Jump to content

Patagonia owners give away their company

52-80

By 52-80
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

52-80

52-80 19375

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The point of reducing taxes is to retain more of the capital  

Since he/they literally gave away 98% of that away, not sure theres an ethical incrimination there. 

Unless he and his heirs work for the non-profit and receive millions in annual salary, what good is having control of the company with regards to their personal enrichment. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 35554

Posted
Posted
On 9/15/2022 at 6:40 PM, Samson's Wig said:

Has anyone actually named their kid Chad since sometime in the late 70s?  I'm sure they exist, but I don't think I've met a Chad younger than 45.

Kudos to the Patagonia folks for at least trying to do something with a net benefit.  Whether or not such gestures actually result in a net positive is debatable, I suppose, but it's most likely better than doing nothing at all.

And yes, if you wear Patagonia it says something about you whether you like it or not.  Any clothing that puts its label forward is going to send a message to others and it will almost always be negative except to other douches wearing the same brand.  I've tried, over the years, to never buy clothes with visible labels.  It's a pathetic thing to do in general, with extreme examples being Euro-dude wearing Gucci/Prada/whatever labels.  Nonetheless, I've got a Patagonia fleece that I enjoy in Texas winters, but I'm fully aware that I look like a complete douchebag when I wear it. I just don't care. The puff jackets are like a bright shining beacon announcing the arrival of an insufferable cunt, but they work really damn well.  I haven't been able to pull that trigger, but I understand why some do.  They're well made.

That’s exactly what I’m counting on with my vintage tee collection. 
 

image.thumb.jpeg.59f650344bb3d7cdddaf145d31b108dd.jpeg

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13831

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

The same people shitting on Patagonia are the same people who buy Yeti 

change my mind

Not everyone is brand centric. There are people who buy Kodi and North Face and other quality cheaper brands. But no one is exactly shitting on Patagonia. There are people shitting on Patagonia purchasers. And if there was a thread on Yeti purchasers, I might have fun screwing with them also. For every Birkenstock, Prada and Ferragamo wearer, there is a Patagonia and Yeti purchaser: In fact, they are probably married to each other. And then there are those weirdos who wear both Birkenstocks and Patagonia.

Edited by Bevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samson's Wig

Samson's Wig 3225

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Well that, and you are claiming that anyone with a visible label on their clothing is somewhere between a gigantic douchebag and insufferable cunt.

 

No, I didn't. At all. I know reading comprehension drops a few notches for everyone when on a message board, but you're arguing with a ghost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Near our vacation home:

 

image.thumb.png.aa2c2582d992ff6a427d0291ffe8e02e.png

 

 

 

I'm specifically referring to the 'brand as a lifestyle' comment from F250.  I don't know anyone who only buys one brand, nor do I know anyone who is super loyal to one brand.  I have North Face ski pants.  I have a Helly Hansen ski jacket.  I have a Mountain Hardware puff jacket.  I have an REI rain jacket.  What do they all have in common?  They are all quality brands.  I just want quality stuff.  I don't care which brand, I just want the ones that work the best for me.  Almost everyone I know is the same.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13831

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Chewbacca said:

I'm specifically referring to the 'brand as a lifestyle' comment from F250.  I don't know anyone who only buys one brand, nor do I know anyone who is super loyal to one brand.  I have North Face ski pants.  I have a Helly Hansen ski jacket.  I have a Mountain Hardware puff jacket.  I have an REI rain jacket.  What do they all have in common?  They are all quality brands.  I just want quality stuff.  I don't care which brand, I just want the ones that work the best for me.  Almost everyone I know is the same.  

Gotcha, but he is not wrong. In marketing, with products an intangible image is advertised while with services a tangible is promoted. So, here is a Patagonia ad:

The Neighborhood Jacket - YouTube

 

That is definitely promoting a lifestyle.

 

Here is a Yeti ad: It is pretty similar to Patagonia without the people.

 

Built For The Wild | YETI - YouTube

 

This Yeti ad just promotes the product as for the outdoorsman.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Gotcha, but he is not wrong. In marketing, with products an intangible image is advertised while with services a tangible is promoted. So, here is a Patagonia ad:

The Neighborhood Jacket - YouTube

 

That is definitely promoting a lifestyle.

