Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: rg200amp
Originally Posted By: bulwnkl
Surely you don't think that XOM hasn't previously seen this thread?
The letter itself isn't particularly risky for Valvoline at all. They made contact with XOM first, and informed them that testing indicated that M1 did not meet SM/GF-4 requirements. That communication was neither public nor risky. At that point, Valvoline only publicly claimed that SynPower protected better than M1.
With no response from XOM after 2 months and in fact an off-point counterattack, Valvoline upped the ante by disclosing to a wider audience that testing at an independent lab showed failure to meet spec. There remains an invitation to XOM to provide information demonstrating that their product does actually meet spec. Still not risky, and still no on-point response from XOM. I'd say that XOM is messing their pants. I just don't know whether it's because they screwed up or because they got caught.
Not risky?!!!?!
Saying XMO dose not meet the Specs they advertise they do is VERY RISKY.
If it is a lie on Ashlands part it is Slander. Look it up. If it turns out to be false, XOM will bury Ashland in court. Ashland will have to pay so much money in Punitive damages they will have no choice but to file for bankruptcy and close down.
It's like playing hot potato with a hand grenade with the pin pulled.
Some one is going to get BLOWN UP