Hacker News Reader

Comment by dominotw | Hacker News Reader

> they run ad campaigns for voting/saving public lands.

This is part of their brand building. Ppl buying their overpriced jackets are not just buying a jacket they are buying "good feelings". They cannot justify the price just on just the quality of the jacket, they have to bundle intangible in their price. Outdoorsy ppl want they outdoors saved, its a no brainer for outdoor company to support this.

Their customers dont' give a shit about muslims in Chinese camps so they don't "run ad campaigns for saving muslims".

Why are you attributing some noble intentions behind basic 101 business marketing. Its clearly not the case per what i said above.

> Does that mean it's ill intended?

yes. I call BS.

View on HN

I feel like its a weird stance to say that Patagonia jackets are overpriced and only justify their value due to their political opinions. Like they're some of the best $/quality on the market and they have great resale value. They turned up on my shortlist before I knew anything about their environmental/political stances.

I think people en masse are more price sensitive and lifestyle oriented than they are activist-by-proxy.

Agreed.

Patagonia also has an Ironclad Guarantee [1] - "If you are not satisfied with one of our products at the time you receive it, or if one of our products does not perform to your satisfaction, return it to the store you bought it from or to Patagonia for a repair, replacement or refund."

They stand by their products. You can even return more than a year later and get credit. Some buy stuff on resale and get it repaired or exchanged for new for cheap.

[1] https://help.patagonia.com/s/article/Ironclad-Guarantee

> Their customers dont' give a shit about muslims in Chinese camps so they don't "run ad campaigns for saving muslims".

By this logic no one should work for or do business with American companies for all our atrocities in the middle east. There are a million issues in the world. You have to pick one or two if you want to have any kind of messaging other than "shits fucked up yo"

> By this logic no one should

I am not saying ppl should or shouldn't do certain thing. Its up to them.

I am contradicting "petagonia is a noble company for boycotting FB". They clearly aren't because they are supporting far worse things.

What? Even if someone is doing other bad things, it still is a good thing when they reduce the number of bad things that they do.

>They clearly aren't because they are supporting far worse things.

Such as?

Wasn't it the founder that got the Three Cups of Tea guy to build schools for Muslims in Baltistan precisely because he thought the customers didn't give a shit?

Why are you ascribing basic 101 business marketing to one of the most successful brands on the planet?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com