love/hate knockoffs? vent here

[Mikey213]

HAHAHAHA Zilvia is funny, Someone could be talking about knockoffs then one replies with the fucken history of Antarctica or some shit hahahahah

[bb4_96]

No knockoffs. Used, lightly used, and "BNIB" name brand parts procured from heavily indebted zilvia boarders FTMFW!!!!!!!!!

[ThatGuy]

Originally Posted by g6civcx

Let's take this one. I have several questions for you.

200 years ago when Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers sat around the table drafting the Constitution, they wanted to promote innovation and the progress of science, but they also wanted to protect inventors from being copied. They wanted to encourage scientists and inventors to develop new technology to benefit the public without fear of someone stealing their hard work.

This is the exact same problem we're talking about so this is nothing new.

The solution they came up with is very close to our current legal system.

When you design a new product, you pay the government, a neutral arbitor, a nominal fee. The government then does an independent inspection to make sure you didn't in fact steal the product from someone else.

If you pass the test, you are granted a limited time to benefit from your invention. After the time period expires, the invention becomes part of the public domain and anybody can use your invention.

The limited time period is your payoff for allowing the public to further develop your invention later on so we can have more technology.


Now if you don't go through the process and bring your product to the market, they assume that you don't care or your invention is not worth protecting. Your product instantly becomes part of the public domain and anybody can freely copy you with no penalty.

Now comes the questions for you.

1. If a company never went through the process, how do you know they actually invented their product without stealing from someone else? Their sworn statement is not good enough. Someone has to actually investigate to see that they actually came up with the idea and that there was no foul play.

2. If a company doesn't want to go through the process and sells the product any way, the Founding Fathers considers this to be that the company doesn't care about their product. It only costs $100 to register your invention and anyone can do it. You don't need a legal background.

So if they don't want to pay $100 to protect their own invention from being copied, why should we care?

3. Selling your product without going through the process is the same as intentionally leaving your money on public property and not claiming your money. Anyone can take the money and it's not considered theft because you never claimed it. Whose fault is it that you lost money?

I understand your points, and I have seen this argument used before. I don't personally know what it takes to copyright and protect your design, as I don't manufacture parts. One hundred dollars definitely isn't much and while I can say shame on them for not protecting themselves, at the same time I'm not going to blame the guy who got mugged because he didn't pay for a permit to carry a firearm for protection. By the way, does it work the same when the part is protected by that $100 in America, but the parts are being copied in China?

Good debate.

[MADE]

As stated before I buy what I want and you buy what you like. It kills me when people knock what another man purchased. Reminds me of elementry when people try to check the tags on your shit to see if it was fake.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

I understand your points, and I have seen this argument used before

Thank you for understanding. I was afraid this would turn into a penis measuring contest, which I did not intend at all. I help big Fortune 500 as well as small companies protect their design for a living and I take infringement very seriously!

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

I don't personally know what it takes to copyright and protect your design, as I don't manufacture parts

You don't need to pay anyone anything to copyright your work. The copyright is yours at the time you created the work. You just have to prove it with a timestamp.

Copyrights only protect printed materials, artwork, and music. Basically things that you can "copy" using a photocopier/camera/CD-burner. Copyrights don't protect physical objects.

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

One hundred dollars definitely isn't much and while I can say shame on them for not protecting themselves, at the same time I'm not going to blame the guy who got mugged because he didn't pay for a permit to carry a firearm for protection.

Your analogy is not the same. When you get mugged, you have legal ownership of your belongings. The person who mugged you committed theft and robbery because you legally own the personal belongings.

What you described is more like someone infringing on Bride who actually went through the process.


What I'm talking about is you leaving money on the sidewalk. Someone walks by and asks you if you want your money. You ignore them and walk away.

Then anyone can take your money since you already declined to claim your money and walked away.

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

By the way, does it work the same when the part is protected by that $100 in America, but the parts are being copied in China?

The coverage only protects you under the jurisdiction of US courts. Wherever the issue is, if the US doesn't have jurisdiction, they can't enforce your US property rights.

China may choose to enforce US property rights at their discretion, but you will probably have to file one in China.

You can get them when they into the US. Anybody who possesses your stuff in the US is considered to be in possession of stolen goods and you can go after them.

