I stopped equating quarterly sales reports with residential comfort
N inety-two percent of home climate installations in North America deviate from their engineered specifications within the first of operation.
The statistic is not a measure of mechanical failure. It is a measure of the gap between a transaction and an outcome. Last month, a homeowner named Elias contacted me about a signature on a service contract. As a handwriting analyst, I am often called to look at the pressure of a pen or the slant of a stroke to determine the intent behind a document.
Elias wasn’t worried about fraud. He was worried about the “vibe” of the technician who had just installed a high-capacity heat pump in his finished basement. The signature was jagged, the ink pooling in the loops of the ‘E’, suggesting a hurried exit.
The gap between the “market-leading solution” and the cold, damp reality of Elias’s basement.
Elias had spent $4,800 on a unit that was, according to the industry’s leading trade journals, a “market-leading solution.” The manufacturer had reported record-breaking revenue for that specific model. The distributor had won an award for units moved. But Elias was sitting in a basement that felt like a damp cave. The air was cold, but the humidity was 74%.
The industry had recorded a win.
