I posted this on another thread. Im really concerned having bought my Rocna now.
Guys excuse the lengthy response - but after having purchased my 33 Rocna and then reading this forum, I went back an challenged the supplier.
I take no responsibility for the contents of the letter that was sent to me but here below is what I recieved:
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with information on current
publicity regarding Rocna.
Background: Forum discussions regarding Rocna and the people speaking against us
There have been several discussions recently on various sailing forums
regarding Rocna. They have been lengthy, heated, and ill informed. While it’s important to be aware of what’s happening, as some of our customers may also become aware, it is also important to consider the full context of these discussions.
There are a small number of people who are making the majority of posts on the forums
, and it’s important to note that they are not Rocna customers. Rather, those making the most noise
are the people who have the most to gain by discrediting Rocna.
This includes Grant King, who is a disaffected former contractor of Rocna Anchors whose contract
with us was terminated after an investigation into his conduct uncovered serious instances of fraud and theft.
We are not at liberty to provide further details given there is an ongoing Police investigation, but as a result of his termination Mr King has an adverse position toward Rocna Anchors, and he has been posting both under his own name and under the pseudonym Adam Andrews (username ‘whaleboy’, pretending to be a dissatisfied Rocna customer.
Also commenting have been a number of people representing other anchor manufacturers who are taking advantage of these discussions in order to discredit Rocna and advertise their own anchors.
While this is obviously a concern, we’re encouraged to see that Rocna owners who are aware of the discussions still rate their anchors highly, and recognise that many of the forum discussions do not tell the full story and also do not necessarily reflect on the quality of Rocna anchors. In fact, there was a new discussion started as a result which specifically asked for information about real world experiences from people who actually own a Rocna.
The sample responses listed below show that people who own a Rocna continue to be delighted with our anchor. (These are direct quotes and as such contain original errors in spelling, etc)
“It's a very good anchor. It will be hard to find anyone using one who wouldn't agree. I spent 6 months up a river changing direction 4 times a day with a fierce ebb and didn't budge.”
“The ROCNA is very very good. We sold
which was not up to our expectations and after much debate and questioning bought the ROCNA. This is our main anchor and has never dragged in two years use. We also have a fortress
and a small danforth. You will be pleasantly surprised at how quickly the ROCNA sets.”
“I have a 40 kg Rocna - costs a lot but is worth every penny. I was amazed how quickly it sets and holds. A Great anchor.”
As a result of the discussions on the forums and speculation regarding the steel quality of Rocna anchors, Manson Anchors undertook testing comparing the strength of two Rocna anchors against their own anchors. This testing uncovered a discrepancy in the strength of the steel used in the Rocna compared to our own published specs.
This was naturally a great concern to us, as our recent material testing has shown no such discrepancies. On further investigation, we discovered that for a short period of time (during the first quarter of 2010) Grant King, who was Production Manager at the time, approved material from a different steel supplier on the basis that it was equivalent spec to that previously used.
Manson’s testing indicates that this is not the case, and that while still a high tensile steel, it is in fact of a somewhat lower specification to that previously used.
We are confident that although the high tensile steel used during this period was of lower specifications, anchors made with this material are still fit for purpose. We have not seen any increase in warranty claims that would indicate cause for concern.
To further verify this, we are currently designing comprehensive proof load testing that we will complete as soon as possible in order to prove to any customers who may be worried that their anchor is fit for purpose, even if it is one of the minority of anchors made with the alternative grade of steel.
We are currently working through the details of these tests at the moment. If you would like to be involved in this process, we would love your input. It’s important to us that whatever testing we do will assure both you and our customers that Rocna anchors are fit for purpose and that there is no need for concern.
In the meantime, we continue to stand behind our product, and ask that you work
directly with us on any specific customer requests or concerns.
Important note: Of the many thousands of Rocna anchors we’ve sold, we’ve only had five cases in total of bent shanks. Two of these pre-date this issue and are for NZ made anchors and two others were undersized for the boat
. As we know, any anchor will bend eventually in the right conditions, and some of the examples that we have seen were as a result of extreme conditions, including one that weathered a tsunami in Chile
(the owner of the boat in that situation was absolutely delighted that his Rocna still held under these circumstances!)
Clarification of RINA status
One of the points discussed on the forums has been our RINA certification
. Due to the complexity of certification
and the special terminology involved, our RINA status has unfortunately been (and to some extent, continues to be) misunderstood, despite numerous clarifications on the forums.
Founded in Italy
in 1861, RINA is a member
of IACS (International Association of Classification Societies) and is popular in Europe
and internationally. Other IACS members include Lloyds Register (United Kingdom), Bureau Veritas (France), American Bureau of Shipping
(USA), Det Norske Veritas (Norway).
Our RINA process to date has involved:
• December 2008: Seabed testing to SHHP
• June 2009: Drawings approved to SHHP
• April 2010: RINA issued a statement confirming Rocna’s SHHP
• 2010/2011: Proof load testing, material testing and welding testing in order to certify our manufacturing facility that currently produces the bulk of our anchors continues. RINA advises that final factory certification will soon be issued.
On the basis of the successful seabed tests and drawings approval a press release on Rocna SHHP was released in November 2009.
Meanwhile, individual anchor certification for registered vessels or those customers requiring individual certification for a Rocna anchor has been available from an alternative fully certified RINA factory since November 2009.
We continue to stand behind Rocna anchors, and our growing customer base is enthusiastic in its support. We regret the negative press being generated by a few parties with an axe to grind, and we are pursuing all means at our disposal to deal with this. We are committed to keeping you informed as we move forward.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me for further clarification.
CEO – Rocna Anchors