Tartan tat kings go Scottish

[sharpdressedscot]

So they moved from $40(USD) bucks to $100, I wonder what the quality is like of the latter...

[demobud]

"The maximum someone should be paying for a kilt is £200. Kiltmakers have had it too easy for too long." - Dildar Singh
That's a bit arrogant. The distinct difference between my more "budget concious" kilts and my tank is night and day. I really don't think a someone hand cutting, arranging and hand stitching a kilt from scratch is "having it easy", and I don't think $400 US is what that kind of time is worth.

[McClef]

I wonder if they are still using flammable materials to make these £50 kilts.

[auld argonian]

Oh, Lord! Will this never end?

Best

AA

[highlander_Daz]

I still wouldnt buy one, i want to support traditional Scots craftsmen and women, the Singhs will continue to sell Tartan tat and Turn Scots/ Highland culture as a shoddy way of lineing their pockets.

a lot of the stuff these guys sell is cheap rubbish, I find some of it offensive in the extreme.

[Hamish]

I still wouldnt buy one, i want to support traditional Scots craftsmen and women, the Singhs will continue to sell Tartan tat and Turn Scots/ Highland culture as a shoddy way of lineing their pockets.

a lot of the stuff these guys sell is cheap rubbish, I find some of it offensive in the extreme.

I am with you on that 100%, Darren.

Take care,
Ham.

[highlander_Daz]

The Gold bros/Singh are not SCOTS they are British Asians to be precise, which isnt and should not be a factor in this discussion,

the factors being

the quality of the materials used.
the quality of craftsmanship.
if any child labour/ exploited workers were invloved in the manufacture.

by using "ambiguous" and "confusing" labelling ,passing it off as something it isnt. the labelling could "catch out" tourists to whom English isnt a first language.

There is a market for "economy" kilts, Im assured Stillwater and sport kilts are excelent kilts for the money, are transparent about the place of manufacture and dont pretend to be something they are not. Unlike our friends on the royal mile.

at the end of the day the golds are simply using tartan tat as a way of making cash, if the bottom fell out of it they would go onto something else.

there is no commitment to further or preserve the art of Kiltmaking and looking at the rubbish they sell, no respect or understanding of symbols of Highland culture.

Id be interested to know if there are similar "chancers" in the US or Australia cashing in on native american or aboriginal cultures producing similar "tat"

[davedove]

by using "ambiguous" and "confusing" labelling ,passing it off as something it isnt. the labelling could "catch out" tourists to whom English isnt a first language.

It doesn't even have to be English as a second language tourists. Most tourists don't even look at the labels; they check price tags (if that).

I can't tell you how many times I've gone into shops in the Caribbean and seen items that appear to be local crafts, only to pick it up and see "Made in China." Yet tourists are buying these things by the basketful.

[Nanook]

The Gold bros/Singh are not SCOTS they are British Asians to be precise, which isnt and should not be a factor in this discussion,

They live in Scotland and have, to my knowledge, British citizenship. They have been doing business and living in Scotland since at least the 1970s (when they had a market stall in East Lothian). Sir Montague Burton (owner of what used to be the biggest clothing factory in the world in East Leeds) was born in Lithuania as Moshe Osinsky. He came alone at the age of 15 to Britain. You might not consider Burton "English" but as a British Jew he provided no less than 10,000 jobs. When he died in 1952 25% of all British men were wearing Burton clothing--- the quintessence of the British look.

the factors being

the quality of the materials used.
the quality of craftsmanship.
if any child labour/ exploited workers were invloved in the manufacture.

That was Burton's model. Its not anymore what the mass market wants. Marks & Spencer used to be about quality and British tailoring and refusing to shift to global production almost killed them. M&S is "not very price competitive" was the cry of analysts. The response to try to get out of their slump? Fire 1,000 employees and "buy products more cheaply".

"Buy products more cheaply", be snazzier and more aggressive is the model of H&M, Inditex-Gruppe (Zara Massimo-Duti), Next, etc.

Its become the model of most of the designer labels including most British luxury brands. Where do you think, for example, most of Burberry's production now is? How about all the tweed jackets in British shops? Where do you think nearly all the sports and leisure clothing with American, British and German brands are made? How about the shoes on most people's feet.. The model is to use cheap easily exploited and unprotected workforce (near slave, child or whatever via subcontractors as long as one does not get caught with some bad PR), export environmental problems (less regulation means lower standards and lower costs), save on tax (move around the nationality of the company via holdings) and while one is at it, see if one can get some national transfer payments to cover the costs of shifting production around. "Capital knows no nationality. It knows only profit.". Profit means in a global textile market with strong price pressures to be a vagabond always looking for the cheapest source of production. How often do I read someone's whining "why does blah blah cost so much when I can go to Wally World and get Blah Blah Blah"....

A friend of mine had a knitwear factory and one of his long time customers (one of the largest dept store chains) showed him a pullover from China. The buyer said they can get them for $7 USD a piece. If he can make them for $7 USD they'd purchase the lot from him. The same story from most of his customers. His knitwear factory is since closed and those $7 USD pullovers the chain sells in nationally advertised sales for $40 USD ($80 USD, regular price). Many of the few European knitwear companies that have survived have since morphed into textile trading with their production in China (where a large part is, in turn, siphoned off into a gray market sold as "counterfeit").

There is a market for "economy" kilts, Im assured Stillwater and sport kilts are excelent kilts for the money, are transparent about the place of manufacture and dont pretend to be something they are not. Unlike our friends on the royal mile.

Sure no child or exploited workers? Do they really tell you the true maker and what subcontractors were involved in the process? The companies you mention sell "kilts" imported from the Sub-Continent like the Gold Bros.. Only the Gold Bros also sell good kilts. The customer can see for themselves the difference and choose..! If they are good salesmen then many a customer that has gone into one of the shops looking for a 39 GBP kilt went out with an order for "the real thing" (the Gold Bros employ and work with some talented kilt makers and purchase not insignificant amounts of cloth from the top Scottish mills).

Id be interested to know if there are similar "chancers" in the US or Australia cashing in on native american or aboriginal cultures producing similar "tat"

You bet!

[Nighthawk]

"The maximum someone should be paying for a kilt is £200. Kiltmakers have had it too easy for too long." - Dildar Singh
That's a bit arrogant. The distinct difference between my more "budget concious" kilts and my tank is night and day. I really don't think a someone hand cutting, arranging and hand stitching a kilt from scratch is "having it easy", and I don't think $400 US is what that kind of time is worth.

I couldn't agree more! I paid almost $300 for a USAK (with ultra rush charges) and I feel like I got one heck of a deal! My SWK's are killer- for $80 each- but there is no comparison! If I'm paying less than $600 for an 8 yard hand made wool kilt, then I wonder what's wrong with it!