Doing The Right Thing

pwalsh · July 23rd, 2011, 03:17 PM

Here’s a couple of questions for all of you garment screen-printers. Suppose that you had a business relationship with a company that had developed a very successful line of pre-print design tee shirts that they sold to the market through a series of wholesalers. Now suppose that this particular pre-print line forms the core of the company’s success as a manufacturer in our industry until….

Along comes another company that produces an almost exact copy of the first companies original design, and then uses a low price strategy to entice the wholesalers to switch suppliers by offering then “seemingly-identical” designs at prices that are 30% - 50% lower than the company who produced the garment with the original design.

The knock-off companies policy is that this approach would allow the wholesalers to make additional profit, and/or allow the people actually buying the shirts to get them at a cheaper price than they could from the company that produced the original designs.

( A ) Would you think that this was OK because the wholesaler was making more profit and/or the end-user was getting a less expensive product? Yes / No

( B ) Would you think that legal action should be taken against the company that printed the knock-off shirts and the wholesaler that brought them to market? Yes / No

( C ) Would your answers be the same if the action of introducing a knock-off of an original design was being perpetrated by a screen-printing equipment manufacturer and their sales and service division Yes / No

crazy mike · July 23rd, 2011, 03:29 PM

Who's _&R knocking of now?

jmd · July 23rd, 2011, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwalsh

Here’s a couple of questions for all of you garment screen-printers. Suppose that you had a business relationship with a company that had developed a very successful line of pre-print design tee shirts that they sold to the market through a series of wholesalers. Now suppose that this particular pre-print line forms the core of the company’s success as a manufacturer in our industry until….

Along comes another company that produces an almost exact copy of the first companies original design, and then uses a low price strategy to entice the wholesalers to switch suppliers by offering then “seemingly-identical” designs at prices that are 30% - 50% lower than the company who produced the garment with the original design.

The knock-off companies policy is that this approach would allow the wholesalers to make additional profit, and/or allow the people actually buying the shirts to get them at a cheaper price than they could from the company that produced the original designs.

( A ) Would you think that this was OK because the wholesaler was making more profit and/or the end-user was getting a less expensive product? Yes / No

( B ) Would you think that legal action should be taken against the company that printed the knock-off shirts and the wholesaler that brought them to market? Yes / No

( C ) Would your answers be the same if the action of introducing a knock-off of an original design was being perpetrated by a screen-printing equipment manufacturer and their sales and service division Yes / No

I don't think it is a simple yes or no answer with the information you gave. Is the original copywrite, trademark or patented? Whats is morally right to some might not be to others but what is legal and not applies to all.

Interested Observer · July 23rd, 2011, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pwalsh

Here’s a couple of questions for all of you garment screen-printers. Suppose that you had a business relationship with a company that had developed a very successful line of pre-print design tee shirts that they sold to the market through a series of wholesalers. Now suppose that this particular pre-print line forms the core of the company’s success as a manufacturer in our industry until….

Along comes another company that produces an almost exact copy of the first companies original design, and then uses a low price strategy to entice the wholesalers to switch suppliers by offering then “seemingly-identical” designs at prices that are 30% - 50% lower than the company who produced the garment with the original design.

The knock-off companies policy is that this approach would allow the wholesalers to make additional profit, and/or allow the people actually buying the shirts to get them at a cheaper price than they could from the company that produced the original designs.

( A ) Would you think that this was OK because the wholesaler was making more profit and/or the end-user was getting a less expensive product? Yes / No

( B ) Would you think that legal action should be taken against the company that printed the knock-off shirts and the wholesaler that brought them to market? Yes / No

( C ) Would your answers be the same if the action of introducing a knock-off of an original design was being perpetrated by a screen-printing equipment manufacturer and their sales and service division Yes / No

Peter - I may not be answering A, B, C directly because the questions seem somewhat irrelevant. Doesn't the knockoff issue happen in almost every industry? It is part of the business life cycle. As long as there are no patent or legal issues, I don't see a problem? I may not like it, but the lowest price is not always the most successful. Apple is a perfect example. They are making record profits and stock is at an all time high. There are plenty of **** type players and ipad duplicates, but the consumer wants the original. They have maintained a "cool" factor. I have an ipad and hate it. I still haven't figured out it's place in the computing world. Good business have to compete with all types of competition ; price, design, functionality, etc. The best survive and thrive. The ones that don't keep up fall to the fate of the marketplace. There are many examples of companies that were first to market and then got smoked by newer and better because they didn't keep up. Borders? Some in our industry are trying to sell "new" technology(as well as other things). That is great and should be welcome, but ultimately the market will decide what to buy. You can't force someone to buy either low price or best whatever without a history or buzz. Sometimes it's unseen and difficult to pinpoint "Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell discusses this type of social phenomenon. I think it is much more common to see products or business to catch on because of the unknown than through beating the consumer to death with an advertising blitz.

Gilligan · July 23rd, 2011, 06:20 PM

I agree... if there is a patented and the "knock off" is basically an exact clone then I think that is wrong.

If you are taking a concept and making it better, then go for it! I am personally making a clone of an embroidery registration system. I borrowed one and took all the dimensions and have it drawn up in solid works and I just have to bring it to a CNC guy and poof, I got one for a FRACTION of the price.

