H2 saddles & TMA news

[Jefferson10940]

From my understanding, if an item is TMA certified and a consumer gets hurt, TMA will testify in court that the product was not at fault but user error. Sounds like a level of protection from a company folding lawsuit. Many of these companies are small compared to the industry and might not be able to sustain a huge lawsuit payout and lawyer fees and survive. The main players will afford to test, as 2 companies already send their saddles and gear out to get tested even without the cert. Trophyline and Tethrd both have been tested at facilities that test for TMA. It is rather costly and time consuming, I am not sure the new start ups can afford to test?

People keep saying that H2 is making saddles in his garage? I do not think that is correct, he may be running his company from his garage, but I am pretty sure I saw him post on FB that he has a facility making his saddles. I could be wrong, not much sleep during deer season messes with my mind.

 

[Nutterbuster]

TMA gives saddle manufacturers some form of protection. In court, they can point and say, "We built our stuff according to these standards, which the industry says is acceptable." It passes the buck and means they don't have to individually decide what is and isnt safe. Thinking/believing your product is safe is easier than telling the whole world it's safe.

TMA gives saddle hunters some degree of safety because they then can reasonably assume that the product they're buying should be made to a certain criteria that will keep them safe if they use the product as directed by the manufacturer. Of course, this assumption also benefits the manufacturer and can be used as marketing. Hence the reason every TMA approved stand displays those 3 little letters.

I don't know that I buy saddles getting more expensive. Practically any treestand/harness combo out there is cheaper than any saddle/platform combo, and uses more raw materials. Not sure why we all hate TMA so bad, unless it's just because TMA historically hasn't recognized saddles.

But, I agree that it's more about benefiting companies than users. Hence the name: Treestand MANUFACTURERS Association. Not Treestand Users Association. They exist primarily to benefit manufacturers, but I'm not sure how they disadvantage end users.

Maybe I'm missing something. @DaveT1963 might have more firsthand dealings with them. I've only talked with them once or twice, and that was mainly concerning strap on steps and the possibility of TMA approved saddles in the future. They were easy-going and quite helpful, and certainly didn't seem like they were trying to squash any ideas or product.

 

[Nutterbuster]

Here's the info page for tma:

About TMA - TMAStands

For the standard in treestand safety, trust Treestand Manufacturer's Association (TMA), a promoter of hunting safety and ethics.

www.tmastands.com

It's full of fun facts. They havent been around all that long. They don't certify or test anything. They're a non-profit. They spend a fair amount of time and money on treestand safety education.

I'm just not getting the guys who are adamantly anti-TMA. Any specific evidence of them hampering the industry or screwing folks over? Heck, OOAL is a member, and he's a pretty dang small operation.

 

[huntin_addict]

Lets have a party and invite lawyers and government agents to it, what could go wrong with that. If they do go TMA cert. that would mean that all saddles up until the stroke of the pen would be illegal and we would have to purchase a TMA saddle.

Uh, doubtful.

 

[bj139]

I’d sure be interested how saddle manufacturers, TMA, insurance companies, et al, address the fact that in every climbing discipline, and every industry that involves working from height, none allow or condone only hanging from a friction hitch or ascender. And yet, in saddle hunting, tying off the end of a tether seems to be an afterthought for tying up slack out of the way, and sometimes as a ‘backup’. I don’t see how that will square.

Don't tree surgeons use only friction hitches routinely? I see Youtube videos of companies cutting trees and that is all they are hanging on. They must have insurance.

 

[BTaylor]

TMA gives saddle manufacturers some form of protection. In court, they can point and say, "We built our stuff according to these standards, which the industry says is acceptable." It passes the buck and means they don't have to individually decide what is and isnt safe. Thinking/believing your product is safe is easier than telling the whole world it's safe.

TMA gives saddle hunters some degree of safety because they then can reasonably assume that the product they're buying should be made to a certain criteria that will keep them safe if they use the product as directed by the manufacturer. Of course, this assumption also benefits the manufacturer and can be used as marketing. Hence the reason every TMA approved stand displays those 3 little letters.

I don't know that I buy saddles getting more expensive. Practically any treestand/harness combo out there is cheaper than any saddle/platform combo, and uses more raw materials. Not sure why we all hate TMA so bad, unless it's just because TMA historically hasn't recognized saddles.

