Plagiarism

[sharpy86]

Hey all,

I’m sure we can all recognise some level of copying between manufactures i.e. the lead clip - each manufacture has their own version that they have tried to add their own touches to, whether that’s just their brand / colour, or a slightly different mechanic. 

Now, I’m not too concerned regarding this aspects of the industry, nor am I concerned that some manufactures bring in ideas from other parts of life and have repurposed them for the angling community i.e. Krusha, Nash bivvy warmer - and then add a great big ‘Carp £££’ on it, but what I am concerned about is companies popping up and performing blatant plagiarism on products. For example with Cyprinus selling exactly the same products that alternative manufactures supply - bed chairs, brollys etc. 

What people may not be thinking about, is that Aqua, Wychwood etc have had to go through months of design, specifications, materials, suppliers, prototypes, testing etc before a product can be offered to the consumer. This costs time and money. Now I’m not close enough to provide any figures around it, and I’m not I saying a new Wychwood bed chair would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to go from concept to production (We are talking evolution or products now - not revolution), but there is still a cost involved, that the initial manufacture has to cover somewhere. Therefore, it’s obvious that Cyprinus are able to approach the same supplier and ask them to sew a different logo onto the item, and sell that item at a much lower price.

Should we be concerned about what these underhand tactics will do in the long run, or should we just care about the money in our own pocket? What happens if we loose our well known manufactures because someone else only wants to make a quick buck? Do we then loose the continued evolution / improvements of products?

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the subject, and if someone has any real information / figures on the matter.

 

[yonny]

Imo the innovators such as Aqua set their price point so ridiculously high that I have zero sympathy for them when their tooling is used to manufacture for other organisations that are prepared to undercut them. After all, if the likes of Aqua's prices were reasonable there'd be less point in Cyprinus undercutting them.

I've heard before that prices are high due to design/development costs - that's not right. In every other industry the manufacturers invest their own profits into R&D/product development to establish long term growth. Why is it acceptable for carp brands to hike the price up instead and pocket the profit? They chose not to invest as they do in other industries and ultimately they'll pay the price.

All industries use price point as a marketing tool, I understand that, but when I see what is essentially a tent for 600 odd quid my sympathy goes out of the window.

It can only benefit the angler imo. These big old brands are forces to be reckoned with nowadays and their marketing power will keep them going just fine, whereas anglers that aint bothered about an Aqua badge can get quality gear for half the price. Result.

[salokcinnodrog]

I have some sympathy for British manufacturers, who design and build in this country, but too many big name brands have gone to the Far East, to get gear made while keeping the high price. Its also an environmental, human rights and other concern, the cargo ship coming all the way from China, the fuel to bring it that way, the risk of your container being one of four to fall into the sea every day.

The child workers in the factories in China, at minimal wage, tuppence a day.

I could quite happily see a couple of brand names slip from the tackle market!

 

Some factories 'sell to the highest bidder'. One factory may make tackle for Fox, Nash, JRC etc.

The brand that pays most gets their bedchairs before the next payer gets theirs. It is why sometimes there can be a shortage, as well as brands purposely holding gear back to create interest.

 

You have as Yonny says, tackle brand owners making big profits in their own pocket yet not wanting to put money into R&D. Updated tackle, some of the new advances in tackle is a step backwards, some original gear is brilliant, yet newer models are frankly awful.

 

I have a TFG oval brolly, I think it was £80, yet why should the same thing from Fox or Nash cost £200?

Why should a Fox bedchair cost £300, when exactly the same from JRC is £150?

The items are essentially the same, in some cases just a different badge!

 

Carp tax, fishing line is fishing line, sea line is the same as fishing line, (example) yet the Fox, Korda brand is £20, compared to £9.99 for Sea fishing line. It is the same stuff!

 

 

 

 

[yonny]

11 minutes ago, salokcinnodrog said:

I have some sympathy for British manufacturers, who design and build in this country, but too many big name brands have gone to the Far East, to get gear made while keeping the high price.

