Low Cost Shell Carrier Option
- Thread starter Zee705
- Start date
My biggest gripe with people buying these knock offs, is that you are supporting someone who has blatantly stolen someone's work.
I can't stand theft in any form.
The person who comes up with a product has invested a quite a bit of time/effort/R&D $ to develop something that meets the needs of competitors.
More cost than most of you could ever realize.
The owner of Invictus is one of the nicest guys in shooting sports, and the amount of money he has thrown back into the pockets of shooters by way of match sponsorship and prize table items is unreal.
I can appreciate the fact that shooting gear is pricey, and some of you are trying things out to see if you like it.
But as has been pointed out already, this gear can sell fast to other competitors if you don't like it.
Discount it by the price of the knock offs, and it will sell all day no questions asked and at the end of the day you are out the same money.
I can't stand theft in any form.
The person who comes up with a product has invested a quite a bit of time/effort/R&D $ to develop something that meets the needs of competitors.
More cost than most of you could ever realize.
The owner of Invictus is one of the nicest guys in shooting sports, and the amount of money he has thrown back into the pockets of shooters by way of match sponsorship and prize table items is unreal.
I can appreciate the fact that shooting gear is pricey, and some of you are trying things out to see if you like it.
But as has been pointed out already, this gear can sell fast to other competitors if you don't like it.
Discount it by the price of the knock offs, and it will sell all day no questions asked and at the end of the day you are out the same money.
I don't entirely agree with you. This is simple business economy at work and it has been going on for ever. Someone makes a product, others try to improve upon it or make it for less. You see it in every market. The originator has to constantly provide something that the also-rans cannot, in order to recoup their initial investment and to remain competitive, be it service, product innovation, or whatever. Maybe your friend Paul will look at manufacturing overseas (egads) and helping others less fortunate by providing wages to them and also reducing his costs. Don't get me started with "taking jobs from Canadians", lots of folks would be against this but it is a global economy after all and it works both ways. Perhaps there is technology that could be used to lower his cost of production and still produce a product he is proud of, possibly 3D printing them for example. I don't know. Maybe he leverages his experience with this item in making other, more lucrative items.
I happen to run a software business where other folks attempt to duplicate our software, often by contracting folks in other counties who work for lower wages of course, and taking a portion of what could be our business. Here is what I have learned...those other companies cannot duplicate the service we provide our customers and the customers who appreciate that, stick with us. We provide good wages to people who raise families in Canada and of course that makes our products costlier. The economics of that is too much to get into here but it is a significant and perhaps unfortunate reality. The potential customers who choose to purchase a similar, lower cost product, from our competitors, are often (but not always) those customers we would prefer not to do business with anyway. I do not blame customers from purchasing what they consider a similar product for less money. There are many reasons they may do this. I do not blame others from attempting to duplicate our work, they are simply trying to make a living and to carve out a niche. They are always two-steps behind anyway because their business model does not allow for the creativity ours does, they are simply good at duplicating. It is possible for originators to obtain copyrights and patents to extend their uniqueness in their field, but that is costly. Some products do not provide enough margin for us to make and are better produced by companies who produce high volumes at lower prices. Why? Because often the consumer does not value the product enough to pay more. The world is pretty screwed-up in my opinion right now. Things are way out of whack. Not sure how long it can continue, the disparity between the haves and have-nots. As you have well-seen, economies all around the world are imploding. Wow, this is really getting off track. Anyway, I just felt I should respond to your expressed attitude and points. Having someone making a similar product as your friend's, is one of the things that will cause him to be at his best, not rest on his laurels and continue to innovate. It is not like his business will crash as a result of it. He may even learn some helpful things from it. Finally, I am pretty sure you have purchased knock-offs of some sort, perhaps not knowingly, but it is almost impossible not to these days. Had I seen your posted earlier, I would have purchased your friend's product. Your passion speaks volumes.
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
NVS, it's more like someone stealing all of your source code, producing the exact same software, and then marketing it under your company's name and software title for cheaper. Not many people are going to care about the customer service aspect of a shotshell carrier...or software for that matter. The difference in quality should make a difference though. I can't imagine people purchasing the knockoffs for competition only to have doubts about being able to rely on them in a match.
- Location
- Medicine Hat
I guess I will jump back in on this.
I agree with a lot of what NVS said. This is simply the way the real business world works and capitalism in general. Nothing more. The argument about something being better quality may be a valid one, and you right Grimreefer, quality should make a difference. However there is alway a balance between quality and price. And if someone is making something super high quality, but is all 3 times the price as something of arguably less quality, but the less quality item meets the needs of most people, the higher quality item either needs to meet a need the lower quality one doesn't, or drop their prices to remain competative. Why would anyone want to pay more to meet their needs. Wants are a whole other story.
The other side of this, is you will alway have some people willing to pay more for status or "brand names". Nothing wrong with this at all and it keeps many companies in business. And if it make people happy, I am happy for them.
So for the lions share of us who are not pro competitors, and are simply out to have some fun, something that maybe lower quality, but is significantly cheeper and does what it needs to do is a logical choice. If the less expensive product proves to be problematic, it will soon be replaced by the name brand, if not, the name brand will need to do something to remain competative.
I agree with a lot of what NVS said. This is simply the way the real business world works and capitalism in general. Nothing more. The argument about something being better quality may be a valid one, and you right Grimreefer, quality should make a difference. However there is alway a balance between quality and price. And if someone is making something super high quality, but is all 3 times the price as something of arguably less quality, but the less quality item meets the needs of most people, the higher quality item either needs to meet a need the lower quality one doesn't, or drop their prices to remain competative. Why would anyone want to pay more to meet their needs. Wants are a whole other story.