 

Here is a Yeti ad: It is pretty similar to Patagonia without the people.

 

Built For The Wild | YETI - YouTube

 

This Yeti ad just promotes the product as for the outdoorsman.

 

Wait, so the brand isn't really a brand, but it's a lifestyle of many different brands?  Or is it just a lifestyle of one specific brand?  Which brand owns the lifestyle?  Are the rest just imitations?

You guys are arguing in circles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13831

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

Wait, so the brand isn't really a brand, but it's a lifestyle of many different brands?  Or is it just a lifestyle of one specific brand?  Which brand owns the lifestyle?  Are the rest just imitations?

You guys are arguing in circles.

All companies tie their brand to their target market or how their target market views themselves. This is true from Covergirl to Converse. Obviously there are a limited number of target markets so there are many brands that have overlapping images.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13713

Posted
Posted

To each their own. I doubt I would ever buy a Yeti product because I don't really care much about insulated tumblers or coolers. And at least for the tumblers, some vendor always seems to hand them out.  But I would have no problem buying patagonia products for day-long hiking trips.

Cheap products are always low quality. Yes, expensive can also be low quality but most likely, it's higher quality. Online reviews help to id the good and bad products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pescado_Rojo

Pescado_Rojo 19571

Posted
Posted
On 9/18/2022 at 11:29 AM, Sandman said:

They don't make tall-sized clothing, so they can fuck off. Columbia and Eddie Bauer are my real friends.

I wore XL t shirts and polos all my adult life just to have shirts long enough to cover my torso, and they always looked loose and baggy on me. I discovered the tall cut shirts from Bauer a couple years ago, and I can wear a Large Tall and they look so much better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt

DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

I'm specifically referring to the 'brand as a lifestyle' comment from F250.  I don't know anyone who only buys one brand, nor do I know anyone who is super loyal to one brand.  I have North Face ski pants.  I have a Helly Hansen ski jacket.  I have a Mountain Hardware puff jacket.  I have an REI rain jacket.  What do they all have in common?  They are all quality brands.  I just want quality stuff.  I don't care which brand, I just want the ones that work the best for me.  Almost everyone I know is the same.  

This whole thread has blown my mind. I had no idea there were people with such strong opinions about what other people wore. Just absolutely bizarre.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted



This whole thread has blown my mind. I had no idea there were people with such strong opinions about what other people wore. Just absolutely bizarre.


This thread has been strange, for sure. I never knew I was trying to live some kind of lifestyle just because I use outdoor gear for its intended purpose.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15536

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, Chewbacca said:

A lot of you people don't spend any time outdoors and it shows.

Big difference between being outdoors and using technical products for their intended purpose.  Most people are larpers.  I have a number of friends that bow hunt in the mountains.  They have to be able to function in extreme weather conditions with minimal weight, so the Sitka/Kuiu gear is critical.  The math is simple:  lighter weights, durable, and weather proof.  Especially their rain gear

They draw a tag, they might spend a year prepping for the hunt.  They are also atypical.  Same with skiers, hikers, campers, alpinists, etc.  I have a "technical" puffy that I can pack into a small pouch if I'm hunting/hiking and using a pack and need to worry about weight.  For soccer games in the winter, my Columbia puffy I got at Costco actually keeps me warmer on the sidelines, but it's heavy and bulky.  

This thread is similar to many hunting threads about the "need" for camo.  Most people don't need it.  A few technical hunters...."maybe".  My Marmot scree pants retired all but the heaviest camp pants I used to wear.  Most of my gear now is a hodgepodge of mixed brands I find on sale.  These days, the only need for camo....I just don't want to get blood and mud on my nicer stuff if I can avoid it.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15536

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Cheap products are always low quality.

Sometimes that's the point.  I used to bring a Styrofoam cooler and a pair of bungie straps when I went striper fishing on Texoma.  I'd filet everything down, pack the cooler, drive home, toss the cooler.