But, I agree that it's more about benefiting companies than users. Hence the name: Treestand MANUFACTURERS Association. Not Treestand Users Association. They exist primarily to benefit manufacturers, but I'm not sure how they disadvantage end users.

Maybe I'm missing something. @DaveT1963 might have more firsthand dealings with them. I've only talked with them once or twice, and that was mainly concerning strap on steps and the possibility of TMA approved saddles in the future. They were easy-going and quite helpful, and certainly didn't seem like they were trying to squash any ideas or product.

There is no measure of safety in buying any climbing hunting equipment just because it has a TMA stamp. If that were the case there would not have been a recall on the climber I have to replace some parts that were faulty eventhough it had TMA sticker right on the side of it. They are not testing every unit that goes out the door. There is zero need for more rules and regs and more safety this and that. The only thing that is needed is a standardized disclaimer that every maker uses that says "All risk associated with the use of this product in a climbing system are born by the end user." Leave it to the Mfg how they warranty craftsmanship and let the public assume the responsibility that should be theirs.

 

[kyler1945]

There is no measure of safety in buying any climbing hunting equipment just because it has a TMA stamp. If that were the case there would not have been a recall on the climber I have to replace some parts that were faulty eventhough it had TMA sticker right on the side of it. They are not testing every unit that goes out the door. There is zero need for more rules and regs and more safety this and that. The only thing that is needed is a standardized disclaimer that every maker uses that says "All risk associated with the use of this product in a climbing system are born by the end user." Leave it to the Mfg how they warranty craftsmanship and let the public assume the responsibility that should be theirs.

would you pay double the price for the same product to have the system set up the way you suggest?

 

[BTaylor]

would you pay double the price for the same product to have the system set up the way you suggest?

Not following your question.

 

[Gamover06]

There is no measure of safety in buying any climbing hunting equipment just because it has a TMA stamp. If that were the case there would not have been a recall on the climber I have to replace some parts that were faulty eventhough it had TMA sticker right on the side of it. They are not testing every unit that goes out the door. There is zero need for more rules and regs and more safety this and that. The only thing that is needed is a standardized disclaimer that every maker uses that says "All risk associated with the use of this product in a climbing system are born by the end user." Leave it to the Mfg how they warranty craftsmanship and let the public assume the responsibility that should be theirs.

Vehicles goes through testing and still get recalled due to safety concerns so I guess I am not seeing your point with the TMA sticker on a stand it it got recalled.

 

[kyler1945]

Not following your question.

would you pay double to get the same product, but keep any certifications or standards or organizations out of it, while the manufacturer assumes all liability for injury or death from failure?

it’s pretty simple. Insurance is purchased to transfer liability from manufacturer to insurance company. That cost is determined by risk, and revenue. If there is no risk mitigation(perceived or real), insurance costs rise. Manufacturers need to make money to stay in business. That cost is passed on to you.

the free market is beautiful without tort law in the picture.

 

[BTaylor]

Vehicles goes through testing and still get recalled due to safety concerns so I guess I am not seeing your point with the TMA sticker on a stand it it got recalled.

I was responding to the notion that a sticker from any testing organization should not give anyone the warm and fuzzy's because it doesnt mean the one you have was looked at at all and it doesnt mean anything with regards to the safety of the product you own and use. The API climber I have before replacing the parts was apparently about as safe as the Baker I hunted on for the first 10 years of my bowhunting career. Now I have the non-recalled parts and guess what, they can fail too and that dang sticker has no bearing on it at all. We are continually adding more and more required safety to dang near every aspect of life and removing responsibility of use from the consumer as much as possible. I just wish folks would stop trying to manscape this country out of the need for urinals. I dont like politicians or lawyers.

 

[bj139]

I like the H2 business model but they probably need protection from lawsuits with the TMA even with their disclaimer.

 

[BTaylor]

would you pay double to get the same product, but keep any certifications or standards or organizations out of it, while the manufacturer assumes all liability for injury or death from failure?

it’s pretty simple. Insurance is purchased to transfer liability from manufacturer to insurance company. That cost is determined by risk, and revenue. If there is no risk mitigation(perceived or real), insurance costs rise. Manufacturers need to make money to stay in business. That cost is passed on to you.

the free market is beautiful without tort law in the picture.

