I think the real issue is that this company clearly took stock photos and photoshopped them and claimed they were their own designs and products. I mean, look at that flashlight. The picture is clearly photoshopped.We do vet within reason
We explain the crowd, give them posting guidelines, then let the vetting process continue once they come on. Sponsoring is part of the vetting process. That's where you come in and if this thread turns out to be accurate, I'd say it works.
As I explained earlier, these companies that do come on are taking the risk. Many companies inquire and then go away when I explain all this. @AKEK did not, So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt until they have time to respond.
*Update, I just talked to Brandon, they’re actually up at the expo manning the booth, but he will get back to it. They are considering everything reasonable that has been posted. Make sure you give him a little wiggle room for some misunderstandings between the frame design and the bag design. As I said earlier, he was very upfront about where the product was made.
In the meantime, try imagining this: whether this product was priced right or not (the market will dictate that in time,) what if it turned out to hold up well, and meet the demands of many of the members? Hmmmmmm
I have no issues with companies finding a product manufacturer and rebranding/reselling but be honest about it.
I’d like to hear from the specifically what was the design process, how did you source the products, how did you find a manufacturer?
Perhaps they found a manufacturer that was making this pack and they modified it to be their own and used the same manufacturer to “update” the product, fine. But explain that.
Saying it’s manufactured over seas with your own designs is much different then repackaging and existing product. And it’s clear here, at least their marketing by using photoshopped images is shady at best.