I can see the sense in some cases. Though I'm sure over the longer term you could argue it's a self defeating policy, check out my reasoning below:
Say I want a battery drill, but I only use it to put picture hooks in the wall 2 or 3 times a year or fix the pales on my fence this one time. I can buy a cheap knock off drill with no quality control for $50 or I can pick up a $200 RyoDecker. (assuming that by combining two well known reputable brands I create a similarly reputable but fictional brand for the sake of continuing this explanation whilst avoiding unwanted legal attention from themselves or their agents).
In either case I can get the job done in roughly the same time. But based on an average wage less tax it would take only 3 hours work to earn money for the cheap drill vs 12 hours for the RyoDecker. Now I can see that the quality of the knock off is less than the RyoDecker (which is often Chinese made in any event). However, even if it takes an hour to replace a broken cheap drill under warranty, I'd need to get 9 drills in a row that don't work in order for it to be better for me to get the more expensive drill. I'd rather apply the 9 hours of my life that I could hypothetically save to something else like riding to the West Coast, grabbing a nice cup of coffee and coming back home.
However, if I was to replace the rear shock on my 03 ZX6R (because from the factory it's not fantastic) and I was to compare an Öh-Tech (another fictional reputable brand created for the sake of this explanation) rear shock to a cheap Chinese knockoff where I could see or determine that the quality of the Öh-Tech was far superior than the knockoff to the point where the knockoff would jeopardise my ride (fun, comfort or safety) then that would be worth working 4x longer for. However, if I could find an Öh-Tech rear shock without the sticker on it and determined it to be exactly the same as a genuine Öh-Tech, then that would be a different story.
The back story to many of these situations, are that the manufacturers, like Oh-Tech or RyoDecker, have previously signed an agreement for the Chinese company to manufacture these items and subsequently the intellectual property to create these items has been given to the Chinese manufacturer as part of the deal. They then produce these parts (often under licence) to further profit from the deal upon completion of the original contract, or by selling the overruns (product created beyond the requirement of the initial order). Oh-Tech benefits by recovering some of the R&D cost and the manufacter benefits from the sale of the items later produced. What you are buying is effectively an Oh-Tech part at less than Oh-Tech prices, the downside is that it is likely to be a previous model to Oh-Tech's latest offering.
In some cases, it's simply the knockoff manufacturer has acquired the IP to produce the parts - perhaps not the patent - or they have simply copied the design. In these cases, the quality is usually lacking and a decision must be made at the time - is the loss of quality going to affect my purpose sufficiently to prevent me saving my hard earned coin and am I willing to take that risk.
In summary, though it may hurt in the long run as Oh-Tech and RyoDecker don't get my extra coin, they have usually already mitigated their losses and at least in the short-term I have benefited. It seems everyone ends up happy except Mr. Katman
You only need two tools in life:
Duct tape if it moves and it shouldn't.
WD-40 if it doesn't move and it should.
Brute force and ignorance always prevails.
Failure comes from too little brute force, or
too little ignorance.
Bookmarks