If I'm harvesting does during the extended doe/spike season, I'm wearing crappy jeans and a hoody that will be utterly ruined when I'm done.  Often toss those as well.  Situational.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38130

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Chewbacca said:


 

 


This thread has been strange, for sure. I never knew I was trying to live some kind of lifestyle just because I use outdoor gear for its intended purpose.

 

Every single piece of clothing you own was marketed to your “lifestyle”. Whatever lifestyle that may be, in this case, outdoorsman. You may believe I’m buying outdoor gear for when I go outdoors, which is true, but there are way way cheaper products available than most popular brands out there. Hell  JC Penny makes warm jackets that work in cold or wet weather. I doubt you buy JC Penny for your camping trip. Just because you’re oblivious to the marketing angle doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or doesn’t work. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sandman

Sandman 3427

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

This whole thread has blown my mind. I had no idea there were people with such strong opinions about what other people wore. Just absolutely bizarre.

You should see the threads where people want to ban others from eating a steak if it isn't cooked a certain way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13831

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Chewbacca said:


 

 


This thread has been strange, for sure. I never knew I was trying to live some kind of lifestyle just because I use outdoor gear for its intended purpose.

 

How about if you use women's underwear for its intended purpose? Is that a lifestyle choice?

 

 

Anyway, I'm just having fun. I did look in my closet and I have a Descente ski jacket and some Fjallraven pants for when I went to Alaska and Iceland in the winter. I think most of my ski gear is Spyder, Black Crowe skis and not sure of my boots. Generally, I'm pretty value conscious and will see stuff I like in the store and then purchase off-season at Evo, Backcountry, The House or on one of the other discount online places. But, earlier I was only half kidding when I said I still have 1987 Jams shorts, Vuarnets, and sorority t-shirts. I just don't purchase a lot since I've stayed in shape my whole life and my old stuff still fits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt

DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Every single piece of clothing you own was marketed to your “lifestyle”. Whatever lifestyle that may be, in this case, outdoorsman. You may believe I’m buying outdoor gear for when I go outdoors, which is true, but there are way way cheaper products available than most popular brands out there. Hell  JC Penny makes warm jackets that work in cold or wet weather. I doubt you buy JC Penny for your camping trip. Just because you’re oblivious to the marketing angle doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or doesn’t work. 

I'm just fucking lost. Are y'all saying that there is no difference in a $69 jacket at JC Penney versus a Columbia jacket that is twice the price?

Are y'all saying that it doesn't make any sense to buy any clothing that isn't the cheapest available?

Are y'all saying that marketing exists?

What. the. fuck. are you people saying? 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Celery Man

Celery Man 21078

Posted
Posted

Marketing and branding is part of why almost anyone buys anything and almost nobody who thinks they are immune to advertising actually is. People buy gear that is way overspec’d for how they use it most or even all of the time, often partly because it gives them feelings to think of themselves as the kind of person who lives the advertised lifestyle and has the advertised needs. But a fucking durable puff jacket that provides good warmth and folds into the size of a wallet is incredibly useful even when not mountain climbing, and if you aren’t a broke dick “over paying” for the brand that is known to be high quality is a reasonable choice versus spending time doing research or wasting time buying shit that might be low quality and either fail to do the thing or soon need to be purchased again. And at some points in your life, a little Patagonia rectangle or the right Walmart hoodie may be part of the key that gets you into some good pussy. Allsups burrito will not get you that, but it will slam. Every single time.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Samson's Wig

Samson's Wig 3225

Posted
Posted

We're saying anyone who thinks they aren't susceptible to marketing is fucking delusional or in serious denial.  This isn't complicated.

The insistence of "I only buy based on quality" is complete bullshit.  It's exactly what marketers for luxury brands have trained you to think, which is what makes this funny.  "You're self reliant, an outdoorsman, you're smarter than other people, and you know quality when you see it.  You care about the Earth and your community more than your own selfish interests.  You can't be fooled."  

