3 ms·

I mean, I don't think we need to have an immediate regulatory answer to recognize it's a kind of scummy practice. Just because the consumer is too stupid to rec

I mean, I don't think we need to have an immediate regulatory answer to recognize it's a kind of scummy practice. Just because the consumer is too stupid to recognize the scumminess of the practice doesn't make it not scummy.

oarsinsync 6y ago
I'm also apparently too stupid to recognise the scumminess of the practice (as I hoped was clear in my previous post). Which of these is true? None? Some? All? 1. branding whitelabel goods is scummy 2. branding goods with a name foreign to where they're manufactured is scummy 3. branding goods with a name foreign to where the business is operating is scummy 4. selling goods with a high markup is scummy 5. selling cheap goods with a high markup is scummy 6. A.N.Other reason that I've missed?
- krisgee 6y ago
  Oh please. There's nothing legally wrong with it but you'd have to be pretty dense not to see the moral issue with labeling something in a way that would signal it as "high end" to consumers while it's actually just being marked up 100x over cost or more. Is there anything legally wrong with it? No, caveat emptor but I think you have to be willfully ignoring the moral implication to not see the issue with essentially abusing someone's preconceptions.
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    "High-end-ness" can and does carry connotations of exclusivity, design, price signaling, and so forth, not just product quality. It doesn't stink of scumminess to me at all. There is no requirement, be it moral, legal, or whatever, that there be a tight correlation between manufacture cost and retail price. Why did you launch into a "oh please" rant instead of directly answering GP's reasonable question? What precisely do you take issue with? You seem to have some mental model here, so let's talk about it.
    - just-ok 6y ago
      Sure, I'll bite. Even though I take issue with all of these as they're more-or-less a form of lying, these two stand out: > selling goods with a high markup is scummy > selling cheap goods with a high markup is scummy The latter one especially takes the cake. When you resell a $2 item for $100, you imply that your contribution as a middle-man is worth $98. The other items on the list (which effectively amount to marketing tactics) essentially act as a way to convince (or, more accurately, take advantage of) consumers that your product is not actually worth $2. Here's a great way to reformulate the morality of the matter in your mind: if you knew that all you were buying were $2 plastic sunglasses from China trussed up with European brand name to look high-end and high-quality, would you still be happy spending $100?
      - labcomputer 6y ago
        > (or, more accurately, take advantage of) consumers that your product is not actually worth $2. Do you actually earnestly believe that most consumers think it costs a significant fraction of $100 to make a pair (any pair) of non-prescription sunglasses (manufactured anywhere in the world)? If so, that strikes me as incredibly naive. What differentiates a pair of Ray-Ban Wayfarers (which I happen to like) from the $3 white label imports on AliExpress? Almost nothing, so far as I can tell, aside from branding and the design of the sunglasses. And the design is entirely subjective--who are you to tell me that a pair of Wayfarers is not worth $150? For that matter, who are you to say that $100 is too much for a pair of re-branded white label sunglasses from AliExpress. And that's a two-way street: Who am I to tell you that $0 is too much for a pair of aviators? > you imply that your contribution as a middle-man is worth $98. Supposing I can connect a consumer with a product he likes and wants, why should it be impossible (or even improbable) for my contribution to be $98? Nothing is stopping him from shopping on Ali directly. Nothing is stopping Ali vendors from setting up a branded website in English. And, yet, there is the unmet desire that I would be fulfilling. > Here's a great way to reformulate the morality of the matter in your mind: if you knew that all you were buying were $2 plastic sunglasses from China trussed up with European brand name to look high-end and high-quality, would you still be happy spending $100? Let me answer your hypothetical with a real example: Generic prescription eyeglasses cost $15 on Zenni. I saw someone wearing a particular design I really like (different company, and the design probably costs 2x to make, but they are no longer available). I know they cost less than $30 to make, but I would be delighted to pay $300 for a pair of those glasses, even a pair of look-alikes.
- unishark 6y ago
  If you mislead a customer in order to make them buy something, then that is fraud. Superdry is an odd one. Perhaps they are crossing a line, or perhaps they're just selling a kind of semi-japanese-but-made-in-UK styling. It all depends whether the customers know the truth.
- flattone 6y ago
  instead of asking each question, just ask 'is some activity deceiving a persons perceptions to 'artificially' extract value? It is .. i hate to disclose this not totally productive statement .. but i am 'floored' to see how 5050 of a split there is on HN. This concept in my worldview/local culture is like year 5 childhood values/dishonesty stuff. i hate to give a shoutout to history but .. im winking and smiling at you Google culture 2010.
celticninja 6y ago
This is what every brand does to some degree or other. Do you really think that Oakley sunglasses at $400 are in any meaningful way superior to say a pair of Levi's branded ones sold for $50?
- flattone 6y ago
  I love this point coming up. I am not excluding other entities of this behavior. I am nervously saying 'great another person is doing it fml' #Idiocracymovie
Fjolsvith 6y ago
Sounds to me like the implied scumminess is more of a subjective experience, which is not shared by a large portion of happy consumers and businessmen.
- flattone 6y ago
  You might be sort of right but the statement is illformed. Happiness is a subjective experience and some people here are aligned with one portion of values and another portion are aligned with other values. If it matters or exposes more mentality.. my views / what you are opposed to - - to me are classic, pure american (US) capitalism values.. when we behave not just to the letter of the law but within the intent of the law and with respect to the culture, and with a sense of responsibility and accountability. A refined yet aggressive and successful business class does exist and is not scummy. I don't need documents I'm a part of a 4th generation US manufacturing family. Sadly our republican class values are currently high-jacked or i would point you to that 'label'

oarsinsync 6y ago

I'm also apparently too stupid to recognise the scumminess of the practice (as I hoped was clear in my previous post). Which of these is true? None? Some? All? 1. branding whitelabel goods is scummy 2. branding goods with a name foreign to where they're manufactured is scummy 3. branding goods with a name foreign to where the business is operating is scummy 4. selling goods with a high markup is scummy 5. selling cheap goods with a high markup is scummy 6. A.N.Other reason that I've missed?