The other side of this, is you will alway have some people willing to pay more for status or "brand names". Nothing wrong with this at all and it keeps many companies in business. And if it make people happy, I am happy for them.
So for the lions share of us who are not pro competitors, and are simply out to have some fun, something that maybe lower quality, but is significantly cheeper and does what it needs to do is a logical choice. If the less expensive product proves to be problematic, it will soon be replaced by the name brand, if not, the name brand will need to do something to remain competative.
Last edited:
Not really. You are referring to our "raw materials" and the "knock-off" obviously has to source and pay for their own raw materials. Recreating our code and simply recompiling it are two very different things. In the case of the branding, well it is obvious to me at least, that an item sold on AliExpress for half the price...is actually a knock-off, and not pretending to be the real deal...although you may see it otherwise. In any case, I am under no illusions that someone else, at any time, could create a product that rivals or eclipses ours, and that they could do this in any number of ways. That is just the nature of things. Being in business is a competitive environment. Just because you come up with an idea and carry it through, does not guarantee you anything...at least that is my attitude. Others obviously feel that it entitles them to something more.
Do you not agree that pauls postings above elude to some kind of allegiance to owner of Invictus?
Depends on the type of software you are referring to. Consumer grade software, yes. Our success in the software business for over 30 years has required us to make plenty of adjustments to get into markets where service is a significant component of what we offer.
Agreed
Just because something is a knock-off, does not mean it is a lesser product. Some knock-offs are just as good as the "original". That is why some folks here are checking them out.
By the way, the product I purchased is not a knock-off of the Invictus product. I purchased a 4x4, quite a different animal. My intended purpose is not competition.
I think that when ordering from China their strategy is not to deliver until you complain about no delivery and start demanding your money back. only then do they deliver.
They make their profit from people who forget, give up or die.
They make their profit from people who forget, give up or die.
- Location
- Medicine Hat
Totally disagree. I have never had an issue with getting items from these types of suppliers. In fact my last order showed up in about 2 week, which was totally unexpected.
Not my experience at all. Only ordered three things so far though...two items that could not be obtained elsewhere, which I found interesting. Two items arrived as expected. On one occasion, the product was very late to arrive. The seller refunded my money and only asked me to pay again once it arrived. It arrived a couple weeks later and I repaid the amount. Very civil, frequent communication and above my expectations.
Runningfool
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- SW Ontario
No, folks here are checking them out because they are inexpensive. It has already been explained here that they are no where near as good as the "original"...according to people using them they break easily.
Agreed...but also with the hope that they will be suitable for those individual's intended purpose...which may not be the same as for a hard-core competitor.
I made a general statement about the quality of some knock-offs. In your zeal to respond, that subtlety obviously escaped you. Not everyone who posted that they purchased a knock-off had the benefit of reading the few negative feedbacks that were posted, prior to them making their purchase. Would it have made a difference to their purchase decision? Who knows.
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
I'm confused with what you're saying here. In the case of the Invictus knockoff, they look to be exact copies of the original. The Invictus design obviously took man hours for design itterations, prototyping, testing...not to mention the expenses involved with designing a product like this. The design is his intellectual property. Your source code went through the same process, and is the IP of your company. I'm not sure how the design of the Invictus carrier or the source code for your software could be considered raw materials...it is intellectual property that took resources and expense to develop.
In the case of the IV carrier, the knock-off makers can simply copy the design...there's no way to protect it since China doesn't care about patents. To put it on the same plane, think if your source code could be available and directly copied simply by buying the software. No reverse engineering needed. So whenever you put out a new version of software that you poured blood, sweat, and tears into, they can simply copy it with minimal effort. Profiting off of your hard work.
Also, the Alibaba listing says "Invictus Practical" in the title. So not only did they steal his intellectual property, they are also stealing his branding, deceiving customers, and benefiting from the money and work that went into establishing his brand.
This part isn't directed at you, NVS, but I'm really having a hard time understanding how anyone can be okay with this particular case. Things can get into a gray area when building upon the work of others, without which, we would be nowhere in terms of technology. In this particular case, though...it's crystal clear. In my personal opinion, knowingly supporting these knockoffs is immoral, and whatever justification buyers come up with is BS. Just be honest and say you don't care or don't say anything at all.
Last edited:
Sorry, I misinterpreted your original statement.
That is pretty much what I meant when I used the term "raw materials"... written in quotes because it is raw materials in concept not as folks might conventionally interpret it.
I was not interested in the Invictus product nor their design for my particular use, so I did not lookup nor did I see the Alibaba ad for their similar product. I still haven't so I believe what you state to be correct. I do not support a product being advertised as something it is not. The ad page for the product I purchased, has no reference to any company name.
Honest, yes, I am being honest here and I do care. You mention "this particular case" and I have been more general in my representations. If I understand what you mean by "this particular case", I agree with you. It sounds like the Alibaba "Invictus Practical" product is a misrepresentation and I don't support that.
grimreefer
Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
If you are equating IP with raw materials in order to convey the sense of THEFT, then we are on the same page. This is beyond "misrepresentation"....call it like it is! It is theft.
For reference:
Support original innovation and quality from a great small company here: http://www.invictuspractical.com/8ight-plates.html
Support foreign theft of intellectual property and get a poor quality product for cheap here: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/FMA-Invictus-Practical-8Q-Series-Shotshell-Carrier-BLACK-Free-Shipping/32628121103.html?spm=2114.40010608.4.2.mtt5B0
Last edited:
