Interest in kilts/Scottish things, should benefit Scotland, and UK

[RockyR]

Rocky.

As a Scot, a proud Scot I really dislike being associated with this kind of sharp practice. It may well be within the law of Scotland, I really don't know and it appears that it might be because its been going on for years, but it should not be.

I hope (and assume) that you know that I wasn't painting Scotland (and by default, people like you) with a broad brush of dishonest vendors... I was just saying that those businesses exist. No insult was meant if it was perceived.

[tundramanq]

Jock this goes on everywhere in the world. It's just that you, I and most people see these "white lies" similar to "being a little bit pregnant". It's the difference between being moral and ethical - One is only a legal term.

[Jock Scot]

I hope (and assume) that you know that I wasn't painting Scotland (and by default, people like you) with a broad brush of dishonest vendors... I was just saying that those businesses exist. No insult was meant if it was perceived.

No need to apologise my dear chap, you are quite right in what you said. Old fashioned thinking it may be, Utopian even, nevertheless I feel that these continued sharp business practices, by some in Scotland, reflects on Scotland as a whole and is in the long run, far from helpful in building the image in the world that I and others would prefer Scotland to have.

[Steve Ashton]

In a very real and tangible way the interest in kilts and Scottish things are benefiting Scotland. Thousands of tourists spend millions of dollars, pounds, yen, euros etc. in Scotland every day.

Local shop keepers, restaurant & pub owners, and hotels are benefiting, The tourist attractions like the Edinburgh Tattoo, the battlefield sites, archaeological sites are benefiting. Museums and the National Trust sites are benefiting. Events are benefiting.

Scotland is producing and selling Tartan. Very few places in the Western world are able to succeed in producing Tartan. Hundreds of thousands of yards of Tartan are sold all over the world.

Yes, local manufacture of many iconic items are hurting in Scotland just as they are all over the Western world. Our labor rates and overhead simply cannot compete with other places. Here in N. America large scale weaving mills are almost non-existent. There are only two or three large scale leather tannerys in the Western world because of environmental concerns.

The truth of the matter is, kilts are a very small, niche interest and market. The "Outlander" books and TV series have probable generated more wide scale benefit to Scotland than the sale of a few kilts. (and the readers of "Outlander" have generated a lot of kilt sales.) There are just as many on this forum who prefer to buy the less expensive, ready made kilts as there are who prefer to buy the hand made custom kilts. But almost all of us have or will visit Scotland and spend our money while there.

I honestly do not believe legislation will, can, or should, bring back the Scottish Kilt making industry. There are actually far more kiltmakers in N. America than there are in Scotland. If one of the bills that went in front of the Scottish lawmakers were to be passed Barb, Matt, myself, Rocky, John, Bonnie, Margaret, and even Jerry could not call our product a "Kilt". What would that do to the kilt itself? Would you even be able to buy a kilt anymore? Heck, what would a bill like that do to the interest in Highland Dance or Pipe Bands?

In truth it is probably places like X Marks that are keeping the interest, and appreciation, of things like traditional kiltmaking, hand crafted sporrans, and all the other accessories alive. If you want Scotland to benefit from an interest in Kilts and things Scottish then perhaps the best thing you can do is wear your kilt and tell every one you meet about this forum.

There are 14 non Scottish advertisers on this forum. My company alone sends almost a million dollars a year to Scotland, England and Ireland. Support those who support this forum and you will support and benefit Scotland and the UK.

Passing laws in an attempt to protect something has never worked. Not once in history. Spending money has, and will continue, to work. Every time. Even when you spend your money at a N. American kilt shop, a lot of your money eventually ends up over there.

[RockyR]

I'd agree with the majority of what Steve said, except the following:

1) I don't think there are more kiltmakers in N.A. than there are in Scotland. Between each little old lady hand sewing kilts and the hundreds of kiltmakers employed at large manufacturing firms, I would say that there are a lot more kiltmakers in the UK. Are there a good number in North America compared to the rest of the world (excluding Scotland)? Yes.

2) The legislation that was proposed (to the best of my knowledge) wasn't trying to protect the term "kilt" so much as the term "Scottish Kilt" or some such. They couldn't stop us from calling what you, I, Barb, Matt, et all produce a "Kilt". In the same way, they can police the term "Champagne", but not the term "Sparkling Wine" or "Harris Tweed", but not the term "tweed", as they are produced in specific regions.

3) Spending money at N.A. kilt shops who buy from Scottish firms (and sell "made in UK" products) helps the Scottish economy. Unfortunately, there are also many US / Canadian companies (not just Scottish firms) that simply sell tartan tat to un-knowing customers. Bottom line... it pays to do a bit of research before purchasing something, but as we all know, that doesn't always happen.

