Are knock offs a good thing?
 

I believe that they can be good for us. I think that they will both bring down the price thereby promoting greater use by a larger amount of people. If that happens maybe Dean K's prediction of mass use will come true. What do you think? :confused:

Competition is generally a good thing.

Sometimes competition causes all the competitors to fail. Four-channel audio from the 1970's comes to mind. Split the market, cause indecision, there are not enough sales for anyone to survive.

With Segs, there is intellectual property in play. Until the patents expire (or are licensed, which I do not think has happened) there should be no Seg-like self-balancers allowed in any country that respects intellectual property.

Pricing is an important factor, but not the only one.

If the copies have some safety compromises, like the Q scooter did, then it dilutes the brand in a negative way, and can even inspire inappropriate legislation. In that case, knockoffs are very bad.

Of course, the term knock off is a pretty subjective one as well. I often see an Asian car that I believe is a knock off of a European design, as an example. I have seen this in both Japanese cars, and Korean cars, that look similar and appeal to similar markets to German or British cars. Some of these knock-offs are as good or close to the original, and while the some may not like them, they may be good for the market, and for the consumer. Some are even better copies than the original. And often for a better price. In this case, the consumer wins, and as long as it does not drive the competitors out of business, it is good.

So, I have to agree with post 2 above, in general competition can be good, but I do not always see 'knock-offs' as competition.

Does anyone really think a Rolex purchased from a man on a street corner in Time Square is doing the watch market a service? Maybe for the consumer who wants a certain look, and does not care about the function. Not for most however...

From a completely different viewpoint of the matter, I don't think *Rolex* is doing the watch market a service, with outlandish price/value ratios that depend entirely on the sucker factor.

Which is why we have the man on the street corner.

But that's entirely from a different perspective -- one of value-to-the-customer rather than health-of-the-producer. Definitely different viewpoints -- but not entirely in conflict with each other. Something that's bad for one -- say, a product that erodes trust -- is often bad for the other.

Wal-Mart comes to mind, who has killed the Mom & Pop stores on main street in towns all across America. Has that been good competition?

That is a very good question.

It seems clear that many people are buying things they could not otherwise afford at Walmart, that were out of range at the Mom & Pop stores. I happen to like the olde style, and frequent the Mom & Pops, but there are not so many people there anymore. It costs more to shop there just like it costs more to eat simple wholesome fresh food. The system is stacked against this.

I agree.

All we have to do is get everyone to stop shopping at Wal-Mart and this will fix a whole range of woes. Local retail will return and the trade balance with China will even out (Wal-mart is a HUGE percentage of Chinese imports, all by itself).

I have shopped at Wal-Mart exactly twice, although there are two stores not far from me. Both times I have left without a purchase. I also do not approve of the way Wal-Mart treats and compensates its employees, while raking in zillions of dollars. It's not necessary to do this.

Unfortunately, most people favor the immediate sweetness of low price over the long-term sour taste of a declining manufacturing base and local retail.

This comment was made in jest. Wal-Mart DOES suck (IMO), but shutting it down overnight would not be appropriate either.

The way our economy works in retail, is that people express their opinions with their pocketbooks. If someone likes something, or some place, they spend their money there.

It works with restaurants, as an example. Small high service, high quality restaurants can survive right next to fast food, because people have the opportunity to spend their money, and buy what they want. Many people only care about a big pile of food, others prefer food of a certain value, in an environment that pleases them.

It also works in retail. Neiman Marcus and Walmart both sell socks and underwear, and both have their markets.

If a person does not like Walmart, they can tell us here, and they can tell Walmart by not shopping there. I am pretty sure that there are several people here who do both (talk about not shopping there, and not shopping there), but there are huge amounts of people who do shop there, and do not care about many of the arguments against Walmart.

Shopping at Walmart does not appeal to me, so it is not a common thing for me to do. I prefer a store with a better level of customer service, and products of a better quality, as a general rule. But if I am looking for a 2 liter bottle of coke, I am not opposed to buying it there. (I would not make a trip there for that, but it is not because of some political opposition to that store)

I think we need to face the fact that there are plenty of people who do shop there, and like it better than other places. Perhaps they feel that price beats all other considerations, and that is their right. I would not begrudge them that.

I find it curious that I am here defending Walmart, since I do not care to shop there. And they do not need my defense, as they laugh all the way to the bank at those who rail against them.

This is a great land, and there is room for all kinds of people to live out all kinds of life plans. Many people include the need to proselytize others as part of their plan. Good for them. I do it regarding segways from time to time as well.

As a general rule, I am not a large fan of a small group imposing their will on a large group. I see the people who want to outlaw Walmart as this kind of situation.

In nearby Boston, the mayor stepped in and denied a permit for a Walmart to take over an abandoned strip mall to make one of their stores. He said he did not want that kind of establishment in that depressed part of town. He preferred Mom and Pop stores. Walmart did not build, and neither did the Mom and Pops. That strip mall is still vacant and terrible looking and the new Walmart is open less than a mile down the road, just across the town line. It seems to be doing a thriving business, and has hired hundreds of people. I guess eventually, everyone gets what they make happen to happen.

I don't know who this remark is directed towards. I don't want to outlaw Wal-Mart. I just believe that the sweetness of buying low-priced imported products is short-term thinking. We are, quite literally, transferring our wealth and security to other countries at an amazing rate.

Wal-Mart is far from the only company that besieges retail with imported products. (In fact, it's often difficult to find products built in the USA.) Coupled with their questionable employee policies, Wal-Mart is just one of the most egregious examples, in my opinion.