But that is where it stops... why? Because they have a patent. If they didn't I certainly would be trying to sell it for less as the COST on these guys are like 1/8th the selling price. Now if I can figure out a way to "make it my own" then sure I will produce my own product.

The iPad is a GREAT example.

I have a chinese clone... granted it runs Android (my OS of choice for small devices)... but the main reason I bought it was that it had a REAL RJ45 ethernet jack and I could use that in my line of work.

I paid a LOT less (200 bucks)... BUT... it's not dual touch and it's kind of hackish. It's slower and it is not without it's problems (battery issues and such).

That is the price I pay for saving the bucks and getting a clone. Only thing that really is "clone" is that it has that ipad button on bottom and makes it look like an ipad at a glance. But in reality, I would NEVER have an ipad or any "pad" for that matter if they didn't have the RJ45. In fact a new version of my pad just came out and I quickly jumped on the website to see what all the new bells and whistles are... first thing I noticed was they deleted the RJ45 and put a new SD card slot. Oh well... I have no clue what else it has because they lost my interest now.

Basically... I think cloning is ok... IF you are changing things or IF there is no patent on the device. But in either case... you get what you pay for and sometimes the cost savings don't mean anything if you lose performance.

californiadreamin · July 23rd, 2011, 07:35 PM

The screenprinting business in the USA is in the mature market cycle, business in not what is was five years ago,and in MHO it will continue ,and will never return for our industry as we know it. That being said there are many new oppourtunites that may arise. The fashion industry has and aways will be run by a bunch of whores. Sad but true! There is nothing new under the sun. You raise good questions, which in turn raise other questions. Do we as suppliers and equipment manufactures sell to these people? You bet we do! Do we care? No! Should we? Good Question! Ground zero being California and NYC. In So Cal I would bet that in most of the larger shops , no! most of the shops are run with hardworking illegal Mexicans!
We are still selling these shops shirts,ink, supplies,and machinery. Are we the problem? Maybe! In other countries that produce our beloved T-Shirt, they are buying OUR same products cheaper than shops in the USA. The printers here are dealing with lower cost competitors from every angle. Kind of like buying ****** in San Diego,Ca and going for a nice trip to the New Screenprint hub of Ensenada,MX and buying that same little blue pill for half of the USA. Doesn't seem fare does it. It is always best to take the high road, but maybe we should ALL look in the mirror a little more! This industry has a bunch of great people, and sad to say a few, well not so nice people! From one who has been in this crazy business more than a couple of years, I have seen winners become losers,and vice versa! There are No sacred cows in this industry any more! And maybe thats good! But doesn't that aways depend which side of the fence we are on?

Ink Guy · July 23rd, 2011, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gilligan

I agree... if there is a patented and the "knock off" is basically an exact clone then I think that is wrong.

Most of the press has to be the same in order for it to work right.
Just like on a car, the main structure is almost identical.
Outer shell is most different.
I think what should be different is the cosmetic part of the press and maybe some features.

Cheaper Cars of today are starting to look like the higher priced cars.

Gilligan · July 23rd, 2011, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ink Guy

Most of the press has to be the same in order for it to work right.
Just like on a car, the main structure is almost identical.
Outer shell is most different.
I think what should be different is the cosmetic part of the press and maybe some features.

Cheaper Cars of today are starting to look like the higher priced cars.

Understandable... but when they admittedly carbon copy the piece.

When all of the panels and knobs end up being damn near identical and the only way you can tell them apart is via the name badge... that's a little beyond "function".

srimonogramming · July 23rd, 2011, 10:51 PM

I think a lot more details would have to be given in this scenario for me to really take a hard stance, but my stance right now would be:
A) Wholesalers making more profit and end users getting a less expensive product isn't a bad thing...but
B) Depends on the "but" above
C) Same

Like I said, I think there are more details needed (how close these 2 products are, is there an obvious effort to make the knock-off better?) but I think the most important thing for me to decide on whether it was right or wrong is MOTIVE of the knock-off company.

Printwizard · July 24th, 2011, 05:03 AM

Question is legality, if its legal, and you can make a profit then run with it. It's like saying you print in a certain style and colourway, it becomes the fashion, so people replicate that. You see this in any retail shop you go in from vehicles, appliances, toys, textiles, kitchenware, everywhere. Over time as the basic design gets replicated by everyone, then changed ten percent, then improved, and the improvements cloned they all look similar and share features and attributes. It becomes too hard to define. There is also more definition between an item like a tee shirt, and an art design where function and feature can be a proven or given development based on the required outcome or function of a design (IE a car needs a steering wheel to turn, and a screenprint machine needs a clamp to lock a screen in place), but artistic design without function doesn't necessarily require clone replication to fit the function to the same degree, so the question is a bit pointedly misleading. TAS took the carousel and automated it, and every other company since has copied and improved or altered every next design since, borrowing from existing designs and adding some and where convenient using other existing parts designed for other technologies from their suppliers parts or machines
for ease of use as well as borrowing from other manufacturers industries. IE micro registration invented and developed from letterpress and was adapted for screen flatbeds later. Some of the very early clamshells had Gestetner and Heidelberg systems on them.