I dont want to pay double and I dont want the Mfg to need to double their prices to afford liability insurance. I want the end user to own the liability of using the product for the most part. Tort reform will never happen because of who is making the rules and who profits most from them.

 

[Jefferson10940]

insurance should go down with certification not up. I believe those companies that have the insurance are paying a pretty penny for every saddle sold. Well add it up with how many saddles are sold it adds up fast.

 

[bj139]

insurance should go down with certification not up. I believe those companies that have the insurance are paying a pretty penny for every saddle sold. Well add it up with how many saddles are sold it adds up fast.

Yes. Liability is transferred to the user with the certifying agency certifying the product is safe.

 

[kyler1945]

insurance should go down with certification not up. I believe those companies that have the insurance are paying a pretty penny for every saddle sold. Well add it up with how many saddles are sold it adds up fast.

yup we agree there. That was my point. We can have a free market, and we can all assume more liability. But the price will remain high because there is always someone who will recoup damages from the supplier of a product if they are hurt using it.

I don’t judge those folks either. I can’t tell you what I’d do if I had a wife and kids, and I was injured using a product that failed(within specified use or not). I know what I’d do on my own. But if I couldn’t feed my kids, who knows.

it’s easy to judge without having been in the situation. Like everything else it’s not black and white...

 

[iamcorey]

Why even get insurance or Care about TMA. Just slap use at your own risk and put out a quality product.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gamover06]

Why even get insurance or Care about TMA. Just slap use at your own risk and put out a quality product.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unfortunately the world we live in is sue happy and any good lawyer will include any and everyone possible to make a buck. Use at your own risk will not stop a good lawyer. All they have to do is find one post were you talk about hunting from the saddle 15 feet up or one picture of them endorsing the use of their saddle from 15 feet up and they will show intent. Its pretty clear what a saddle is made for when 100% of saddles bought are used not at ground level. If Johnny Cochran can get OJ off I am sure a hand full of people getting hurt from a saddle put out by the same company will be able to win a large settlement.

I sell insurance and one of our customers was brought into a lawsuit for a building that he put the siding on. In the suit every company that stepped foot onto the property while it was being built was being sued. Obviously they wont get money from everyone but they tie everyone into a suit and see what sticks. The suit was over the wrong framing nails being used. Well the plumber didn't use a single framing nail but they are still in the suit.

 

[Letemgrowitllshow]

I sell insurance and one of our customers was brought into a lawsuit for a building that he put the siding on. In the suit every company that stepped foot onto the property while it was being built was being sued. Obviously they wont get money from everyone but they tie everyone into a suit and see what sticks. The suit was over the wrong framing nails being used. Well the plumber didn't use a single framing nail but they are still in the suit.

Jeesh thats fricken ruthless

 

[Nutterbuster]

Why even get insurance or Care about TMA. Just slap use at your own risk and put out a quality product.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because even hardy, red blooded, anti big government individuals like ourselves will lawyer up when their back is broken and they can't work their trade and feed their families. Or their widows will. They can do that in this country because we saw what happened when little people didn't have recourse. We tried to fix it. Did it work? Not great, but maybe better than in places like Somalia and Afghanistan.

Everybody loves to hate lawyers and insurance, until their home floods, they rear end someone, or their tether snaps. All of us will align with the gubment and other regulators and bean counters when we profit from it. @DaveT1963 works for the airforce if I'm not mistaken. I'm worse, I work for a university.

Understand the way the cookie crumbles, and take it into your calculations. You can wish it weren't so all ya want. Sometimes it just be like that. As saddle hunting grows, the risk of someone getting hurt and suing you goes up. I highly doubt TMA initiated the talks with saddlehunting companies. It was most likely the manufacturers, who have sense enough to see the inevitable and want to not be personally liable for it. Getting TMA to recognize them helps with that. Liability goes down, insurance companies charge less because their risk is lower, and (hopefully, and to me probably) saddles get cheaper because the longterm benefits of testing outweigh the short term disadvantages.

Or that's the current my wrinkled little bunch of fat is sending out.