Coming Off a Six Month Kilt Binge...The Financial Reality

[Kiltbear]

Gasp, shock, horror....someone else has dared to criticise the uncriticisable (is that a word????). When I ventured to suggest that UK's quality control was maybe not quite up to the mark on the UK Yahoo group site I could hear the villagers coming up the hill with their burning torches, pitchforks and noose. I'm convinced that all the members of that forum are all UK employees. At the risk of being crucified/hung drawn and quartered I have to agree re the comments of poor quality. My black leather UK is unstitching everywhere (and I mean everywhere). I have one belt loop left which is still in one piece whilst the others are hanging by a thread or two or just sheer willpower. One belt loop was like that when the thing was delivered for Gawd's sake. If they were cheap then fairy fluff but relatively speaking they are not so hence my gripes......Steps down from soapbox and shuffles off to corner muttering obscenities.......

[Riverkilt]

I have no problem paying up front for quality.

I have no problem paying up front for reasonable shipping time (4-5 weeks for a kilt, contemporary or Traditional with allowance for seasonal rushes and special situations like a lone tailor working on kilts for a band that reveals that at the time of ordering)

Kathy Lare at Kathy's Kilts in Albuquerque took 1/2 down, 1/2 when ready to ship and she special ordered the tartan from the 1/2 down.

That's a lot more customer friendly than taking 100% down on a stock kilt and shipping 11 weeks later.

Is economics a great sport or what? Will be most interesting to see how this current boom in kilts plays out.

In six months I've gone from naive first time buyer, and through extensive market experience become much more savy about where I do business. In the process I've had some aggrevation, frustration, and extensive jonesing. But, I've also met great people like Mike at AmeriKilts, Steve at Freedom Kilts, Jeff at Pittsburgh Kilts, and Kathy at Kathy's Kilts. All have treated me with dignity and respect, shipped as promptly as one would expect for a kilt, been upfront about any potential problems, and delivered quality products.

I have strong hopes for Utilikilts, I hope the do well, they are refreshing in their marketing, and I'm very greatful to the extensive work they've done to bring kilts mainstream. I even sometimes wish I could dust off all my old cut and sew training and find a way to work for them. They are exciting.

But its really sad when I've had more quality problems with Utilikilts than I have with SportKilts.

When I first ordered, one of the reasons UK gave me for the 11 week jones was that one of their production moguls had "fried." I don't doubt it. I know that pressure because I lived it for five years in the 70s in another clothing fad/boom era. But today I'm a consumer. I expect my Levis not to be defective off the shelf. I expect my Pendleton shirts not to be defective off the shelf. I expect quality for my hard earned dollar.

Like someone else said, my father taught me to pay extra for quality to achieve value, particularly when buying clothing. My hope is that UK can do that and overcome instances of "bad Karma" like me.

I also agree it would be "suicide" to post all this on the UK board. I'm not anti UK, I'm for them. That's why I wrote Stephen with my concerns - so they'd know and can tighten up inspections.

If UK succeeds, kilts succeed. If UK keeps having production problems the boom in contemporary kilts may fade unless the quality houses can step in with the marketing ompf that UK has.

We shall see what we shall see.

Ron

[Dreadbelly]

Nobody is going to want to hear me say this...

A while back there was this theatre play, I can't think of the name of it. It's all about the sordid lives of a large family of Macho-Mexo-Texicans. It was actually a pretty big hit where I live. One of the cowboys was a crossdressing queer (This is a billing point even) and on stage, he is seen wearing a Utilikilt. Now, when I go to the coffee shop, or a place where certain types of almost-cultured people hang out, people ask me (because I am kilted) about those funny looking "queer kilts," Utilikilts is now branded, at least in my little area, as a homosexual garmet. And the conversation eventually comes around to Richard Hatch, the homosexual guy from Survivor, that also wore a "queer kilt." I personally find this alarming, and there has been more then one occasion where somebody flat out asked me if I was gay because of what I am wearing. The other day when somebody asked, it was not in a bad way, and ended up in a conversation, the guy really didn't know much about them. Near the end of the conversation, he asked "So tartan kilts are for men and those little black kilts are for homos?" He didn't get it. I tried to explain that solid coloured kilts are for men too. Conversation ended when the man got on his bus, and he went away confused.

It's kinda sad really, so much ground has been gained for the kilt, and, Utilikilts deserve a lot of that. They did make a big stab at making it mainstream, but, they are doing nothing to maintain the masculine image of the kilt. It is rapidly becoming an icon for a certain type of demographic and this worries me. Whether this is intentional or accidental, this could chain a stigma or a stereotype to our garmet. I wonder sometimes, if a major kilt maker, any of them, might shoot for a niche market and directly market to a certain type of community. I fear the reaction that could come of this.

[arrogcow]

I'n not sure what you mean exactly about maintaining a masculine apperence. The reason that all of my contemporary kilts except for my new PK are UK's is because they seem (at least to me) to be the most masculine of the bunch, and frankly I feel that I would be doing more explaining that it wasn't a skirt if I didn't have the cargo pockets, and the hammer loop (that and because of my work, I really need the pocket space). I love my new PK, but I admit that I am a little afraid that it will be called a skirt more often by the unenlightened masses (not that I haven't had the UK called a skirt as well).

UK does sell at alot of pride events, but that does not make then a "Gay" thing, anymore than selling at SF cons make them a "Geek" thing. They are a male thing, period. Go check out the UK Yahoo forum, most of the customers (gay and straight) are adament that they are male clothing (not freestyler/cross dresser) and has nothing to do with sexual orientation. I'm sorry a stupid director had created the myth in your town that they are gay only wear, it is your job to help reeducate people if you want (like I do at least) to not be seen as weird if I want to wear a kilt.

