| > Tool branding is everything and people who use tools absolutely care about where they are made and who owns the company making them. Reputation is everything with some things. Good chart of tool company owners, https://www.protoolreviews.com/power-tool-manufacturers-who-... > It may surprise you to know that only a handful of power tool companies own your favorite tools. That’s right, most tool brands fall under a parent company that also controls additional power tool manufacturers and brands. At this point, reputation and branding needs to be separated out to the level of tool lines or even model numbers, e.g. Ridgid tools, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32453919 > After signing the deal in 2003, TTi took over the production of Ridgid power tools. These tools are licensed for sale only at The Home Depot, and all of these tools are produced by TTi, not Emerson. However, TTi does not own Ridgid or the rights to the brand name. Rather, TTi has a licensing agreement with Emerson that allows them to produce and distribute the tools under the Ridgid name. While most Ridgid power tools are made in China by TTI, the well-regarded Ridgid shop vacs are made in Mexico by Emerson. Ridgid toolboxes are made in Israel by Keter, which also makes enclosures for Milwaukee Packout and Home Depot's Husky brand. |
I think the licensing of a manufacturer name without that manufacturer being involved in production, quality control, or maintenance has probably cost consumers more money than just about any other market change.
There are too many products carrying a brand name associated with quality that are actually entirely produced, sold, and serviced by unrelated entities on licensing agreements. Many of those products are low quality "consumer grade" examples of things like lawn mowers, outdoor grills and kitchen equipment, power tools, yard tools, etc and are sold through stores like Lowes and Home Depot. A consumer buys one of these products thinking they have a high quality item and then later when it fails they find themselves in service limbo since the brand owner has no connection to the product and the manufacturer makes it difficult to reach any customer service information or punts the consumer to the brand owner people.
They have essentially purchased a license to a reputation for their products and have free reign to operate with no intention of maintaining the good will that reputation has among consumers. I don't understand why a company will license their reputation in a situation like this. The money must be great.