Well, one action that would have value, would be to actually record all defects (description, pictures), the email sent to Mirco, and his response.

That way there is a customer story log, and PPS has access to the exchanges and can see for himself (and can't state - I did not know about it).

It could be a central repository hosted on a Github, or a Google spreadsheet or equivalent, locked and maintained by one individual (maybe the OP of this thread, or even better, High_End_Pins whose credibility is super high), or a few individuals if the number of response is too high.

It should also contain the good and the bad, so that if there's a positive evolution, it can be seen. Because after all, as much as we complain, at this point we have very few alternatives, if any at all. So it is in everyone benefit that Mirco quality improve. If this is even possible in the first place though.

And this list would be accessible on the first page of this thread, so that newcomers could have some historical data, and not search through miles and miles of threads.

Could it be that he's been more reasonable and open with you because of your reputation and standing in the community, vs the average Joe customer buying his product and complain?

I'm sure you're not doing it on purpose, but the fact remains that I have seldom heard of customers getting satisfactory support from Mirco on what would be otherwise called "defective products". This thread is full of people posting his response. So there's no deniying that if you managed to get some support from him, it's likely because he's considering you as "someone to care for"

I'm sorry, but I strongly disagree.

There is a difference between "small tolerable defect", "perfect", and "defective". Are we asking for Mirco to provide "perfect" playfield, I'm sure none of us are. However, we expect them to provide playfields which cannot be considered as "defective".

By defective I mean:
- Material that is not durable over time
- Obviously incorrect artwork (lettering, colors, etc). He has the files, he can fix them. And his excuse "it's in the files provided to me" is kind of silly... If it was there in the original production of the machine, then... this means the file he's got are incorrect and he needs to fix them.
- Holes position that prevent usage of the playfield

Fortunately, 3/ above does not seem too frequent (although, I did have an example of a MM playfield with a massive hole where there should not be one... and to be fair, he did provide a replacement as far as I know)

But 1/ and 2/ are all too frequent.

Missing text on the TZ playfield: would you consider this as acceptable ? If it were coming straight from a manufacturer, when buying a machine, would you accept this ?

Willie's vampire teeth on indiana Jones (on top of that in an area which is very visible by the player), again, easy to fix, just need to spend the time doing it (although looking at the post earlier it seems he might actually have fixed it ?).

All the more since the feedback has been made to him on multiple occasions, and he's simply dismissed it.

Color reproduction was perfect on his first runs (I happen to have a picture of a first run MM Mirco playfield), but has major issues since he changed his production process, probably because he did not bother recalibrating it (take a look at the paved road at the bottom on MM). To be fair, CGC remake are not good either in that department, but they perfectly align (again, I have access to a CGC NOS playfield, you can clearly see the quality of the alignement vs Mirco)

And lastly: material not durable. I would guess this is the number one complaint. Buying a 1200 euro playfield, going through the pain of swapping it, only to find out that the clearcoat cracks/peels after a few weeks/months is not acceptable.

Buthamburg has stellar quality compared to Mirco, AND they are cheaper. If only they had more capacity (and hopefully they will after moving to their new facility), and resource to offer more models, we would not have this conversation because everyone would buy from them with no second thought.

If PPS was enforcing some level of quality control in his licencing contract (to avoid brand reputation damage for ex), then it would force everyone to at least pay attention. For that matter, "licensed" now holds no meaning to me whatsoever. There has been examples in various groups of licensed product having subpar quality compared to non licensed products (not all, I won't go as far, I'm just stating that "licenced" does not mean "quality").

Pinside is english speaking centric. I know a lot of FR pinheads who are not on Pinside, because they don't speak/write english. Likewise in Germany, Spain, Italy. And given that Mirco is EU based, a lot of PF are being sold across Europe, for which it's unlikely you will see complaints here on Pinside. Also, people might post of an issue into the relevant owner thread, and not in this particular "Mirco focused complaint thread".