Adam

[Dreadbelly]

I said image, not looks. Din't mention appearance. Just the public image.

I will confess, I did rather like how UKs looked... I am thoroughly hooked on tartan though.

However, intentional or not, they are rapidly becoming associated with an alternative lifestyle. Which is shame. I do not want this happening with ANY kilt makers garmets, as it could make us lose much needed credibility. For those of us that work in kilts, for those of us that live in kilts, for those of us that kilts are the only choice, we can not afford to have this stigma branded on us. For many, it's already hard enough to be accepted in the workplace, we need no additional burdons. And I believe that a company has some small responsibility in cultivating it's public image. For example, if Rocky at USAKilts started selling Pink Fluffy Bunny Kilts, I would have to take my wallet and go elsewhere. While the rest of his kilts would be great, generating the image of Pink Fluffy Bunny Kilt wearers is not something I want a part of.

[Colin]

Wow, this thread has sure taken a downward spiral. I personally don't care who is wearing kilts. But it would seem that some would rather have women wearing a man's garment, than to have gay men wearing kilts.

Yes, Utilikilts has done alot of promotion to the gay community, but is members of that community that have helped expose a new style kilt to the masses.

Maybe I am too liberal in my thinking, but I could care less if the man wearing a kilt is gay, straight, black, white, chinese,short, tall, a Christian, or a Jew, it's made for men regardless of these factors.

For someone that has express the cultural discrimination that he has seen in his life, I am suprised by, what I see as a shortsighted group of comments. It would seem that tolerance should only extend so far.

[Dreadbelly]

Wow, this thread has sure taken a downward spiral. I personally don't care who is wearing kilts. But it would seem that some would rather have women wearing a man's garment, than to have gay men wearing kilts.

Yes, Utilikilts has done alot of promotion to the gay community, but is members of that community that have helped expose a new style kilt to the masses.

Maybe I am too liberal in my thinking, but I could care less if the man wearing a kilt is gay, straight, black, white, chinese,short, tall, a Christian, or a Jew, it's made for men regardless of these factors.

For someone that has express the cultural discrimination that he has seen in his life, I am suprised by, what I see as a shortsighted group of comments. It would seem that tolerance should only extend so far.

Has less to do with tolerance and more to do with greater good. And it's not a downward spiral, it's an expressed concern, not just about one company, but for kilts as a whole.

For kilts to be accepted, they must remain unfettered. If a man shows up for work in a kilt, say, from JoeBlow Kilt Kompany, and his potential future boss has it in his head that only certain types of people wear kilts, and refuses to hire him because of that branded stereotype, that hurts a lot more then just the kilt wearer as a singular entity. It's a lot like racism, or how people view the mentally ill, or the handicapped, or anything else that lies on the fringes of society. You must do something to combat emerging stereotypes and stigmas before it becomes a landslide of issues. Like it or not, there is a responsibility here, something all of us shares. This has more to do with maintaining a neutral image and pushing away incoming barbs or connections. Both the company and the community has a part in cultivating the image they wish to project.

I don't see it as a tolerance issue, I see it more as a form of preservation for a lifestyle that we all know, love, and share.

If kilts were to start, say, becoming a serious symbol for "white supremacy" groups (they already have a foothold) I would be sounding the alarm in much the same way I am now.

A kilt should be kilt. And shouldn't be profiled. Or become a symbol for something that it isn't.

[macwilkin]

A lot of gay mean wear kilts, but a lot of gay men wear other styles of men's clothing as well. I'm a "clothes horse", and I pride myself on being able to "dress", especially for business and formal occasions -- Going to Brooks Brothers for me is like going to the Sporting Goods store for other men (although I go there as well for my fly fishing gear!), but since the stereotype of gay men is that they are "natty dressers", I've had people make that assumption about myself & three of my friends because we can tie a full windsor knot in a tie and wear double-brested blazers with ticket pockets and side vents, much more so than when I'm in a kilt.

I see Dred's point in the fact that kilts belong no more to the gay community than they do the heterosexuals, but I see Colin's point as well, and I agree with his sentiment that it doesn't matter. All I know is that if they wear a kilt, and are proud of it, they're welcome in my house with traditional Highland Hospitality anyday. I agree with Burns:

"...that man to man, the world o'er, shall brithers be for a' that."


It's a difficult question to answer really, but this subject extends far beyond kilts and the realm of this board, and I don't think we should go there.

Just my two bob's worth...

T.

[Dreadbelly]

A lot of gay mean wear kilts, but a lot of gay men wear other styles of men's clothing as well. I'm a "clothes horse", and I pride myself on being able to "dress", especially for business and formal occasions -- Going to Brooks Brothers for me is like going to the Sporting Goods store for other men (although I go there as well for my fly fishing gear!), but since the stereotype of gay men is that they are "natty dressers", I've had people make that assumption about myself & three of my friends because we can tie a full windsor knot in a tie and wear double-brested blazers with ticket pockets and side vents, much more so than when I'm in a kilt.

I see Dred's point in the fact that kilts belong no more to the gay community than they do the heterosexuals, but I see Colin's point as well. It's a difficult question to answer really, but this subject extends far beyond kilts and the realm of this board.

Just my two bob's worth...

T.

Well put.

[Colin]

I just posted a long winded reply, but have chosen to delete in respect of the administrators. Let's just agree to disagree. I too see both sides of the issue. Good Comments Todd.