Century, JAG and Cotswold Aquarius.... I can't think of anyone else apart from the bespoke bank-wear manufacturers that are still in the UK? ESP and Korda still make a couple of bits over here. You're Aqua's and Trakker's did the off some years ago. Still £££££££££££££ though..... 

[nigewoodcock]

If you had a business designing and selling, I dunno, ball ponot pens say, and you can sell them for £1 a pen. If you source manufacture in Britain and it costs you 18 pence per unit delivered; would you keep that company as your supplier if you could get the exact same pen shipped over at 10 pence per unit? Then still keep the selling price at £1? Or would you say ‘tell you what, I don’t want to earn that extra 100k profit per year’ 

That £1 is what people are happy paying. If it wasn’t, then you wouldn’t sell any and go out of business. 

In a funny kind a way, what the tackle firms are getting slated for; buying as cheap as they can, is the same thing that many are advocating by buying a cyprinus bed chair over a trakker one! Lol

Products are only worth what people will pay for them. If trakker can still make a living selling at 30% above what cyprinus are charging then fair play to them.

The real deal is with designs like the tempest mechanism or the Titan. I would have thought that is patented or exclusivity agreements with the factories, perhaps due to design rights? That’s why you won’t see a cyprinus tempest or a Titan, only a copy of the m3 (standard pramhood) and the like. 

[salokcinnodrog]

I am the person who will rather pay £1.18 for a pen made in Britain over £1 for a pen made in China.

 

I have gotten to looking at environmental cost, to why do we ship or air freight goods from China to UK on blooming great container ships. I have gotten to thinking about those sweat shop factories, and I have gotten to thinking about UK produced goods.

 

Not being funny, but part of this is Brexit related as well. There will be Brexit, we need our economy working, we need to be producing stuff for ourselves, a manufacturing industry. We also need bigger name tackle manufacturers, like Nash, like Fox, Korda or whoever considering the environment and where they manufacture and what they charge the angler for their gear.

If they charged a real fair price, then maybe a lot of this 'copy and paste' cheaper made gear would nit be produced to undercut them.

[B.C.]

A deep and emotive subject imo........ I wouldn't say that I'm a complete anti-capitalist , after all, what's the alternative?  But I do think it's taken a wrong turn along the line in general. Pollution and debt are what it thrives on. Lots of heads in the sand... With the environment taking the biggest hit world wide....... 

 

[harpz_31]

I work in a design and development team for a furniture manufacturer and we have the means to make a prototype from idea to finished produce ready for manufacture

we couldn't take a sofa from dfs and stick our label on it or they'd have us in court so fast

but if dfs outsourced it to a 3rd party to design and only paid for the manufacture and didn't pay for the design process that design would belong to the 3rd part and they could sell it to any1 they choose

I very much doubt that's whats happened to wychwood and aqua  but it would explain why some1 can sell their exact product without feeling the wrath of the lawyers

 

[yonny]

I do know Aqua went after Cyprinus in the courts but it was about the name. That's why their version of the Fast 'n Light was rename the Rapide. They couldn't do anything about the design which backs up your theory @harpz_31.

[cyborx]

personally i have absolutely zero sympathy for any big brand company who's gear is 'ripped off' by others, others who are ready and willing to bring the top end gear to market without 'ripping off' the very people who pay their wages.

this tendency to add carp tax on everything carpy can only be blamed on the tackle tarts who insist on having 'named gear' imo and before anyone bangs on about quality of build etc,etc, just remember that for the most part these items will often follow each other off the production line with the only variation being the logo stitched or stamped onto them.

nope!! the sole reason for the high prices is because there are people who will gladly pay it because they think it gives them kudos while they sit and blank.

[yonny]

7 minutes ago, cyborx said:

the sole reason for the high prices is because there are people who will gladly pay it because they think it gives them kudos while they sit and blank.

Not sure I agree with that buddy. Price point is used as a marketing tool in all industries, although I agree it's at its worst in carp angling. I would blame the tackle firms working the price point far more than I would the anglers who want decent gear.