[ThatGuy]

The difference is Physical Property as opposed to designs and ideas.

I know legally they are not the same, I'm talking more morally wrong.
That's where I maintain my naivety. I keep hoping that people will be honest and forthcoming enough NOT to take someone else's design and hard work, just because it isn't protected. To me, it's would be the same as finding someone else's term paper laying on the sidewalk and turning it in for your grade.

I know, I'm probably off base, but I am a man of ideals.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

The difference is Physical Property as opposed to designs and ideas.

In law they're the same. They're just different classes of property. Infringement is treated the same way if they trespass on your land or your idea.

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

I know legally they are not the same, I'm talking more morally wrong.
That's where I maintain my naivety. I keep hoping that people will be honest and forthcoming enough NOT to take someone else's design and hard work, just because it isn't protected. To me, it's would be the same as finding someone else's term paper laying on the sidewalk and turning it in for your grade.

I know, I'm probably off base, but I am a man of ideals.

The Founding Fathers would strongly disagree with you. This is why.

In order for technology to progress, we have to reuse ideas before us. We have to stand on the shoulder of giants if you will.

Innovation made by each person's lifetime is very small, but cumulatively over many generations of building on top of each other gives us great technology.


Not only is copying each other okay, it's actually encouraged. Someone invents the wheel. Someone else takes the wheel and invents an axle. Someone else takes the axle and makes a carriage. Someone else takes the carriage and makes a car.

The leap from nothing to wheel to axle to carriage to car is incremental, but the leap from nothing to the car is HUGE. If you were not allowed to copy previous technology, we would have no car since it's very very difficult to design a whole car from the ground up.


When you invent something new, the only way to make sure no one steals from you is to hide it. There's still no guarantee because someone else can acidentally invent the same thing independent of you.

It's not about stealing. It's about promoting scientific cooperation. If you invented something, good for you. You can have a limited time to profit from your invention, but ater the time period expires, your invention becomes public domain and other scientists are free to improve your design.


Keep in mind that making something cheaper is an improvement over the existing product. If you invent cold fusion, but I can make it for $5, my design is an improvement over your design because I make it cheaper.


What you want people to do is not fair for the following reasons:

1. The company has not demonstrated that they are the original inventor. They could have killed someone and stole his design, then later sold it as their own. We don't have much homicide as we do industrial espionage, but it does happen.

We can't automatically assume that if a company sells something, that they are the first to invent. We need an independent audit of what they did to determine if they didn't steal from someone else.

2. If you allow a company to own its design forever, this is unfair use because the natural progression of technology is to make things cheaper. What you want to do is in fact stifling innovation and preventing the public from researching cheaper ways to build the same thing.

3. If we let people claim whatever they want with no checkup, greed would drive people to claim that they own everything. We need to check to make sure who actually invented what.




Now if they actually have gone through the process and has been found to be the original inventor, and someone infringes their idea, I take this very seriously.

We are on the same page as far as infringement goes. The difference between you and me is that I require that the invention go through the process, whereas you take the people at their words. Greed/ignorance will always make people think they invented everything

When someone is looking at a particular design, you will be surprised how much of the design is actually well known features already invented by other people. Most of the inventions we have are actually in fact very small improvements over what other people have done before.


No doubt you are of ideals. I just think that your ideals do not line up with Thomas Jefferson, the Founding Fathers, or current US law as they currently exist.

[ManoNegra]

knockoff companies don't R&D
they don't have stringent quality control
they don't innovate
they don't care about the community or scene
they are in it to capitalize on trends and fads to make a quick buck
do we really need another set of Ikeya knockoff suspension arms that look identical to 5 others?
do we really need another set of cheap ass coilovers?

[CrimsonRockett]

The thing is though, these knock off companies aren't taking a product, reviewing it, and seeing how they can improve it. They take something, copy it, and figure out how to produce them while spending the least amount of money. This means lesser quality materials will be used resulting in a lower quality product.

So, if anything, these knock off companies are taking us a step back instead of trying to move forward. I'm sure our founding fathers wouldn't like that.

People that keep using money as an excuse, please. No one is forcing you to buy new.

I remember when I first started to build up my project S13. I bought nothing but used parts. I would end up paying just around the same amount as a knock off product would cost new.