Also, it's not only the product quality which is being questioned, it's the response given when an issue arise which is problematic.

But to be able to move forward, having a "review" section on Pinside would help, especially if pinsiders were informed about it and could write a non biaised review (positive or negative), as long as they provide detailed information (pictures, good or bad, etc).

Works both ways, at least there will be some statistical data (if reviews are in high enough number) of whether there are really widespread issues, of if the issues are anomalies.

Even in EU it's not straightforward, as each country as it's own law. The governing law in the case of Mirco is Germany. There is a settlement EU body which helps in case of dispute, but they have no legal authority.

The only way is to file a complaint locally in Germany. I'm not sure there is a similar mechanism as a class action lawsuit as there is in the US.

With regards to the non returned playfield, I would tend to think you can simply file a complaint. I need to check if it involves any fee, but even if it does it's probably nominal. Mirco will receive a nice letter stating that he is keeping property that do not belong to him. Whether he decides to comply and return the playfield (in a good shape) is another matter entirely, he of course knows no one can enforce unless taken to the next level, which requires a legal lawsuit for theft, but he might consider this is too much of a hassle vs returning the unit.

Just a word there: I know from past experience in dealing with one international supplier, they all think you will fold if they push hard enough. You have to stand your ground, and be prepared to lay cash to get there. In my case, the supplier was asking for a 200 euro bill for a service he had not delivered. I had the European organization I referred to involved, the supplier stand their ground. And then I received a letter from a firm specialized in recovering debt. I gave them a call, explained all of the history, clearly told them that if they wanted to go that route I would go to court, no matter the cost (it was on principle, I was willing to pay far more than 200 euros just to get them straight). The guy on the phone apologized, stated "there's no need to go to court", and I never heard from them anymore.

Sidenote: Mirco does show up at European events. He did at "Le Treport", along with Jack from JJP. And he pretty much does show up at every "Le Treport" event. But getting nasty at an event won't help a bit IMO, first you'll have the event organizer on your back in no time (because Mirco and JJP still have a standing), second in a state of law, only due process will get you what is your right.

Here is a link to the European body that can help you navigate this, and where you can file your complaint:
https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr/main/?event=main.complaints.new&complainttype=1&consumer-question3=N

Even better. Keeping someone else property is reason enough for a police report. Everyone in the same situation should indeed use this. I pointed the link since it's in international language, but if a native german offers to help, all the best

Now for all with PF defects, it would clearly fall, IMO, into the "dispute" category. You can use the link I provided. If a sufficient number of people complain, maybe (I'm not privy to the inner workings of this european union organization) this will trigger higher scrutiny.

You might want to set a deadline, because at this rate he might say "next week", then again "end of the week", over and over. The psychological aspect is that we all try to get our investment back (in your case a playfield), and do not wish to burn all bridges in the hope of getting this investment back. This leads to a never ending waiting game (speaking of experience, for another matter entirely, not related to pinball nor Mirco, but I had the same attitude).

Setting a deadline to you and Mirco will put the stake in the ground. True, past this deadline, you can probably kiss your playfield goodbye (unless legal action is taken), but at least you move forward, you don't wait forever in the hope that something will happen, you just call it a loss, and proceed with whatever action you deem relevant (publishing email content, legal action to german authorities, etc).

I know in my case that's what I did. I did lose a fair amount of money, but my mind is much more at rest now. And that's priceless.

Depends on your mindset and your intent.

If you can live with this situation as long as it takes, without having an impact on your personal mental health, well indeed there's no point in setting a deadline.
If however, like me, you tend to turn things in your head over and over, then the best move is to just be done with it. Call it a loss, set a deadline to Mirco and just disclose all the history once the deadline is past. If by chance this makes Mirco moves forward and send you back your playfield to avoid further backlash, well then everything is fine. If not, this means he would likely not have sent anything anyway. And once this situation is off your chest, you'll be better for it. I know I was. But yes you lose your playfield in this case.