Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brands got worse on purpose

worseonpurpose.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 179 posts

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#161

Post by nunez »

AlexB138 wrote: post #39

Funny baader-meinhof moment for me reading this. My wife recently bought me some Brooks Brothers polo shirts that essentially dissolved the first time they were washed. I had never seen a shirt that was such poor quality. We were both flabbergasted, and the employees apparently gave her a bit of a hard time when she tried to return them. I suppose I now know why. What this company is doing is taking advantage of, and…

The decline of Brooks Brothers is real and sad.

If I recall, their 1818 Madison collection is still mostly made in Italy with Italian fabrics. "Mostly" because some of this collection --- their made-to-measure garments, specifically --- is made in China with high-quality Chinese fabrics. What's sad about this is that their made-to-measure stuff used to be made in Chicago by expert tailors before the acquisition.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#162

Post by timacles »

pocksuppet wrote: post #157
timacles wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do it because, In the words of Gordon Gecko, they can. To them, theres a never ending line of hungry vultures right behind them, and if they do not do it, someone will take their place and do it and profit from it. So naturally they MUST do it, because it will inevitably be done also. > What is it that these financial frameworks actually do that helps anyone? They are supposed to clean out inefficiencies in econ…

Has real capitalism ever been tried?

Has man ever been honest and decent?

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#163

Post by somewhatgoated »

palmotea wrote: post #69
somewhatgoated wrote: post #13

Just but either professional (as in practitioners of a trade us it) or military products — those tend to be much better than “consumers” products. They cost more but they will last a lifetime. Of course not super applicable to every aspect of fashion, but I’ve been doing this for all kinds of products for years and was never disappointed. For fashion I would recommend to hit up small designers, ideally someone you kn…

> Just but either professional (as in practitioners of a trade us it) or military products — those tend to be much better than “consumers” products. They cost more but they will last a lifetime. Eh, I'm not sure that's such good advice. IIRC, I remember stumbling across tacticool "military grade" USB thumb drives, for instance. I doubt those are any better than your typical name-brand drive. "Professional" seems to b…

Of course don’t go by marketing buzzwords on trash markets like Amazon. Professional means used by people who rely on the product for their profession. Often these are products or brands that laypeople have never heard about before. For example I have the same heavy duty washing machine for 30+ years. Many of my friends went through at least 5 “consumer” washing machines in the same time.

I wouldn’t know what the equivalent is for USB sticks, don’t really use them. I’m sure you would find a sturdy one with some research. Or you can buy the same trash product many times.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#164

Post by somewhatgoated »

cratermoon wrote: post #38
somewhatgoated wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really - it’s __one form__ of capitalism working as intended but capitalism (like most -isms) can take many vastly different forms. There can be a much better form of capitalism also in the US - since this whole thread and discussion is pretty US-centric.

No True Scotsman eh?

That would imply no better form of capitalism than present in the US actually exists. But there are many other countries in the world that have a different (still capitalist) system.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#165

Post by oska »

paganel wrote: post #43

> Billabong board shorts lasted a decade of salt water and sun, I've had a Billabong orange t-shirt last almost 15 years of sun and salt water from time to time, one of the best clothes-related purchases I've ever made. Sad to see that that's now a thing of the past.

Yeah, it's sad to see classic Australian brands caught up in this debasement process

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#166

Post by palmotea »

somewhatgoated wrote: post #163
palmotea wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just but either professional (as in practitioners of a trade us it) or military products — those tend to be much better than “consumers” products. They cost more but they will last a lifetime. Eh, I'm not sure that's such good advice. IIRC, I remember stumbling across tacticool "military grade" USB thumb drives, for instance. I doubt those are any better than your typical name-brand drive. "Professional" seems to b…

Of course don’t go by marketing buzzwords on trash markets like Amazon. Professional means used by people who rely on the product for their profession. Often these are products or brands that laypeople have never heard about before. For example I have the same heavy duty washing machine for 30+ years. Many of my friends went through at least 5 “consumer” washing machines in the same time. I wouldn’t know what the equ…

> Of course don’t go by marketing buzzwords on trash markets like Amazon. Professional means used by people who rely on the product for their profession. Often these are products or brands that laypeople have never heard about before.

That's good advice, but hard to follow. There's a big information deficit there: it's hard to shop for something you've never heard of, perhaps sold in an unusual corner where one of the typical consumer signals apply.

> For example I have the same heavy duty washing machine for 30+ years. Many of my friends went through at least 5 “consumer” washing machines in the same time.

Speed Queen? I think that's an area where the professional grade stuff is a little more accessible. They've got consumer-appropriate models (with the commercial internals) sold in regular appliance shops (though they're not everywhere).

> I wouldn’t know what the equivalent is for USB sticks, don’t really use them. I’m sure you would find a sturdy one with some research. Or you can buy the same trash product many times.

Swissbit is one. They sell industrial-grade memory cards and drives that trade off capacity for reliability. Though a cheap high-capacity one is probably the better trade off for most people.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#167

Post by rasso »

scoofy wrote: post #109
dostick wrote: post #57

The author of website will be flooded with submissions about almost every known brand. Instead of ledger of bad brands it should track brands that remain, - it will be a lot easier and less work.

https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/status/approved

I'll make this my new source of truth. Thank you!!!

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#168

Post by fmajid »

insane_dreamer wrote: post #139
logotype wrote: post #10

Support brands with values and local manufacturing. For example: American Giant, Origin, Crye Precision, Randolph Engineering, American Optical, and many more.

We need a curated directory of brands, like Yahoo of old, but for brands instead of websites. With information on who they are ultimately owned by, i.e., PE, public company, private enterprise, where they do their manufacturing, how they source their materials. Yeah, I know that would be a lot of work, especially to keep it updated, but a valuable resource in this day an age. Because ownership changes as the article…

There's one linked from the article: https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/

I don't agree with all their recommendations. Tom Bihn should be put on the watch list. Goruck, Bellroy and Barbour are all avoid now.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#169

Post by fmajid »

AlexB138 wrote: post #39

Funny baader-meinhof moment for me reading this. My wife recently bought me some Brooks Brothers polo shirts that essentially dissolved the first time they were washed. I had never seen a shirt that was such poor quality. We were both flabbergasted, and the employees apparently gave her a bit of a hard time when she tried to return them. I suppose I now know why. What this company is doing is taking advantage of, and…

The CEO and owner of Luxottica, the dominant company in eyeglasses, bought Brooks Brothers as a present foir his idiot son, much as Larry Ellison did with Paramount and CBS for his. Said wastrel son ran it into the ground and there it remained for scavengers to feed on.

Re: Brands got worse on purpose

#170

Post by IshKebab »

lamasery wrote: post #5

I think there's a lot of hidden inflation in this. Or, if not outright inflation, something similar to it. Look at what it costs to get a work shirt (I mean, for physical labor, "blue collar", heavy chambray or something along those lines) of comparable quality & materials to what was in a Sears catalog in the 1930s or ordered by the US military in the 1940s, which in neither case could be regarded as super-fancy . Y…

Presumably because as soon as cheap good-enough clothes became available, high quality clothes became a luxury and are priced accordingly.
Post reply on HN