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by ManoNegra

knockoff companies don't R&D
they don't have stringent quality control
they don't innovate
they don't care about the community or scene
they are in it to capitalize on trends and fads to make a quick buck
do we really need another set of Ikeya knockoff suspension arms that look identical to 5 others?
do we really need another set of cheap ass coilovers?

What's to say the same doesn't apply to your run-of-the-mill jdm aftermarket company?

Most sell pretty much the same shit, have their manufacturing done in China.
What's to guarantee their QC is any better?
If you're not in the factories, you can't say.
Likewise it's unfair to claim that all knock-off companies lack QC either.
If their stuff didn't work, it be a matter of time before they went out of business.

Every company pretty much capitalizes off fads.
All are those ricer bov's sold by Greddy, HKS, etc, updated almost every year entirely necessarily from a utility perspective?

Are all the name brand JDM coilovers really all that different from one another?
Is there that much innovation from Japan today?

Think we should measure merit on behalf of the company, product, and price.
If Megan can do an exhaust at half the price of a Japanese company and not sacrifice quality, then that in itself speaks of high quality QC and innovation.

From a business perspective, it's not unreasonable to offset a higher profit margin with higher volume in sales.
Cheaper price doesn't always equate to worse quality in product.

[ThatGuy]

Originally Posted by g6civcx

The Founding Fathers would strongly disagree with you. This is why.

...(content removed to save space, not to remove any of your topic points. )...

No doubt you are of ideals. I just think that your ideals do not line up with Thomas Jefferson, the Founding Fathers, or current US law as they currently exist.

The "Founding Fathers" were also looking out for the best interests of OUR NATION. Certainly they would make things like this viable for the United States to capitalize on the inventions of scientists from other countries (who had been established longer and had the intellectual supierority of the day). [Think Edison versus Tesla] I don't think they counted on "sweat shops" pounding out car parts in China and Korea when they were devising this plan.

I like your argument. I like your level of research and knowledge. I'm just trying to make the setting a bit more relevant.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

The "Founding Fathers" were also looking out for the best interests of OUR NATION. Certainly they would make things like this viable for the United States to capitalize on the inventions of scientists from other countries (who had been established longer and had the intellectual supierority of the day)

Actually Thomas Jefferson was more egalitarian than that. He and his associates just wanted to advance science regardless of origin because they believed that science and technology is key to the success of the country.

You can glean that when you read his manuscripts. You'd be surprised what we use now that actually existed in some form back 200 years ago.

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

I don't think they counted on "sweat shops" pounding out car parts in China and Korea when they were devising this plan.

Actually they thought about this extensively. Keep in mind that this debate was happening concurrently with the tariff debate. They knew exactly what was going on with imported goods and all that.

Originally Posted by ThatGuy

I like your argument. I like your level of research and knowledge. I'm just trying to make the setting a bit more relevant.

I understand.

It definitely helps because I locked myself in the basement of the Jefferson engineering archives for like 3 years and went through all his manuscripts. It's really fascinating. I really developed a deep respect for the people who founded this country and what they went through. Definitely not the crybaby yuppy we have now.

Did you know that Jefferson was trying to build a prototype of the da Vinci flying machine?

His encryption technique to hide messages from the Brits is still be taught today in college courses in computer security.

Did you know that he was conceiving complex computing machines very similar to computers that we have now?

It's very humbling experience to see that our generation is not as smart and innovative as we like to think we are.

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

What's to say the same doesn't apply to your run-of-the-mill jdm aftermarket company?

Most sell pretty much the same shit, have their manufacturing done in China.
What's to guarantee their QC is any better?
If you're not in the factories, you can't say.
Likewise it's unfair to claim that all knock-off companies lack QC either.
If their stuff didn't work, it be a matter of time before they went out of business.

Every company pretty much capitalizes off fads.
All are those ricer bov's sold by Greddy, HKS, etc, updated almost every year entirely necessarily from a utility perspective?

Are all the name brand JDM coilovers really all that different from one another?
Is there that much innovation from Japan today?

Think we should measure merit on behalf of the company, product, and price.
If Megan can do an exhaust at half the price of a Japanese company and not sacrifice quality, then that in itself speaks of high quality QC and innovation.