The only confusing thing on this thread is the really odd flex coming from those who can't accept the fact they pay extra not just for quality, but to send a message to others. I guess that's difficult to accept for some.  A simple example: LL Bean has a lightweight pack-away jacket that is every bit as high quality as the Patagonia nano puff, except it costs $129 instead of $229.  Lands End has one for $118.  There are tons of other examples.  You're paying that extra $100+ for the brand.  Patagonia has sold you a message that resonates better with you than what others are pushing.  If quality were the true driving factor in the decision, the Patagonia jacket makes no fucking sense whatsoever. 

Patagonia has masterfully utilized "demarketing", which ties in the "reduce, repair, reuse, recycle" concepts.  It's little more than a form of greenwashing.  Recall the "Don't Buy This Jacket" campaign?  This resonated with lots of folks.  It also increased their sales significantly.  They preach this stuff because it makes certain people buy more of their products, if it didn't they wouldn't push it.  It's no different than the mythology built around Chouinard (which he very carefully nurtures - what a kind and gentle billionaire he is), a narrative they are continuing to push with the story that started this thread. Greenwashing fucking works, and there are a handful on this thread that are clearly very susceptible to it - susceptible enough to pay way more for a jacket and still think they only buy it for the quality.

Wear whatever the fuck you want, but acting like you are above marketing while walking around in an overpriced branded fleece or puff jacket is hilarious. 


 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19375

Posted
  • Author
Posted
21 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

 And at some points in your life, a little Patagonia rectangle or the right Walmart hoodie may be part of the key that gets you into some good pussy

all i'm seeing is a lot of inefficiency in this business process, where the go-to-market solution should be an option to purchase the pussy directly. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HornOnTheBayou

HornOnTheBayou 9057

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

all i'm seeing is a lot of inefficiency in this business process, where the go-to-market solution should be an option to purchase the pussy directly. 

I believe that the business process you are describing has been around for a long time. In fact, you could say it is the world's oldest business process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt

DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Samson's Wig said:

We're saying anyone who thinks they aren't susceptible to marketing is fucking delusional or in serious denial.  This isn't complicated.

The insistence of "I only buy based on quality" is complete bullshit.  It's exactly what marketers for luxury brands have trained you to think, which is what makes this funny.  "You're self reliant, an outdoorsman, you're smarter than other people, and you know quality when you see it.  You care about the Earth and your community more than your own selfish interests.  You can't be fooled."  

The only confusing thing on this thread is the really odd flex coming from those who can't accept the fact they pay extra not just for quality, but to send a message to others. I guess that's difficult to accept for some.  A simple example: LL Bean has a lightweight pack-away jacket that is every bit as high quality as the Patagonia nano puff, except it costs $129 instead of $229.  Lands End has one for $118.  There are tons of other examples.  You're paying that extra $100+ for the brand.  Patagonia has sold you a message that resonates better with you than what others are pushing.  If quality were the true driving factor in the decision, the Patagonia jacket makes no fucking sense whatsoever. 

Patagonia has masterfully utilized "demarketing", which ties in the "reduce, repair, reuse, recycle" concepts.  It's little more than a form of greenwashing.  Recall the "Don't Buy This Jacket" campaign?  This resonated with lots of folks.  It also increased their sales significantly.  They preach this stuff because it makes certain people buy more of their products, if it didn't they wouldn't push it.  It's no different than the mythology built around Chouinard (which he very carefully nurtures - what a kind and gentle billionaire he is), a narrative they are continuing to push with the story that started this thread. Greenwashing fucking works, and there are a handful on this thread that are clearly very susceptible to it - susceptible enough to pay way more for a jacket and still think they only buy it for the quality.

Wear whatever the fuck you want, but acting like you are above marketing while walking around in an overpriced branded fleece or puff jacket is hilarious. 

I buy gear that works for me, and am willing to pay a premium for better gear. I also make conscious decisions not to buy certain high-end brands (I'm looking at you Simms) if my experience with their gear and/or customer service didn't justify the additional costs. Suggesting that all outdoor clothing is the same and therefore the only factor you should consider is cost is completely wrong, but really this is what I want to talk about...

