I have to agree with Monkey@Arms on this one. If someone buys a cheaper kilt thinking its the same as a traditional one, well I don't agree with that. And if someone buys a cheaper one while saving up for a more expensive one, I'd say stay patient and keep saving! However, a kilt is a luxury item. It's a meaningful one, a symbolic, cultural, heritage-infused luxury item. If someone doesn't have a lot of money, then pants cover the waist and lower at a cheaper price. Mr. Nicholsby will never business from these people; a kilt is simple not a necessity. The cheap kilts (or "kilts", depending on your view point) give people the opportunity to wear one, who would otherwise not have a chance to wear a kilt. And I think we can all agree that that is a good thing!

Is the quality the same? Of course not. If you can afford both, should you go cheap? I'd say no, since you'll likely have to replace it sooner (I'm sure others may disagree). But is it so terrible to have this option? I say no.