From a business perspective, it's not unreasonable to offset a higher profit margin with higher volume in sales.
Cheaper price doesn't always equate to worse quality in product.

You get my gold star of approval for the day for presenting good counterpoints.

[240XTC]

The real deal is great. Knock offs work.

Morons who speak of a product they've never experienced should kill themselves as the following sheep that they truly are.

[Number1]

Originally Posted by 240XTC

The real deal is great. Knock offs work.

Morons who speak of a product they've never experienced should kill themselves as the following sheep that they truly are.

lmao

[DALAZ_68]

if a manufacturer takes an existing product, and improves it, then sells it, I have no issue, it benefits all...


if the same manufacturer takes an existing product...ant simply replicates it, with poorer quality materials...fuck that...


i think the biggest issue here is, no one can simply take all said product, I.E. 1 set of megans, one set of Tein, one set of Zeal's etc, cut them up and analize every item...

we could all easily argue that broken parts are perhaps just user error...fine...but like i said...im pretty sure all the talk would be finallized with actual breakdowns...

its not as easy as say comparing L.A. river water to Dasani Water, the difference is visibal...and we all know which we would all prefer once we saw it...

going back to g6civcx argument

Someone invents the wheel. Someone else takes the wheel and invents an axle. Someone else takes the axle and makes a carriage. Someone else takes the carriage and makes a car.

that is not what is going on here...whats happening here is more along the lines of...someone events a wheel made of metal, someone sees that and makes it out of wood, someone sees that and makes it out of clay... same shape? yes, same quality? no... is cost cheaper sure...will it work, yeah...but at what cost to the buyer?

thats just how i see it...and frankly when i buy i tend to talk to those who use the products im considering...and yes going to more than one source for refrence is always best when it comes to things like this...

[Mikey213]

That must have been one crazy wheel event! ^ hehehe j/p

I remember when I first started to build up my project S13. I bought nothing but used parts. I would end up paying just around the same amount as a knock off product would cost new. __________________

Yup! Kids need to realize this. But I'm not sure how old you were when you started building your s13 but I remember used parts when I started were less abused and cheaper if you had the hook up. Shoot I remember buying a nice suspension set for 200$! off a friend's importing facility.

[ManoNegra]

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

What's to say the same doesn't apply to your run-of-the-mill jdm aftermarket company?

Nothing, why do you assume I advocate them
I don't own nor plan to own anything performance related from DMax, PBD, etc, etc
I'm not a JDM whore
I like quality parts, preferably US made

Most sell pretty much the same shit, have their manufacturing done in China.
What's to guarantee their QC is any better?

I agree, never said otherwise

If you're not in the factories, you can't say.

no, I'm not
but I do talk to people that are from time to time

Likewise it's unfair to claim that all knock-off companies lack QC either.

never said they don't
I said their QC is not stringent

If their stuff didn't work, it be a matter of time before they went out of business.

how many cases of suspension arms breaking
manifolds cracking
wheels sheering
turbos falling apart
etc, etc are out there?
lots, yet people will still buy items based solely on price
and still whine about products costing too much

Every company pretty much capitalizes off fads.
All are those ricer bov's sold by Greddy, HKS, etc, updated almost every year entirely necessarily from a utility perspective?

Agree to a degree,
the quality and selection of products from established companies appears to me to have degraded over time
but these are also the companies that shelled out money on R&D to bring you a quality performance products before the s-chassis was the 'it' car for kids to get.
cost reductions to compete in today's market?
adopting the practices of knock off companies to stay relevant?
interesting topic but not the one at hand

Are all the name brand JDM coilovers really all that different from one another?
Is there that much innovation from Japan today?

I've already agreed with this point
I don't advocate the majority of crap being offered
whether JDM or USDM

Think we should measure merit on behalf of the company, product, and price.
If Megan can do an exhaust at half the price of a Japanese company and not sacrifice quality, then that in itself speaks of high quality QC and innovation.

Probably because they didn't have to pay someone to design it and test it
but rather picked it from a catalog
hardest part was probably choosing the size and location of their logo

From a business perspective, it's not unreasonable to offset a higher profit margin with higher volume in sales.
Cheaper price doesn't always equate to worse quality in product.

Not always, but usually does
at least in our community

[lflkajfj12123]

Parasites suck.

