Skip to main content

You get what you pay for?

"You get what you pay for". A statement guaranteed to strike fear into any financial-conscious parent queuing with their son outside a depressingly dark and noisy Hollister shop.

They have to be dark and noisy to reflect the far eastern sweatshops in which most of the product is manufactured. Yes, you get what you pay for in terms of pretty good quality, but the poor souls working flat-out under conditions that would have UNISON bringing the entire West of Europe out on strike, might not agree.

Plus the fact the £80 sweatshirt that you are quite unhappy to pay a fortune for comes with an advertisement for the company name on the front (surely Hollister should be paying you?) and leaves the far eastern factory at only a few dollars.

Yes, you get what you pay for.

My eyes were well and truly opened to brand manipulation several years ago when I undertook a little freelance work for a delightful local Leeds company called Standtondown, based in the Holbeck area of the city. Delightful in as much as it was run in the old-fashioned and genuine family way. No dysfunctional HR people calling on staff to jump up and down on coloured squares for an hour every Friday, or pushing out copied and pasted CIPD bilge every second day.

They manufactured and delivered, amongst other things, quality beauty products in bulk around the country. Wonderful stuff such as Coconut and Jojoba shampoo, dressing out cream, salon wave pink, stylecare gel and more.

Now what I did learn was, that while many hairdressers were simply decanting the products into the own salon dispensers to use on their customers, others were decanting (and quite legally I might, no arguments here!) the products into bespoke bottles for resale under their own name. Absolutely nothing wrong with that either!

However, the shock was that while "Betty's Hairdressers and Burger Emporium" on a sink estate in Birmingham were charging £1.99 a bottle, "Chez Con Customer" on St John's Wood Road in London, the type of salon with very uncomfortable seats and owned by a very badly-dressed TV hairdressing personality with a fee of £600 to 'personally' look at your hair from 50 metres, was charging £39.50 for the identical 60p's worth of product.

Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, on the basis that if the St John's Wood customer is happy to part with that sort of money (not forgetting the £60 fine for parking their 4x4 tractor on the double yellow lines outside the salon), fair play!

However, the point is that while these are best quality, British-manufactured products, you are NOT getting what you pay for because you have essentially been brand hijacked by the 'posh' hair salon. And yes, they say let the buyer beware, but in this case, they are very high quality products. It's just the morals of "Chez Con Customer" prevent him from coming clean!

Unfortunately, UK buyers are only now becoming a little more price sensitive. Sadly, to a great degree, this is only now happening as a result of the exposure companies are getting on BBC's 'Watchdog' and 'Fake Britain' programmes.

But why should this be the case? Why do people have to wait for these programmes to expose the far eastern sweatshops, the price disparity between game consoles sold in the UK and those sold in America or the fact that consumers in the UK put up with all sorts of guff as to why their purchase would be 30% cheaper if they could purchase them from the American website?

As long as we take the "You get what you pay for attitude", assuming that expensive is best, the importers and sellers will simply continue to rip us off. If you think it's too expensive, put off your purchase. Don't queue up outside the shop for the latest "fruity" must-have but really don't-need gadget or 60p DVD cleverly disguised as a £48 PlayStation game.

If you voted more with your wallet and feet, the sellers would quickly get the message.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Season for all men

Well, we’re used to hearing about the Camping Season , which for Scouts runs from approximately 31st March to 31st October each year, although Graham Norton’s camping season lasts all year. Then there’s the Caravan Season , where Jeremy Clarkson spends six months with extremely high blood pressure as he tries to overtake them on the A38 in an excruciatingly expensive and completely unnecessary car. The Japanese have their Scientific Season, which was a series of sporadic weeks where they slaughtered endangered whales for scientific research, the results of which seem to be a closely guarded world-secret. This season now looks set, thanks to a group of spineless, land-locked countries threatened by the Land of the Rising Scientific Research with paying more for their Nintendos and PlayStations, to last until the final whale is wiped off the face of the oceans. I have written to the Japanese Embassy four times now seeking details of this research (email address info@l...

"Q". My name is Bond. Oh. not THAT Q.

I was sent a story today by a friend who knows my feelings on the subject - that is, about one of the consummately greatest of all British activities, namely, queuing. It seems some Danish Professor or other has come up with the theory that those who queue the longest should actually be served the last. He claims it makes purchasing something altogether more efficient and smooth through the idea of 'contra-queuing' (whatever the devil that may mean). 'Serve the people at the back of the queue first', he says, with profound wisdom. Altogether very professorial, albeit demonstrating a somewhat keen lack of understanding of the purchasing psyche. The Nobel Prize-chasing Prof suggests that if, for example, a popular entertainment act was to announce a tour, with tickets going on sale at 11am one morning, using the theory of 'contra-queuing', no one will want to be first to buy said tickets. So no one will turn up 14 months in advance and venues will...

"Pre-" . . . . . good grief!!!!!!!!!

I was looking through the Guardian this morning and noticed a position being advertised that I thought I'd take a closer look at. The first sentence, when clicking the link to apply was: "If you are registered, please log in and we will pre-fill this form for you." What is the current fixation with the prefix "pre" . It is everywhere, turning perfectly reasonable statements into total and utter gibberish! I would have thought that for one of our major quality newspapers, instead of "please log in and we will pre-fill this form for you" it would have been much more sensible to have something along the lines of "please log in and your details will be automatically filled in for you". It is the rip-off Britain merchants who have embraced this particular prefix with a vengeance. They have nonsensically slapped it in front of the word " order " so that the moment an overpriced games console, war game for that console, phone,...