty' is just a marketing gimmick, its not realistic.
I guess we are getting off topic. For the record, I believe the OP had a legitimate issue that could have been handled better, thats all. He's moved on and everyone is happy. I've offered to let him test ride my bike if he dares show his face at IMMT.... ;)