| Used clothing from
Patagonia. |
| One
of the most responsible things we can do as a company is to make
high-quality stuff that lasts for years and can be repaired, so you don’t
have to buy more of it. They are blatantly lying about the “high quality stuff lasts
for years” because people who buy stuff that lasts for years don’t return
it so fast. The Patagonia stuff being returned may very well not be more
than one season old. |
| Trade
in your used Patagonia gear at any Patagonia retail location and receive
credit to put toward another new or used garment. They do not want to replace the product at no charge to the
customer. |
| As
individuals, the single best thing we can do for the planet is keep our
stuff in use longer and reduce our overall consumption in the process. How about Patagonia worry about making products that last
versus putting the responsibility on their customers to save the planet. They
should not make products that hurt the planet to begin with. |
| Help
gear that once sat idle in the closet make its way back into the field
instead of the landfill. Maybe the landfill is where their product belongs in the first
place. |
| “Why Wear
Worn Wear “is the title for this email I received today from Patagonia. Did
they publish it because of what I published yesterday? I hope so because
that tells me they read my newsletters and commentary which maybe good
because then they will be getting an education if they want one. They
probably haven’t the ability to comprehend the education I offer to one and
all. Of course those who work in the outdoor industry is immune to absorbing
information that is educational, but that has been par for the course since
Gore entered the industry. They showed how b/s could sell and the rest of
the industry has just followed like lemmings. You know in the early 1980’s
Yvon C. owner of Patagonia said that Gore-Tex did not work but over the
course of time he went for it and also have made their own version of a b/s
product. They are
trying to justify why they make crappy products by offering to get them
back to repurpose. What if they cleaned them and fixed them and donated
them? Maybe the original buyer will not want to get a second product by
spending money versus getting a replacement based on the Patagonia
guarantee. Since their return volume is so high the factory they have for repairs must be very large, so large in fact possibly that they should use it for production in the USA and then keep a watch over production so seconds aren't made and just passed through as first quality which their Asian factory is probably doing. The North
Face is in this case just following what maybe a financial success for
Patagonia and if it is I think it is tragic because that tells me Patagonia
will have no incentive to really try to make a decent product. I cannot
wait to see the next company to make the same offer because we will then
get to know who makes crappy products. Just before
I was going to publish this article the following testimonial arrived as a
result of yesterday’s commentary. I am always sorry when these testimonials
come in Unknown” but that’s okay with me. . |
|
Thank you Jerry.
If North Face paid any attention to your quality, they would probably cry and
go home. Over the years I have amassed all of the cold weather gear that I will
ever need including 3 sleeping bags. I Wouldn't sell any of it, even for
original cost. I just hope the pack boots hold up since you no longer make
them.
– Unknown
Loading... Please wait...
