Brand Names are Better - Aren't They?

Our first indicator that something was amiss with the Brand Name products we all have grown to trust should have been the recent lead paint scandal. China is the latest society we have decided to use and abuse. It's funny how abuse always seems to go both ways when "we want our cake, and to eat it too". Huge, brand named toy companies have had to remove innumerable products from retail shelves, due to sub-standard (even dangerous) quality issues. Who can we blame for this? The Big Brand names for wanting to make a greater profit by using cheaper Chinese labor and materials? Should we just blame China for having low quality control standards? Should we blame the consumer, because they seem to only be willing to buy products that are "CHEAP" (in every sense of the word)?

I believe it is the responsibility of every trusted business or business-person, to educate the consumer as to what constitutes a quality product, and what will give you the best value for your money. I refuse to sell inferior products, which has probably cost me many sales over the years, because if I won't sell the "Cheap Stuff" the dealer down the street propably will. There are cycles in the flooring industry where it seems that people are satisfied with the cheapest product and service they can find. Even if the guy down the street has no sense of moral obligation, and will sell what ever product people will buy, that does not mean it is the right thing to do. Consumers need to be well informed as to what constitutes a Bargain. To me; a bargain is a good to excellent product or service that is sold at a reasonable or discounted price.

It is my responsibility to make certain that my clients are well informed about the products they are considering. If they choose to ignore my advice and suggestions, Well... that part is out of my control, but at least I can sleep at night with the knowledge that I did my best to make certain they were going to get Good Value for the money they spend. There have been many occasions when I have refused to introduce a certain product to my clients simply because I knew that it was not up to the standards that it claimed to be. However, can we truly blame the consumer for being a cheap-skate and buying sub-standard products, when we are the ones who offer it to them? If a product is low quality and we know it, we should not offer or sugest it to the consumer, No matter what Brand Name is on the label. My dumpsters have been overflowing with flooring products that I absolutely refuse to endorse. They just do not give good value for the price people have to pay. I could tell many stories about how we have had to repair or replace what another dealer was willing to pass off as "good enough", but I will keep my comments to Company Branding and Brand name products we should be able to trust.

What does it say about our society and our values when you can't trust a Brand Name Product? This is what happened recently... I returned home one afternoon and saw a new area rug in a chain-store bag hanging on the dining room chair. It was a typical "cheap" area rug. Since I sell area rugs I wondered why it was even in my home. I was informed that my daughter bought it for her room because it was such a good price for a Brand Name Rug... ("No Big Deal" I thought, because I could clearly see the tag and price). Then I noticed something else. Something strange and bewildering. The Tag on this cheap fuzzy rug had the Brand Name of one of the best known manufacturers of good quality flooring, specifically Carpet. I will not name the company but it has the same name as a Native American Indian Tribe (you can probably guess it easily). When I saw the Brand Name, and noted the quality of the rug, I thought that it had somehow been mis-tagged, or some other mistake had taken place. But when I read the details on the tag, I was shocked and surprised. Like I said before;

The rug in question was a cheap (inferior) rug that had the cheap latex backing on it (supposedly to keep it from sliding around on a hard-surface floor- Further info on rubber or latex backed rugs can be read on our web site). This kind of rug backing is notorious for causing damage to linoleum, vinyl, and even laminate or wood floors (they can cause discoloration, fading, or worse... they tend to draw moisture up through concrete slabs). Anyway as I read the tag further, I noted the type of fiber that this rug was made of; It was Olefin. Olefin fiber tends to hang on to things that are oily or greasy (even body oils from the bottom of your feet), and they can have a tendancy to crush and cause your rug to go flat. Olefin rugs of this quality do not usually hold up for very long. Six months to a year depending on traffic. This is the fiber most cheap rugs are made of, so no surprise there. The shock factor for me was that this, Brand Name Company, had allowed it's name to be prominately displayed on the rug.

A huge manufacturer of fine quality carpet is either making or endorsing a Cheap Fuzzy Bath Room Rug! Needless to say, I informed my daughter that despite the Brand Name on the Tag, She had been robbed. Even a paltry sum of money is wasted upon a rug of this quality. Brand Names used to mean something... It used to mean quality and integrity. I suppose that we should expect such situations as this in today's global economy. But as for me, from now on I will be reading tags and ingredients, I don't care what Brand Name is on the Package (or rug).

I guess it is just a disappointment, that a name I have trusted and suggested to so many clients for so many years, could allow such decay in quality and craftsmanship.

When you are tempted to buy a chain-store area rug, ALWAYS READ THE LABEL! Or, to quote Mr. Gump, "you never know what you're gonn'a get."

Article By: Charles Beason
Charles is a Flooring Design Consultant in the High Desert of Southern California.
Visit his website at http://www.rugrunnerbiz.com
Have Questions, Ideas, Tips, etc... Submit them to us for inclusion on our web site.
mailto:chazbeason@rugrunnerbiz.com
This article is copyright (c) 2007 by Charles Beason, and may be reprinted in it's entirety as long as this byline and copyright statement is included.