3 ms·

> It's interesting to question, however, if U.S.-made labels have at all contributed to the company's success. The article did follow up the total sales number

> It's interesting to question, however, if U.S.-made labels have at all contributed to the company's success. The article did follow up the total sales number with this caveat though. It seems reasonable that the products could have accounted for more than $3.18M in sales, though we really don't know total sales of the falsely labeled products or what percent of those sales only happened due to the Made in the USA label.

thaumasiotes 3y ago
> we really don't know total sales of the falsely labeled products or what percent of those sales only happened due to the Made in the USA label. We can speculate about that second question, though. Have you ever made a purchase decision based on a country-of-origin label?
- wccrawford 3y ago
  I'm not sure why you're being downvoted for that. It was part of Walmart's early success that they sold products made in America, and there was a long time that people griped about it no longer being true. Clearly people care.
  - Tagbert 3y ago
    The question may have come off as implying that people do not made buying decisions based on the country of origin label. I imagine that many people’s own buying habits show them that the label does have an impact.
    - wccrawford 3y ago
      I took it the opposite way (that it implied they do make decisions based on that info) but I guess it could be interpreted either way.
- mostlysimilar 3y ago
  Personally I will spend significantly more to buy made in America.
- _heimdall 3y ago
  From William-Sonoma specifically? No, I haven't. In general, absolutely though in those instances I end up always buying from a smaller company as well that actually produces the product. I'll buy USA-made jeans from Round House for example, but it wouldn't make a difference to me if I saw a sticker in a big chain store selling jeans.
- vundercind 3y ago
  MIUSA is a good marker of quality for many products—not because US workers or processes are exceptional in ways that those in poorer countries can’t be, but because US manufacturing has high labor costs, so it doesn’t make sense to cut corners that it might in other countries, because you’re already not able to chase the very-price-sensitive market. For example, it’s rare to see shoes made in the US (or other rich countries, for that matter) that are made with anything worse than mid-tier full grain leather, because what’s the point? If you use US manufacturing to make crappy bonded or corrected leather shoes, you’re just going to have the most-expensive crappy shoes on the market, so why bother? There are exceptions, but it’s a decent signal.
TheCleric 3y ago
I feel like that was the weakest part of the article. I don’t particularly find that to be an interesting question in this context because it’s a bit irrelevant if it works. What matters is whether they think it works, and whether it’s a worthwhile exchange for them to lie to increase sales with the hope/knowledge that it will be profitable in the long term.

thaumasiotes 3y ago

> we really don't know total sales of the falsely labeled products or what percent of those sales only happened due to the Made in the USA label. We can speculate about that second question, though. Have you ever made a purchase decision based on a country-of-origin label?

wccrawford 3y ago
I'm not sure why you're being downvoted for that. It was part of Walmart's early success that they sold products made in America, and there was a long time that people griped about it no longer being true. Clearly people care.
- Tagbert 3y ago
  The question may have come off as implying that people do not made buying decisions based on the country of origin label. I imagine that many people’s own buying habits show them that the label does have an impact.
  - wccrawford 3y ago
    I took it the opposite way (that it implied they do make decisions based on that info) but I guess it could be interpreted either way.
mostlysimilar 3y ago
Personally I will spend significantly more to buy made in America.
_heimdall 3y ago
From William-Sonoma specifically? No, I haven't. In general, absolutely though in those instances I end up always buying from a smaller company as well that actually produces the product. I'll buy USA-made jeans from Round House for example, but it wouldn't make a difference to me if I saw a sticker in a big chain store selling jeans.
vundercind 3y ago
MIUSA is a good marker of quality for many products—not because US workers or processes are exceptional in ways that those in poorer countries can’t be, but because US manufacturing has high labor costs, so it doesn’t make sense to cut corners that it might in other countries, because you’re already not able to chase the very-price-sensitive market. For example, it’s rare to see shoes made in the US (or other rich countries, for that matter) that are made with anything worse than mid-tier full grain leather, because what’s the point? If you use US manufacturing to make crappy bonded or corrected leather shoes, you’re just going to have the most-expensive crappy shoes on the market, so why bother? There are exceptions, but it’s a decent signal.

TheCleric 3y ago

I feel like that was the weakest part of the article. I don’t particularly find that to be an interesting question in this context because it’s a bit irrelevant if it works. What matters is whether they think it works, and whether it’s a worthwhile exchange for them to lie to increase sales with the hope/knowledge that it will be profitable in the long term.