Not trashing the complaint you have or the comments anyone else has made, just chiming in from a legal angle and a longer term collector who buys one or two per year for 5 decades, I have a pile.
You complaint is not well described in terms of how the world works today in manufacturing and distribution. The earth is no longer flat and the term common sense has changed in meaning, we all need to keep up.
When an issue comes before any CS group, the issue of shipping relies on many things. Of course with your background as the head guy of the third largest company of it's kind you know that CS people are not located in the supply or parts house and often not in the same state. An electronic communication goes into a first come first served pile of digital orders, you know that.
The CS guys would not likely have any idea how many spare parts of that kind are in storage for some future complaint, especially if that is a part that never or seldom fails. When a product is that good, they do not order or store a lot of those parts, so factually and practically, when those guns are that good, you would normally expect delays, and perhaps until a new production run of that part is ordered. That being said, where do they source small gold bead pieces that are used to enhance visibility for shooting handguns. The CS people would not likely know where those little gold beads come from, because Smith and Wesson produces or has produced many different guns with many different sighting options, perhaps in the thousands.
I assume the gun still shot just fine, but the gold bead might have aided the sight picture?
Personally, I buy one Smith and Wesson handgun per year, sometimes 2 and in recent years only buy new ones. I have had exactly one problem, and that was the cheap little fibre optic piece in the front sight of the 5.7 x 28 handgun. Like yours it just went flying off at the range. Apparently they have a front sight problem. Superglue or epoxy likely would have prevented that. I will be calling them next week and see how my complaint compares with yours.
Historically, I have never ever had a problem with them. I was asked to evaluate a SW AR 10 and we found the rifle was shipped with no rifling in the barrel whatsoever. They made it good immediately.
As to your comment about them not accepting used guns. From a legal standpoint AND from a practical standpoint it is not just a business decision. Once a gun enters private hands, it is a product of unknown damage and there is no idea of whether the gun has fired ammo above the proof testing protocols. It would be legally insane for any company to take a gun back after ownership has changed.
Why? because people who buy things and damage them lie about them and try to return them for a full refund. When a person like yourself, suddenly wants a new gun because the front bead on the front sight fell off, you suddenly become a common sense suspect case.
I once bought a used rifle for a fraction of the cost, the local dealer refunded the full price of the gun and took it back. I was offered the gun cheap with the understanding in writing that it was suspect and I waived all liability. The facts were the guy bought it a week before deer gun season, kept it 3 weeks and brought it back claiming it was not accurate. That was lie, I killed a huge buck with it later and it shoots just fine. People do that.
Keep in mind that Walmart is an easy company to sue, because they have lots of money. Monsanto the company that makes Round Up week killer is an easy company to sue, and Smith and Wesson is easy to sue because they have lots of money. Juries almost always buy into the lies of individuals suing big companies. Did I mention that I am a retired attorney?
Smith and Wesson would put their company at risk for every gun that they accept back as they could not sell it without risk. And the cost of proof testing all such returned guns would destroy any profit margin built into the gun.
Practically speaking, I understand your frustration. I have plenty of money and would like to add a 610, but am not willing to part with $1,200 for one, and probably never will, I have lots others, including vintage that perform very well, and certainly much more powerful than the nice little 10mm, I have them in 1911s and like the round a lot. Milder that 357 wheel guns and just a pleasure for an old guy to shoot all day.
I am curious why you just did not shoot it as is, until the new bead comes in the mail, eventually, their data base will find one and be shipped to you. Then you can epoxy it or superglue or whatever. So, did you try shooting it like I did with my fiber optic insert removed? It does make a difference in daylight, but I noticed it did not matter much when I was shooting in a dark range.
As to never buying that brand again, there is always an issue of the competition. I am well aware that Taurus is getting very , very few complaints about their wheel guns. That is when you look at the number they market and the number that actually have problems, the number is statistically insignificant. I am neither a Taurus fan or do I trash them, I have their Rossi lever guns in 454 and 357 and one of their 357 wheel guns, and a couple others, all are perfect in every way. I did send a used Rossi wheel gun back a couple years ago to replace a missing sight, they did, even though I was the second owner, they cleaned and polished the gun, test fired it and had it back in 2 weeks, and it never cost me a dime. Taurus? Who knew. The little 9 shot ultralight is now my tackle box gun, loaded with snake shot for fishing. It replaces my vintage SW model 63, a collectors item that lives in the safe.
You just bought model 63, so your know, mine was made in 1980, barely got the pinned barrel one. You are lucky to find one of that vintage, most folks hang onto them, mine is extremely accurate and I cherish that one.
Just saying, no company should replace or buy back a used gun, one that has legally changed ownership, that is not even a close question. And in my view, there is a logical reason why they cannot immediately tell you when that small part might be found at the supplier and when it could be shipped directly from the source to you, or to Smith and Wesson and then on to you.
Then again, the gun should be just fine, but that the bead would enhance your sight picture during shooting sessions with good light. I am reminded that I have several dozen guns with plain front sights. All of them would be better with gold beads or maybe fibre sights, but they work pretty good without that addition. I carried handguns with plain black front sights in harms way outside the US and at 4 different law enforcement agencies for half a century, and they worked OK. Not trashing your choice, just mentioning an option.
An maybe Taurus would be a better place for your new acquisitions. I love my Rugers, but not very impressed with their customer service at all. That said I will probably keep buying Rugers anyway. And I have some Colts, they have lost their appeal to many, but mine are just fine. None of those companies are perfect, just saying.
I am just suggesting that marketing in the modern world is different and maybe there is a better way that taking a loss on a gun when the proper part will get here eventully.
