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

Let's make quality the norm again

forbrukerradet.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 505 posts

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#291

Post by boelboel »

roenxi wrote: post #101
kqr wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Quality brands are economically incentivized to sell-out [...] because customers take some time to catch on, and short-term financials are too often more important That probably happens a lot, but there's another mechanism by which it could happen, that requires no malice: the brand gets a quality reputation, which increases demand for its products, and they are unable to produce quality products at the rate needed…

That sounds implausible. For a premium brand the marginal unit should be comfortably profitable, so they will have the resources to saturate the market at exponential speed purely from their unit economics. The somewhat theatrical lines outside the store aside, Apple has never had a strategic problem meeting the demand for Apple computers. It seems a lot more likely that you get executives who come in and believe tha…

lmao, not everything is quickly scalable. Take quality lace which is still a very manual process, the highest quality brands most people working on these products are well past the age of 50. There's no one learning to make it and it takes many many years to get skilled enough to do it quickly. Also including apple in premium brand? They make cheap computers.

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#292

Post by chickensong »

In a world of shrinkflation and enshittification, I just wanted to give a shout out to Feetures socks[0] which I love. It's a family-owned business and all they make is socks. They're anatomically designed, so if you can't handle sorting L/R these aren't for you. Not only are they a high-quality sock, they have a lifetime guarantee as well.

No affiliation, just a satisfied customer.

[0] https://feetures.com/

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#293

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #229
pphysch wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it easy? What if an organization avoids liability through shell companies and financial engineering? "The company managing your warranty was acquired by Foobar Inc and their sole building burned down destroying all records. We apologize for the inconvenience."

Well there is the option to make Amazon responsible for what they sell...

I think they should be responsible for accurate listings, swift refunds, taking down misleading products, and banning repeat offenders. I somehow think making Amazon "responsible for what they sell" goes far beyond that in ways that are not reasonable. Only those that make products should be responsible for them.

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#294

Post by wombatpm »

wafflemaker wrote: post #264
chairmansteve wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, you pay 10x for shirt that is made in the same factory as the cheap shiry, just has a different logo.

Not always. I got a pair of T-shirts from These Glory Days. Wore them like 20% of time last two years and they look better then some others after 2 washes (albeit changed from them after coming back to work, and use work clothes at work, so not like they were used THAT much. So it's not always the expensive stuff that's equal to the cheap stuff. And funny thing, got them on a sale because they were pretty cheap, not…

Good to clarify the definition of seamstress with DiscWorld/Pratchett quotes floating around.

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#295

Post by teh_klev »

hn_acc1 wrote: post #267
Terr_ wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> difficult to know which brands are still actually quality anymore I haven't verified its accuracy, but I had a tab open for this from HN a while back: > The Brand Ledger tracks 397 brands, from the tools in your garage to the pans in your kitchen. Who owns them, what they used to be, whether they're still worth buying. https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/

Yeah, not sure I would rely on that.. Sure, they have Knipex and Klein on the approved list (which, AFAIK, is true), but then they list Warby Parker (read reddit - has gone WAY downhill), Cutco (by all accounts, a total rip-off and super low-quality knives requiring you to constantly get them sharpened) and Henkels, which also makes some pretty suspect knives, AFAIK.

There's two Henckels listed:

https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/henckels-internatio...

https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/zwilling

The first one is on their watchlist and probably the brand you're thinking of?

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#296

Post by boelboel »

Borealid wrote: post #213
dtech wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is mainly there are no quality options available. It's mostly all cheap shit or slightly more expensive, but still equally shit. So how can this reveal preference if there are no options? I would argue the surge in vintage clothing ecosystems is an indication there is an unmet demand.

There absolutely are still rich-people brands that sell absurd quality at absurd price. See, for example, Marine Layer in San Francisco, or boutiques like Red Ants Pants.

Not just rich people, I pay maybe 3 times more for my T-shirts than the average person. I'm certain they last me at least twice as long, probably 3 times and they're way nicer to wear.

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#298

Post by Dylan16807 »

throwitaway222 wrote: post #247
tracerbulletx wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternative hypothesis.. Its not a hive mind and different factions vocalize their different opinions at different times in different places.

Also HN: We don't get jokes.

Saying something in a teasing way doesn't make immune to criticism or immune to being a bad comment.

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#299

Post by iamnothere »

jerf wrote: post #169
xingped wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is quite common and is usually referred to as "it's expensive to be poor". That said, unfortunately these days it's very difficult to know which brands are still actually quality anymore and which are the ones still coasting on previous good engineering reputation while currently shipping substandard crap to make an extra buck for the bean counters in charge before the ship sinks.

Everything has become a lemon market: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons Even if a brand stays solid for 100 years, for all I know as I'm standing there in the store deciding whether to buy something, private equity bought them two quarters ago and hollowed them out. Harvard MBAs/private equity sees brand reputation as just another resource to be converted into money. If I were a billionaire my dream…

I wish more brands would follow the Newman’s Own charity model. All profits go to charity, so there isn’t an incentive to hollow out the brand, and the products are a reliable quality at a decent price.

Apparently they set up an organization to help other people do this: https://100forpurpose.org/

Re: Let's make quality the norm again

#300

Post by Henchman21 »

imoverclocked wrote: post #283
lateatdesk wrote: post #279

I think we're asking too much of buyers here. You shouldn't need to learn about fabrics and stitching, then check who owns the brand now, just to buy a shirt that lasts.

So, given reality, how would you suggest this gets done?

The way we used to do it? Based on human reputation, so you know, if you're a dick you prob won't get a lot of customers.
Post reply on HN