[ericcastro]

Originally Posted by DALAZ_68

that is not what is going on here...whats happening here is more along the lines of...someone events a wheel made of metal, someone sees that and makes it out of wood, someone sees that and makes it out of clay... same shape? yes, same quality? no... is cost cheaper sure...will it work, yeah...but at what cost to the buyer?

I am actually glad that skateboards started with metal wheels.
Then went to clay.
Then those were knocked off with Urithane, lol

lol.

Not really realavent, just wanted to give Steve shit,lol.

I just stopped by to see what 240XTC wrote and got pinked for, LMAO!

i already did this discussion several times this year.
Thought we had all agreed.
The pricey stuff is great.
you CAN get away with the cheaper stuff.
The Pricey stuff knocked off existing technologies too and have made their R&D
The interwebs have changed everything, business needs to modernize or die.
Most knock offs arent actually knock offs at all, but cheaper versions of a product, but still better then OEM.
A knock off is a gucci purse that is sold on venice beach for $20 new.

[240KA]

OP i am very disappointed in you for starting this retarded post. i enjoyed your insurance post and respected you for that, but this...?

who fucking cares. why do you people need to vent? what bearing does someone buying rotas have on your life? get over it and live your own life. is it really going to help you any by venting? people buying knockoffs really bothers you that much that you need some social intervention to help you get through the day?

[ThatGuy]

240KA, calm down.

Evidently you haven't read what the "OP" has posted.

If you'd like to add to the conversation/debate, then please do so.
Just coming in here and ranting and swearing doesn't do anything productive though.

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by DALAZ_68

that is not what is going on here...whats happening here is more along the lines of...someone events a wheel made of metal, someone sees that and makes it out of wood, someone sees that and makes it out of clay... same shape? yes, same quality? no... is cost cheaper sure...will it work, yeah...but at what cost to the buyer?

Scenario 1: you have your way and no one can duplicate the wheel with other materials.

We have:

metal wheel - $1000

Scenario 2: you let other people make wheels out of other material

We then have:

metal wheel - $1000
wooden wheel - $500
clay wheel - $100


I as the consumer would choose Scenario 2 because I have more choices. Not every application requires the durability and cost of metal. For my car, yes. For my wheel barrow, wooden works just fine. For my mockup, clay would be just fine.

I don't see any problem with this from the consumer's point of view provided that I know what I'm buying.


If the wooden/clay wheel manufacturer is marketing their product as metal, then that's false advertising and we have a different problem.


In Scenario 1, you hurt consumers like me. I understand what I'm buying. I don't need people you to decide what kind of quality and cost I need to buy.

Sometimes I want good quality. Someimes I want cheaper prices. It depends on the application.

I don't want you to force me to just one choice because you personally feel it's the best quality and R&D. I don't need you to make the decision for me. I'd rather have more choices and choose for myself.


Scenario 2 benefits most consumers. Ignorant/cheap people will always buy inferior goods, but that's their problem and not mine. I know what I want and I know how much I want to pay.

[g6civcx]

And if you truly value R&D, and I mean true R&D, you need to stay OEM. Every major manufacturer, including Nissan, spends much, much more R&D money than your typical aftermarket company.

Most companies just installs the parts on a car and drive around the track a couple times. Then it becomes "track tested". They simply just don't have the budget to do hardcore stress analysis like OEMs.

Some of my clients like GM/Ford/Chrysler spend more R&D than your typical "tuner" house.

If you want quality, GM/Ford/Chrysler will warranty their parts and will fix stuff for you. Plus they'll pay you liability if you wreck your car.

Aftermarket companies will only replace parts due to workmanhip only.


If you want true R&D, quality, and originality, nothing beats Nismo.

[lflkajfj12123]

Why did you delete my post? What the hell.

[twin_vector_turbo]

Originally Posted by g6civcx

And if you truly value R&D, and I mean true R&D, you need to stay OEM. Every major manufacturer, including Nissan, spends much, much more R&D money than your typical aftermarket company.

Most companies just installs the parts on a car and drive around the track a couple times. Then it becomes "track tested". They simply just don't have the budget to do hardcore stress analysis like OEMs.

Some of my clients like GM/Ford/Chrysler spend more R&D than your typical "tuner" house.

