Buyer Beware

[MacLowlife]

If I might, I want to weigh in for just a minute. ABSOLUTELY, it is wrong to steal images. ABSOLUTELY, it is wrong to pretend to be selling one grade of goods when one is selling another. ABSOLUTELY, it is wrong to lie about delivery.

BUT, the other question is not so clear to me. Do we always get what we pay for? Is price an indicator of quality? I do not think so. There is a guy on eBay selling what he calls the world's worst kilt. He gets about $30 and he warns you up front that it is poorly made. Apparently, he got a pile of them and just wants to be rid of them. He may even be taking a loss. In his case, price indicates quality. I think it also indicates he was counting on something better. But elsewhere on XMarks, I have read about people paying a lot of money and getting junk. Price is only an indicator of price and if you pay it, of what you are willing to spend.

We have all seen examples of other factors influencing price, but demand and lack of competition do enter into the equation. So does snob appeal. And, of course, the cost of production comes in. If your goods are made by people who grew up comfortable and hold advanced degrees, they will cost more than those made by people who only expect to feed their families- and not very well at that. Whether the intangible difference is felt by the purchaser or not, I can't say. I don't know whether a "conflict diamond" shines any more or less brightly than an ethical diamond, whatever that might be.

So I leave alone the question of what is unseen. I believe we stick with what we know is true. The merchant who steals web images is a thief. The goods you hold in your hand are what they are. The ones on the web can be anything. Beware doesn't mean "run away". It means be careful. If you only need a sporran to give away as a door prize, or because your mother made you wear one, it can be made of actual cardboard, certainly of cardboard-like "leather". If you want a garment that you can give to your descendants after you have worn it a long time, then you ought to do a little homework.

[Cavebear58]

12345

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I'm back from three blissful days with no Internet, and am reading the new posts in this thread. I just want to step in and reiterate that I did not start this thread about the relative merits of expensive vs. cheap goods, or even high quality vs. low quality alternatives. Nor did I start this thread to discuss the relative merits of buying goods made from one country over another.

This thread is about truth in advertising and supporting businesses who follow ethical business practices. Period.

[macwilkin]

I would love to see documented evidence (and not just a sentence on a website) that a firm in pre-partition India was supplying kilts & kit to Her Majesty's forces. While officers did on occasion commission private purchase uniforms from local tailors (US officers purchasing khaki uniforms in Hong Kong), it is documented that Highland Battalions had their own tailors from the ranks.

If there is such a source, I'd love to see it.

T.

[Cavebear58]

12345

[RockyR]

... what one person considers ethical another considers uncommercial, and what one considers unethical another considers business as normal.

I would argue that it is as unethical to create a misleading impression of one's corporate heritage as it is to copy pictures of a competitor's products, but it is still just my interpretation of 'ethical'.

Cheers, Graham.

I personally don't see a 'MAJOR' (if any) unethical nature of trying to tie the name of your business to tug at the heartstrings of a country or region (when it relates to the product you're selling). LOTS of businesses inside and outside of Scotland do this... Gaelic Themes (scotland), Great Highlandwear (Pakistan), Heritage of Scotland (Scotland selling Pakistani Kilts), Skye Highland Outfitters (US)...

In Colorado, there's a WATER company that is named the Highland Water Company (http://totemdenver.blogspot.com/2006...y-company.html). They have water delivered by men in Kilts. They have NOTHING to do with Scotland. Is this 'unethical'?

By that method of thinking, you could say that 'any company using a name having ANYTHING to do with Scotland or Ireland that is based outside of Scotland / Ireland is unethical'. Is Matt Newsome 'unethical' for running the 'Scottish Tartans Museum' in the USA? I don't think he is.

I think we should stick to Matt's original point as he's the one who started the thread... businesses STEALING pictures and STEALING descriptions and STEALING designs who PURPOSEFULLY mislead customers are theives. Period. In my mind, that's a pretty black and white ethical issue.

[slohairt]

I would love to see documented evidence (and not just a sentence on a website) that a firm in pre-partition India was supplying kilts & kit to Her Majesty's forces. While officers did on occasion commission private purchase uniforms from local tailors (US officers purchasing khaki uniforms in Hong Kong), it is documented that Highland Battalions had their own tailors from the ranks.

If there is such a source, I'd love to see it.

T.

I agree. We occasionally hear this but no valid proof is ever brought forward. Hopefully it isn't the company that sent me five identical spam emails this morning!

[macwilkin]

I agree. We occasionally hear this but no valid proof is ever brought forward. Hopefully it isn't the company that sent me five identical spam emails this morning!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds this story a bit much. In the British Army, other ranks uniforms and kit were provided by the MoD, while officers were expected to private purchase uniforms and equipment. While we all know that the government generally goes to the lowest bidder, I don't see the Victorian army choosing to purchase kilts from a firm in India over a firm in the Borders...

T.

[slohairt]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds this story a bit much. In the British Army, other ranks uniforms and kit were provided by the MoD, while officers were expected to private purchase uniforms and equipment. While we all know that the government generally goes to the lowest bidder, I don't see the Victorian army choosing to purchase kilts from a firm in India over a firm in the Borders...

T.

Exactly. Officer's uniform and kilt would have been purchased before embarking for the Indian subcontinent. I could accept individual tailors providing alterations and replacements while the regiments were stationed nearby, but a military contract to a firm is highly unlikely.

As a side note: This may come as a shock to some, but my company was not founded in ancient times, nor is it staffed by equally ancient Keltoi peoples whether they be Gauls, Belgae, or Fomorians. Sorry if I misled anyone...

[Heming]

I'm back from three blissful days with no Internet, and am reading the new posts in this thread. I just want to step in and reiterate that I did not start this thread about the relative merits of expensive vs. cheap goods, or even high quality vs. low quality alternatives. Nor did I start this thread to discuss the relative merits of buying goods made from one country over another.

This thread is about truth in advertising and supporting businesses who follow ethical business practices. Period.

I feel that this point was relatively clear in your first post, it was also well proven and at least by me well received.

I agree completely that one should know what one is buying. The location of a factory does not imply anything about the quality of its products, but untruthful advertising will at best be a sign of stupidity and at worst of fraud.

I run a small hobby-business (non kilt-related) myself, and know first hand how devastating it can be to a small operation when someone "steals" your designs, images or wording.

I will gladly buy cheap, pakistani-made products from any company anywhere in the world if they tell me that's what I'm getting.