krisgee 6y ago
Oh please. There's nothing legally wrong with it but you'd have to be pretty dense not to see the moral issue with labeling something in a way that would signal it as "high end" to consumers while it's actually just being marked up 100x over cost or more. Is there anything legally wrong with it? No, caveat emptor but I think you have to be willfully ignoring the moral implication to not see the issue with essentially abusing someone's preconceptions.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  "High-end-ness" can and does carry connotations of exclusivity, design, price signaling, and so forth, not just product quality. It doesn't stink of scumminess to me at all. There is no requirement, be it moral, legal, or whatever, that there be a tight correlation between manufacture cost and retail price. Why did you launch into a "oh please" rant instead of directly answering GP's reasonable question? What precisely do you take issue with? You seem to have some mental model here, so let's talk about it.
  - just-ok 6y ago
    Sure, I'll bite. Even though I take issue with all of these as they're more-or-less a form of lying, these two stand out: > selling goods with a high markup is scummy > selling cheap goods with a high markup is scummy The latter one especially takes the cake. When you resell a $2 item for $100, you imply that your contribution as a middle-man is worth $98. The other items on the list (which effectively amount to marketing tactics) essentially act as a way to convince (or, more accurately, take advantage of) consumers that your product is not actually worth $2. Here's a great way to reformulate the morality of the matter in your mind: if you knew that all you were buying were $2 plastic sunglasses from China trussed up with European brand name to look high-end and high-quality, would you still be happy spending $100?
    - labcomputer 6y ago
      > (or, more accurately, take advantage of) consumers that your product is not actually worth $2. Do you actually earnestly believe that most consumers think it costs a significant fraction of $100 to make a pair (any pair) of non-prescription sunglasses (manufactured anywhere in the world)? If so, that strikes me as incredibly naive. What differentiates a pair of Ray-Ban Wayfarers (which I happen to like) from the $3 white label imports on AliExpress? Almost nothing, so far as I can tell, aside from branding and the design of the sunglasses. And the design is entirely subjective--who are you to tell me that a pair of Wayfarers is not worth $150? For that matter, who are you to say that $100 is too much for a pair of re-branded white label sunglasses from AliExpress. And that's a two-way street: Who am I to tell you that $0 is too much for a pair of aviators? > you imply that your contribution as a middle-man is worth $98. Supposing I can connect a consumer with a product he likes and wants, why should it be impossible (or even improbable) for my contribution to be $98? Nothing is stopping him from shopping on Ali directly. Nothing is stopping Ali vendors from setting up a branded website in English. And, yet, there is the unmet desire that I would be fulfilling. > Here's a great way to reformulate the morality of the matter in your mind: if you knew that all you were buying were $2 plastic sunglasses from China trussed up with European brand name to look high-end and high-quality, would you still be happy spending $100? Let me answer your hypothetical with a real example: Generic prescription eyeglasses cost $15 on Zenni. I saw someone wearing a particular design I really like (different company, and the design probably costs 2x to make, but they are no longer available). I know they cost less than $30 to make, but I would be delighted to pay $300 for a pair of those glasses, even a pair of look-alikes.
unishark 6y ago
If you mislead a customer in order to make them buy something, then that is fraud. Superdry is an odd one. Perhaps they are crossing a line, or perhaps they're just selling a kind of semi-japanese-but-made-in-UK styling. It all depends whether the customers know the truth.
flattone 6y ago
instead of asking each question, just ask 'is some activity deceiving a persons perceptions to 'artificially' extract value? It is .. i hate to disclose this not totally productive statement .. but i am 'floored' to see how 5050 of a split there is on HN. This concept in my worldview/local culture is like year 5 childhood values/dishonesty stuff. i hate to give a shoutout to history but .. im winking and smiling at you Google culture 2010.

celticninja 6y ago

This is what every brand does to some degree or other. Do you really think that Oakley sunglasses at $400 are in any meaningful way superior to say a pair of Levi's branded ones sold for $50?

flattone 6y ago
I love this point coming up. I am not excluding other entities of this behavior. I am nervously saying 'great another person is doing it fml' #Idiocracymovie

Fjolsvith 6y ago

Sounds to me like the implied scumminess is more of a subjective experience, which is not shared by a large portion of happy consumers and businessmen.

flattone 6y ago
You might be sort of right but the statement is illformed. Happiness is a subjective experience and some people here are aligned with one portion of values and another portion are aligned with other values. If it matters or exposes more mentality.. my views / what you are opposed to - - to me are classic, pure american (US) capitalism values.. when we behave not just to the letter of the law but within the intent of the law and with respect to the culture, and with a sense of responsibility and accountability. A refined yet aggressive and successful business class does exist and is not scummy. I don't need documents I'm a part of a 4th generation US manufacturing family. Sadly our republican class values are currently high-jacked or i would point you to that 'label'