Quote

And yes, if you wear Patagonia it says something about you whether you like it or not.  Any clothing that puts its label forward is going to send a message to others and it will almost always be negative except to other douches wearing the same brand.  I've tried, over the years, to never buy clothes with visible labels.  It's a pathetic thing to do in general, with extreme examples being Euro-dude wearing Gucci/Prada/whatever labels.  Nonetheless, I've got a Patagonia fleece that I enjoy in Texas winters, but I'm fully aware that I look like a complete douchebag when I wear it. I just don't care. The puff jackets are like a bright shining beacon announcing the arrival of an insufferable cunt, but they work really damn well.  I haven't been able to pull that trigger, but I understand why some do.  They're well made.

I'd suggest you take a minute (or maybe a couple of therapy sessions) to try and better understand what compels you to form such strong opinions about people based on what they choose to wear. I'm not a shrink, but it might be the case you lack self-esteem and attribute self-worth to such asinine habits. That's not healthy, and hopefully something a professional can work with you on so that aren't so self-conscious of yourself and judgmental of others.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

They are also atypical. 

I think this is the disconnect.  Around here, people use the gear they buy for its intended purpose the majority of the time.  People camp, hike, ski, fish all over this state and good gear makes that much more enjoyable.  Do I need a Gore-Tex shell and Gore-Tex pants to ski?  Nope.  But do they make it much more enjoyable because they wick away the sweat and I never get wet?  You bet.  Same can be said for all of my other gear.  It performs a specific thing that I want from it and I'm willing to pay for that.

We aren't larpers (although I'm sure there are some who are, the vast majority are not).

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Every single piece of clothing you own was marketed to your “lifestyle”. Whatever lifestyle that may be, in this case, outdoorsman. You may believe I’m buying outdoor gear for when I go outdoors, which is true, but there are way way cheaper products available than most popular brands out there. Hell  JC Penny makes warm jackets that work in cold or wet weather. I doubt you buy JC Penny for your camping trip. Just because you’re oblivious to the marketing angle doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or doesn’t work. 

Show me a cheap ski jacket that will keep you warm and dry like a Gore Tex jacket will.  You can't.  It's impossible because cheap jackets don't have Gore Tex and they don't let the moisture escape.  You end up sweaty and wet, which turns into wet and cold real fast.  Same for ski pants.  Do they work?  I dunno, if you're miserable skiing is it worth the $200 you saved on your jacket?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BabaYaga

BabaYaga 15536

Posted
Posted
Just now, Chewbacca said:

I think this is the disconnect.  Around here, people use the gear they buy for its intended purpose the majority of the time.  People camp, hike, ski, fish all over this state and good gear makes that much more enjoyable.  Do I need a Gore-Tex shell and Gore-Tex pants to ski?  Nope.  But do they make it much more enjoyable because they wick away the sweat and I never get wet?  You bet.  Same can be said for all of my other gear.  It performs a specific thing that I want from it and I'm willing to pay for that.

We aren't larpers (although I'm sure there are some who are, the vast majority are not).

Agreed.  I'm not casting shade at anyone here.  As I've gotten older, comfort and convenience are a priority.  That means staying dry and warm and I'm willing to pay a little more to stay out a little longer, especially my feet - decent footwear is a line in the sand I won't cross.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chewbacca

Chewbacca 7827

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Bevo said:

How about if you use women's underwear for its intended purpose? Is that a lifestyle choice?

 

 

Anyway, I'm just having fun. I did look in my closet and I have a Descente ski jacket and some Fjallraven pants for when I went to Alaska and Iceland in the winter. I think most of my ski gear is Spyder, Black Crowe skis and not sure of my boots. Generally, I'm pretty value conscious and will see stuff I like in the store and then purchase off-season at Evo, Backcountry, The House or on one of the other discount online places. But, earlier I was only half kidding when I said I still have 1987 Jams shorts, Vuarnets, and sorority t-shirts. I just don't purchase a lot since I've stayed in shape my whole life and my old stuff still fits.

So you do have quality stuff, you just didn't pay full price for most of it.  That's a very different conversation than the one we're having in here.  I think I still have my white frame Vuarnets around somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...