I wonder if there’s an inverse of this: brands that actually got better over time because they don’t have massive brand history to fall back on, or simply because they actually care.
Yeah not sure. Barbour for example has a few good models that are produced in England. The rest is from China and not up to standard. Well known, but this page just lists it as "approved". Same for carhartt actually.
I have a hard time with the Instant Pot case. If you have their first generation product, you never have to buy another one. This is not really worse on purpose. They made a product so good no one ever bought it again and they couldn't afford to keep making immortal products. It's really hard to get the customers to pay a premium for something that will last for 50 years but hasn't proven the ability to do so yet.
Not really sure how to solve this particular dilemma. I think Apple brushes up against it with the quality of their products too. I know of people who still use iPhones with a single digit in the model name. I am still on my M1 MBP.
In a K shaped economy, there is no success in making quality goods at reasonable prices. There’s no middle class to buy them. You can make luxury goods for wealthy customers who do not care about price, or you can make absolute garbage to sell to the masses in bulk.
If you want to bring back quality goods and services, end wealth inequality. Tax the rich.
I’m surprised to see Cutco as approved. I’ve never used their knives, I only know them as the brand that tricks young people into selling their stuff through misleading job postings. It always seemed like a scummy business, which always makes me assume low quality.
It doesn't really take into account that not all products are meant to be premium. Like it says to avoid Black & Decker because it's "Built to a price point, not a quality standard". Like we know, it's not the 1980s - sometimes you just need a cheap drill to mount a TV and then forget about until you move.
But trading off a former reputation for premium quality whilst hollowing out the brand / actual goods ... is a pretty bright flag of red hue.
Looking through the list, I'm finding that the classifications and narratives for the cases I'm familiar with largely match my own experience, about 50 of the listed brands.
Principle exceptions are Keen and Merrell, both shoemakers. I've watched their products disintegrate before my eyes. Both had had good reputations. Keen, ironically, being my substitute for Teva when that brand went bad in the early aughts.
If anything, the rankings are generous. Though I don't see any marked "Approved" I'd disagree with.
This site is absolute catnip for HN. Do we know what motivates the site? Long-term SEO content authority reputation building before pivoting to affiliate links?
I have two American Giant hoodies. One was a gift. After around 10 months the zipper broke, so they sent me a new one.
I eventually repaired the zipper (and have done the same for the other since). They are high quality and have respectable service. I think they're worth the price. These are probably 7-8 years old now, so things could have changed since then.
I have a zip-up hoodie from Polo Ralph Lauren I got at Costco for $56. I wore it almost daily for many years and it still looks basically new. The only issue now is the zipper doesn’t stay up as much as it used to. It will slightly fall throughout the day, and I have to zip it back up if/when needed.
I ended up buying another one recently, from RL directly, I think it was around $150. Considering how well it held up to near daily wear for 6 years, it felt worth it. People still asked me if it was new. Other than the zipper falling a bit, there was only some minor wear on the cuff, that only the person wearing it would notice.
I’m assuming there is also some way I can just replace the zipper on my old one, but I didn’t look into it.
Assuming you wear it, and it holds up like my RL one did, the per wear price can actually end up being pretty low, maybe even less than a cheaper alternative that only lasts a season or two.
I sure wasn't expecting to see multi-level-marketing company Cutco on the list of "Approved" vendors. I guess it depends on which moral failing you're monitoring.
I see Lodge is the first entry on their "approved" list: "The anchor of the entire counter-list." Everything I've heard from the cast iron nerds is that modern Lodge is crap because they switched to the cheaper sand casting process, which leaves a rough finish that is a PITA to season. Selling out to private equity is not a prerequisite to enshittification.
Site is hard to use and navigate and make sense of, because of all the ai slop. If the creators spent more effort tuning the language and UI it would be more usable. Right now, not usable for me.
I understand vibe coding a website if you only care about putting out the info but this is sloppenheimer levels of garbage. It reeks of stunted, far up its own ass Claude-isms everywhere and none of the prose is remotely readable without wanting to running headbutt a wall. Seriously, "Private Equity" was too long so you decided to write "Ownership Type: PE-owned"? I despise ai writing so much and shame on you.
The corporate ownership is interesting. I generally don’t buy brands. They just get my first attention.
What sucks about brands is the marketing that drowns out the signals from other brands making them impossible to find or discover. Come to think of it, that’s sort of like everything else these days. (The Corruptor in Chief being a skilled practitioner). It’s why ChatAi is so effective over google search. The latter pushes the most discussed or linked or read (whatever the Google ranking algorithm is doing these days to put crap content at the top).
28 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 35.9 ms ] threadNot really sure how to solve this particular dilemma. I think Apple brushes up against it with the quality of their products too. I know of people who still use iPhones with a single digit in the model name. I am still on my M1 MBP.
If you want to bring back quality goods and services, end wealth inequality. Tax the rich.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22ZmmZ67SMY
Worse on Purpose discussion 4 days ago:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49019647
But trading off a former reputation for premium quality whilst hollowing out the brand / actual goods ... is a pretty bright flag of red hue.
Looking through the list, I'm finding that the classifications and narratives for the cases I'm familiar with largely match my own experience, about 50 of the listed brands.
Principle exceptions are Keen and Merrell, both shoemakers. I've watched their products disintegrate before my eyes. Both had had good reputations. Keen, ironically, being my substitute for Teva when that brand went bad in the early aughts.
If anything, the rankings are generous. Though I don't see any marked "Approved" I'd disagree with.
Then I see how much a zip-up hoodie costs: $168.
I guess I'm not in the mainstream anymore, yikes.
I eventually repaired the zipper (and have done the same for the other since). They are high quality and have respectable service. I think they're worth the price. These are probably 7-8 years old now, so things could have changed since then.
I ended up buying another one recently, from RL directly, I think it was around $150. Considering how well it held up to near daily wear for 6 years, it felt worth it. People still asked me if it was new. Other than the zipper falling a bit, there was only some minor wear on the cuff, that only the person wearing it would notice.
I’m assuming there is also some way I can just replace the zipper on my old one, but I didn’t look into it.
Assuming you wear it, and it holds up like my RL one did, the per wear price can actually end up being pretty low, maybe even less than a cheaper alternative that only lasts a season or two.
True, simple MBAs often reach the same conclusions.
Proto >> Snap-On IMHO. Both in raw quality and in value.
And while Craftsman may have changed significantly even before Sears' demise, there are still some excellent tool lines within the brand.
What sucks about brands is the marketing that drowns out the signals from other brands making them impossible to find or discover. Come to think of it, that’s sort of like everything else these days. (The Corruptor in Chief being a skilled practitioner). It’s why ChatAi is so effective over google search. The latter pushes the most discussed or linked or read (whatever the Google ranking algorithm is doing these days to put crap content at the top).