I buy whatever I think is best for the job. Sometimes it's the cheapest on the market, others it's the most expensive. It is what it is.

There always has been and always will be cheaper options out there. Pays your money takes your choice.

16 minutes ago, cyborx said:

personally i have absolutely zero sympathy for any big brand company who's gear is 'ripped off' by others, others who are ready and willing to bring the top end gear to market without 'ripping off' the very people who pay their wages.

Now that I agree with 100% mate!

[greekskii]

I think you're right cyborx. I saw a post on a local selling page where a guy wanted to have all nash stuff for some reason and was swapping out his kit for nash stuff with others. Not too sure why. Maybe he wants to pretend he is sponsored by them or something? 

[yonny]

19 minutes ago, greekskii said:

I saw a post on a local selling page where a guy wanted to have all nash stuff for some reason and was swapping out his kit for nash stuff

The way that stuff lasts he might as well give up fishing lol....

[nigewoodcock]

To give balance to the thread......

whos the one ripping off customers in this scenario....

 

company a:- 

pays staff wages to designers, cad technicians, marketing team, sales team. Pays out for numerous prototypes, ironing out any problems with new product. Puts product out for testing. Resolves any issues after testing period. Etc etc etc

ends up with finished product and sells for £15. After taking all the above and more into account, each unit sold draws a margin of £4.50.

 

company b:-

buys finished product above off shelf. Gets factory to copy it. Sells product for £10 making the same £6 profit per unit. 

[yonny]

4 minutes ago, nigewoodcock said:

whos the one ripping off customers

It's a good question Nige. That said, in many (most) other industries R&D is covered by investment of profits, not by hiking the price up.

 

[cyborx]

2 hours ago, nigewoodcock said:

To give balance to the thread......

whos the one ripping off customers in this scenario....

 

 

buys finished product above off shelf. Gets factory to copy it. Sells product for £10 making the same £6 profit per unit. 

thing is, if companies dont cover themselves with a patent they only have themselves to blame when cheaper 'rip offs come on the market.

[cyborx]

2 hours ago, yonny said:

It's a good question Nige. That said, in many (most) other industries R&D is covered by investment of profits, not by hiking the price up.

 

if a company is prepared to invest their profits and protect it then nige would be correct in his assumption BUT, if not then its an open market for me.

[nigewoodcock]

That’s my take on it. If the company has invested profit and more into designing and improving on their ideas, then they should have some protection. 

In some instances though, patents would be very difficult to achieve. 

At the end of the day, taking Yonny’s advice on buying what suits you, at what time, is the way to go. If you feel that the patented product that seems over priced from the outside is that item that you think will improve your experience on the bank, go for it. If not, don’t. 

I know if my boss asked me to take a pay cut because another company is paying their equivalent staff 20% less than me, I would tell him where to go! Lol

[salokcinnodrog]

1 hour ago, cyborx said:

if a company is prepared to invest their profits and protect it then nige would be correct in his assumption BUT, if not then its an open market for me.

Open market on Oval brollies! The most expensive brand is not always the best, and I know that some cheaper brands work just as well.

I will spend what money I have or have saved on gear I need, not the cheapest or most expensive, unless it is the best.

5 minutes ago, nigewoodcock said:

That’s my take on it. If the company has invested profit and more into designing and improving on their ideas, then they should have some protection. 

In some instances though, patents would be very difficult to achieve. 

At the end of the day, taking Yonny’s advice on buying what suits you, at what time, is the way to go. If you feel that the patented product that seems over priced from the outside is that item that you think will improve your experience on the bank, go for it. If not, don’t. 

I know if my boss asked me to take a pay cut because another company is paying their equivalent staff 20% less than me, I would tell him where to go! Lol

I refuse to drop to less on my earnings, I can't afford to live on minimum wage, and in hospitality wages have effectively gone down over the last 18years already. If I dropped my expectations, I would be working at NMW, compared to the £20 an hour I was earning in 2002.

Not nice as a manager being paid £7.50 an hour, the same as your subordinates.