If you want quality, GM/Ford/Chrysler will warranty their parts and will fix stuff for you. Plus they'll pay you liability if you wreck your car.

Aftermarket companies will only replace parts due to workmanhip only.


If you want true R&D, quality, and originality, nothing beats Nismo.

Nicely put.

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by ManoNegra

Nothing, why do you assume I advocate them
I don't own nor plan to own anything performance related from DMax, PBD, etc, etc
I'm not a JDM whore
I like quality parts, preferably US made

I agree, never said otherwise

no, I'm not
but I do talk to people that are from time to time

never said they don't
I said their QC is not stringent

how many cases of suspension arms breaking
manifolds cracking
wheels sheering
turbos falling apart
etc, etc are out there?
lots, yet people will still buy items based solely on price
and still whine about products costing too much

Agree to a degree,
the quality and selection of products from established companies appears to me to have degraded over time
but these are also the companies that shelled out money on R&D to bring you a quality performance products before the s-chassis was the 'it' car for kids to get.
cost reductions to compete in today's market?
adopting the practices of knock off companies to stay relevant?
interesting topic but not the one at hand

I've already agreed with this point
I don't advocate the majority of crap being offered
whether JDM or USDM

Probably because they didn't have to pay someone to design it and test it
but rather picked it from a catalog
hardest part was probably choosing the size and location of their logo

Not always, but usually does
at least in our community

Sorry Juan, I never intended to address you in particular or you advocating JDM.
just voicing my opinion to the statements you made about the industry in general.
It's entirely impersonal and I hope I did not come across as trying to attack
Likewise I'm more preferential to US aftermarket suppliers, but that's another discussion.

Basically I think all products develop a reputation in time.
It's up to the consumer to research and they only have themselves to blame if they get something that fails them (for the price they pay especially).
let the buyer beware.
If we choose to be lax about doing research and getting less than we bargained for, we only have ourselves to blame.
I really do believe that any given company's/consumer's success/failure speaks for itself.

I personally don't think there's really all that innovation going on with 240 parts period.
It's an older car made 20 yrs ago.
How much room is there for innovation for utility parts realistically?
Looking at coilovers alone, knock off or not, it's the same deal.
You get your typical spring rates, shock dyno specs, etc.
Whats to say even brand name parts don't plagarize off other brand name parts?

How are we to know how much 'such & such' co invested into R&D without resorting to presumtions?
Do you know for a fact precisely how much, say KW (established brand name imo) invested vs. say Megan?
Is there always a direct 'cause & effect' relationship between amount invested into R&D with respect to quality.
Is the utmost quality always entirely necessary for all & every application out there?

With QC, I'm not necessarily saying it is or is not stringent.
I'm saying it's hard to prove it's any more stringent than name brand parts,
for EVERY given part.
Name brand parts aren't always stringent with QC,
and that I have first hand exprience with (esp w/ Greddy parts).

I think part of this debate also needs to address the definition of brand name parts.
It's not always good, innovative, or a good value.
Some brand name parts are better than others
(I would take something from say a manifold from Full-Race over Greddy/HKS)

Cost cutting practices are entirely relevant to the discussion at hand.
My opinion is that cheaper parts don't necessarily equate to inferior quality.
We also don't know what the profit margin of brand name parts.
They could be raping us for all we know.
Cheaper parts will sell at increased volume.
Increased volume allow profitabilty at higher volume.

Also, business is business.
Companies are there to make money as a priority.
The state of aftermarket customer is what it is.
There is a decent demand for cheaper parts
Many brand name companies aren't doing so well.
It's up to companies to adapt or go out of business.
To be fair this has not been easy in the last few years.

Hope I've addressed your questions at least semi-thoughtfully.
if not apologies as I'm not entirely sober as I'm typing this.

[singlecamslam]

I got MB's just like 80% of people on here. I think its dumb to buy wheels that are 2k + and run them on the track. Everything but the wheels on my car is legit, but i cant see myself spending more than 1k on wheels, thats just ridiculous to me. MY OPINION.

[ronmcdon]

Originally Posted by g6civcx

Scenario 1: you have your way and no one can duplicate the wheel with other materials.

