MRF No Clone Zone??

[Bartman]

So which system is best? Capitalism is one man exploiting another...... Communism is the exact opposite. ;-)

it should be mentioned, we are all referencing a false premise. these cheap prices we are all debating are based on the policy of the Chinese government to keep their exchange rates fixed at a rate that strongly favors their exports. we argue the good/bad of our governments' policies but in reality the artificially low chinese-government-fixed exchange rates make it harder for everyone around the world to compete.

we buy chinese stuff and further hamper our own abilities to compete/survive/thrive. i'm as guilty as anyone although i do buy locally wherever possible even if it means higher costs. whether my shop will survive given my personal buying preferences remains to be seen. i do know i've accepted smaller margins as a consequence of my decisions.

bart

 

[gtranquilla]

So in other words the net consequence of capitalism and communism is identical..... i.e., they both exploit the individual.
Bart also brings up a very good point, i.e., the Chinese fixed exchange rate makes it very difficult for other countries to recover from an economic setback.

So which system is best? Capitalism is one man exploiting another...... Communism is the exact opposite. ;-)

 

[PeteDee]

You Aussies dont know how lucky you are. You live in one of the wealthiest countries on earth, its gorgeous, the weather is awesome and you have arguably the best lifestyle and quality of life on the planet.

Oh yes we do and we are not swapping with anyone.

Cheers.

Pete

 

[SMP]

we buy chinese stuff and further hamper our own abilities to compete/survive/thrive. i'm as guilty as anyone although i do buy locally wherever possible even if it means higher costs. whether my shop will survive given my personal buying preferences remains to be seen. i do know i've accepted smaller margins as a consequence of my decisions. bart

Cloning will continue, China will continue, Hobbyking will continue. I'm not worried about the race to the bottom. What I AM worried about is when "Good" is no longer available as an option. Case in point, multis & photography, spent a bunch of money buying the best I couldn't afford. I knew there were cheaper alternatives, I made a business decision to buy once (quality). I'm grateful that was still an option. My fear is when "Good" vendors like you, Lanzar, Patrick, Holco, Gotheli etc. can longer afford to compete due to buyers simply accepting less quality... "Quality" is going to close it's doors and walk away. I understand buying cheap but if Somebody isn't going to buy "Good" eventually its going to stop being offered as an option.

 

[bruce365]

Hi SMP, there will always be people who buy and or demand or can afford quality so I feel quality will always be in demand. Germany is only the most successful economic power house in Europe (the country holding the mess over there together) because it produces Quality Products, not cheap but quality.

Stores (in Aust.) buying cheap s**t from china and trying to pass it off at high prices to make a killing gets up my nose. Cheap clothing from china sold in Aust with 1,000% markup for example (also china produces different quality clothing depending on destination country). If one has no where else to go then you simply must pay the price because of lack of competition or closed shop policies. Thank God for the internet.

Example of closed shop, Miele Aust. (once best quality white goods, but now not so much) forces selected retailers to sell Miele products at the same retail price, they are not allowed to discount unless Miele Aust decides to have a promotional sale then all the retailers will discount by the same amount dictated by Miele Aust., they can not get away with these practices in Europe but in Aust. they can? Where is the trade practices act?

Any way I have had my little ***** and really all I wanted to say is that Quality products will Always be in demand, I certainly always look for quality at a price point that I can afford.

Thanks and Regards - bruce

 

[R|M|D Photography]

I think clones should still be allowed on here. As many have said, there are a lot of people who simply cant afford to buy a "name brand" but still want to partake in the hobby and surely one day step up to the real deal. Plus it allows people to share thier experiances with lower grade gear. For instance I was originally going to buy the HK DJI f450 clone like my buddy had. This was untill he came down with it a little off angled and snapped two arms like they were twigs. So I did a little research, realized they were clones and bought a true DJI f550 instead. And now my friend has also ordered a true DJI f450.

Bottom line, this forum is for the enjoyment and helping of each other in the hobby correct? Well lets help those that want in the hobby regardless of what they buy! To do otherwise just seem "elitist" to me.

 

[nicwilke]

This certainly has sparked a big debate here. I think we all have similar views to stealing designs, but banning users for their own moral stance is probably similar to banning people with different cultural views.... It's unfair to judge or ban anyone based on what they believe in themselves.

How about we have a list or thread exposing brands that are clones or copies so that people at least are educated about the products that are copies of designs. Give them the facts and let them make moral judgement. It's just an idea that I thought would assist in saving a few sales of fakes to the unsuspecting buyer.

 

[PeterLester]

I think there may be a terminology issue to resolve here. The proper term for passing off an apparently identical product as the original would be counterfeiting. Anyone who has visited Italy knows that it is very difficult to distinguish between the original sculpture or art piece and the copy. And there is often a good reason for making exact copies of an original art piece, e.g., to preserve the original work of art etc.

In the case of MRs this would be inappropriate to circumvent the normal return on investment after considerable upfront R&D investment.....stifles further R&D etc.