I'd also like to point something else out (that goes against my points, but is true none the less). Buying tartan tat on the Royal Mile or tourist shops around Scotland DOES help the Scottish economy to a degree. It helps that specific shop to prosper. It allows that shop to continue doing business and employ locals to staff the store. It gives the tourists a tangible memory of their trip in the form of a souvenir. That being said, the effects of that sale (in regards to supporting Scotland's economy) stay reasonably contained within that shop / community. The issue is that this model relies SOLELY on the tourist trade and benefits a few. What happens if it's a bad year for tourism?

When you buy from a shop who sells goods made in Scotland, you are supporting (1) the shop and all those they employ, (2) the manufacturer of the goods and all those they employ, and (3) manufacturers of the components of the product (leather, wool, metal workers) and all those that they employ. Your dollar (yen, mark, pound) goes much further to supporting the Scottish economy. This model isn't ONLY benefitted by the tourist trade (which it obviously would be) as those products that are sold throughout the world (i.e. USA, Canada, Germany, France, Australia, etc) pump money into the Scottish economy as well.

Food for thought...

[tpa]

I

I honestly do not believe legislation will, can, or should, bring back the Scottish Kilt making industry. There are actually far more kiltmakers in N. America than there are in Scotland. If one of the bills that went in front of the Scottish lawmakers were to be passed Barb, Matt, myself, Rocky, John, Bonnie, Margaret, and even Jerry could not call our product a "Kilt". What would that do to the kilt itself? Would you even be able to buy a kilt anymore? Heck, what would a bill like that do to the interest in Highland Dance or Pipe Bands?

I don't believe that was the issue Steve, I think the comments related to mis-representation in order to mislead and profit. No matter the country, this an issue faced everywhere. It is just that relatively speaking the Scottish kilt industry is small and when flooded with a lot of items "Made in Scotland" which originate in Pakistan it may not do the Scots kiltmakers any favours, unless the recipients educate themselves and come back to get the proper thing!

[tundramanq]

The best thing about X MARKS being an open forum and searchable by Google etc. is the education of the first timer/tourists. With no foreknowledge they don't know what kilts of various qualities should cost. Nor how to separate good from bad. With a little research they will know that the cheap kilt is not a full on proper kilt. There is a large market for inexpensive kilts and this site will point the buyer to the best places to get the most for their money. It also provides the knowledge, appreciation and appetite for a proper traditional kilt in the future. - I know!

[Steve Ashton]

tpa,

There are those in Scotland who do advocate some form of legislation to protect the Scottish manufacturers from the imports. One bill that was introduced was hinted at in an earlier post to this thread. The bill would limit the name "Kilt" to being made in Scotland by a Scottish company. This would mean that any garment made anywhere other than Scotland could not be labelled a Kilt.
Much the same was as Scotch. You can distill whiskey and/or whisky anywhere but you can't label it Scotch unless it was distilled in Scotland.
This bill was first brought up by Geoffry Nicklesby (you know him as Geoffrey (Tailor)) who is one of the most vocal advocates of legislative protections of Scottish made products and makers.

And Rocky, perhaps it is just here in Canada but every town or city has at least one kiltmaker. They may not have a retail shop but they make the vast majority of pipe band kilts and Highland Dance kilts. I have business cards from about 15 or 20 right here in BC alone.

If we go by the number of students in Elsie, Barb and my courses and you say only 10% try making and selling kilts, and you account for all those other pipe band and dance kilts, that's a lot of people sewing. If you take into account that the population of Scotland is between 5 & 6 million. The population of Canada is 6 times larger at 35 million and the US, where more kilts are owned and worn, is at 318 million. I think it is safe to stay with what I said.

[RockyR]

I had never heard that the term "kilt" itself was being discussed for protection, only "Scottish Kilt", though it may have been originally discussed as "kilt". Either way, I dont think it has a chance passing as just "kilt".

I would still disagree about your assumptions / math on the NA kiltmakers, but I will say there are a lot since we have a lot of ex pat Scots!

[RectaPete]

I had never heard that the term "kilt" itself was being discussed for protection, only "Scottish Kilt", though it may have been originally discussed as "kilt". Either way, I dont think it has a chance passing as just "kilt".

I would still disagree about your assumptions / math on the NA kiltmakers, but I will say there are a lot since we have a lot of ex pat Scots!

While I do believe the term "Scottish" should only appear on kilts with the majority of sourced components coming from Scotland, restricting the word "kilt" to Scottish-made products would be ludicrous. It would be like banning the word "cheese" due to Wensleydale cheese having place of origin protection. If non-Scottish kiltmakers (again, whether or not expat Scots based elsewhere count as sufficently "Scottish" is a point of debate that has probably been discussed by Scottish Parliament) were banned from using the term, the euphemism treadmill would be at full power. "Monofurcated tartan garments", anyone?