We have:

metal wheel - $1000

Scenario 2: you let other people make wheels out of other material

We then have:

metal wheel - $1000
wooden wheel - $500
clay wheel - $100


I as the consumer would choose Scenario 2 because I have more choices. Not every application requires the durability and cost of metal. For my car, yes. For my wheel barrow, wooden works just fine. For my mockup, clay would be just fine.

I don't see any problem with this from the consumer's point of view provided that I know what I'm buying.


If the wooden/clay wheel manufacturer is marketing their product as metal, then that's false advertising and we have a different problem.


In Scenario 1, you hurt consumers like me. I understand what I'm buying. I don't need people you to decide what kind of quality and cost I need to buy.

Sometimes I want good quality. Someimes I want cheaper prices. It depends on the application.

I don't want you to force me to just one choice because you personally feel it's the best quality and R&D. I don't need you to make the decision for me. I'd rather have more choices and choose for myself.


Scenario 2 benefits most consumers. Ignorant/cheap people will always buy inferior goods, but that's their problem and not mine. I know what I want and I know how much I want to pay.

Absolutely, we don't always need the absolute best of everything.
Even 'brand name' companies offer different grades of quality depending on user preferences (ie - Tein).

Originally Posted by ericcastro

I am actually glad that skateboards started with metal wheels.
Then went to clay.
Then those were knocked off with Urithane, lol

lol.

Not really realavent, just wanted to give Steve shit,lol.

I just stopped by to see what 240XTC wrote and got pinked for, LMAO!

i already did this discussion several times this year.
Thought we had all agreed.
The pricey stuff is great.
you CAN get away with the cheaper stuff.
The Pricey stuff knocked off existing technologies too and have made their R&D
The interwebs have changed everything, business needs to modernize or die.
Most knock offs arent actually knock offs at all, but cheaper versions of a product, but still better then OEM.
A knock off is a gucci purse that is sold on venice beach for $20 new.

I am with you on this one.
It's actually a virtue to spend as less as possible as long as the purpose is served.
Anything beyond is just a matter of bragging.
This is why I fully respect companies like Godspeed.

Originally Posted by 240KA

OP i am very disappointed in you for starting this retarded post. i enjoyed your insurance post and respected you for that, but this...?

who fucking cares. why do you people need to vent? what bearing does someone buying rotas have on your life? get over it and live your own life. is it really going to help you any by venting? people buying knockoffs really bothers you that much that you need some social intervention to help you get through the day?

To be fair, G6CiVx brings a refreshing perspective to the existing debate and it's very thought provoking imo.
It's not venting at all, and I sense no emtional rant either.
That is my impression at least.

[S14_Kouki]

Originally Posted by singlecamslam

I got MB's just like 80% of people on here. I think its dumb to buy wheels that are 2k + and run them on the track. Everything but the wheels on my car is legit, but i cant see myself spending more than 1k on wheels, thats just ridiculous to me. MY OPINION.

My point too. I dont see the reason on buying 2k+ rims to fuck them up at the track (unless you just have a bunch of money to buy rims). Ill have my mb's for the track and invest in a expensive set of rims for DD'ing. But if u go that way you should just get a set of z wheels or se wheels ect ect, plus 16 inch tires are easyer to find

[g6civcx]

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

To be fair, G6CiVx brings a refreshing perspective to the existing debate and it's very thought provoking imo.
It's not venting at all, and I sense no emtional rant either.
That is my impression at least.

I'm glad somebody is having a good time.

I think most people agree that stealing is bad. The problem is that we have to be very careful about what we consider to be theft. You can't steal something that belongs to the public.

My point is this. If you actually looked at each product and tried to determine what exactly is new, you will find that 99% is just rehasing old designs. Very rarely will you get something 100% new.

Like in 1997 I invented something very similar to the iphone. It was a PDA that has gesture recognition to allow you to pan, zoom, and rotate. You can also use it as a phone. You can program different apps for it. The closest thing available at that time was the Palm OS, and that wasn't even close to my design.

Functionally, there is no difference between my design and the iphone. The pratical difference between my design and Apple's design is that Apple made theirs cheaper to manufacture. They also made the user interface a lot more pleasant.

There were many other designs like mine that all pretty much did the same thing. Apple cashed in because of the execution based on asthetics and the programming of the OS and GUI, not any new functionality that we didn't know before.