Opinion column from the Scotsman: "Kilt police should stop pleating about shops"

[Mike1]

Not all of us who own "expensive" kilts are "wealthy" either. In my own case, I have saved for my kilts; sure, I don't get the "instant gratification" factor, but as my frugal Scots grandmother always taught me, "good things come to those who wait" and "buy the best so you won't have keep replacing it."

C'mon Todd, when it comes to wealth, we know you're rolling in it.

I agree with what you are saying, but I think that we also might point out that all of the items on our 'Want List' end up being prioritized, as well. There's nothing wrong with a $50 kilt, if that is what you want to wear. Nothing at all. And if you prefer a kilt of a higher quality, then you have to prioritize that desire. If the kilt means that much to you, then you won't spend the cash for that collectible that just popped up for sale, or that new video game you've been wanting, etc.

Using the figures supplied by the U.S. Census, I earn a slightly below-average income. I live in a five year-old home, drive a five year-old vehicle, spent the last eleven years as a single parent and still have the funds to visit Scotland on a fairly regular basis. Yet I managed to save the money for a kilt that cost considerably more than $600. So the concept that only a rich person can afford a higher-quality kilt is just plain silly. It's all about priorities.

[IEScotsman]

I agree with what you are saying, but I think that we also might point out that all of the items on our 'Want List' end up being prioritized, as well. There's nothing wrong with a $50 kilt, if that is what you want to wear. Nothing at all. And if you prefer a kilt of a higher quality, then you have to prioritize that desire. If the kilt means that much to you, then you won't spend the cash for that collectible that just popped up for sale, or that new video game you've been wanting, etc.

...Yet I managed to save the money for a kilt that cost considerably more than $600. So the concept that only a rich person can afford a higher-quality kilt is just plain silly. It's all about priorities.

First of all, this is very well said. It's odd that we even have conversations where the "instant gratification factor" arises. What happened to patience and priority?

Anyway, I agree with McClef that the article failed to address the main point: truth in advertising. Where are the so-called "Scottish kilts" made? If there were tags in them stating "Made in USA" or "Made in Scotland" or "Made in Pakistan", it would do a great service to the consumers so they can make an educated choice.

[M. A. C. Newsome]

I, for one, think this Scotsman article is ridiculous. For one thing, it completely misses the main point that was made in the article from the Scottish Tartans Authority.

The STA has nothing against inexpensive kilts. In fact, in a sidebar in the article, they stated so quite plainly, and admitted that there is a place in the market for inexpensive, off-the-peg kilts. Are you going to want to wear one with your Prince Charlie jacket to a wedding? No, of course not. But if you want a kilt to play rugby in, or need a cheap kilt for your kid to wear, it might be just the thing. In fact there are a whole host of reasons why you might decide to buy an inexpensive kilt -- and unless you are a very gullible shopper, you should realize that the quality you get will be much, much less than the higher priced hand tailored kilts.

What the STA's problem is -- and this was explicitly stated in their article -- is that certain merchants are selling "kilts" imported from Asia as "authentic Highland kilts" and misleading the tourists into thinking they are purchasing a genuine made in Scotland product. And this, their main concern, was not even mentioned by the Scotsman article. Not once.

If you are going to attack the STA's position, at least attack their actual position. Or is journalism in Scotland as bad as it is here in the United States?

The STA is made up largely by members of the tartan weaving industry, it is true. And also quite a number of tartan academics. And it has quite a large individual membership, as well of interested people. And it watches out for the interests of its membership. Why shouldn't it?

Let me put it plainly. The STA is not out to promote one tartan company over another. It's membership is made up of woolen mills that compete with eachother for your business. It's looking out for the tartan industry as a whole.

And if people are led to beleive that some cheap, acryllic, made in Pakistan, machine sewn, ill fitting "kilt" is representative of tke kinds of products that the Scottish woolen mills and kilt making firms are producing, it is quite unfair to their image.

If you go back and read the original STA article again, all it is asking is that you call a spade a spade. If the kilt was made in Scotland, then label it made in Scotland. If it was made in China, then you should be required to label it as such. A lot of people who buy the cheap kilts in question are doing so as a souvenier of their time spent in Scotland. They have the right to know that the "kilt" they just bought was not made in the country and does not represent "authentic Highland" dress, despite what is claimed on the label.

Aye,
Matt

[McClef]

Excellently put Matt!

I note that the comments section on the Scotsman site has been closed after only four entries.

Could it be because they didn't like the criticism?

I once had to do a course in how to deal with newspapers when I was on the NEC of my Union. One of the things newspapers go for is conflict and it was therefore consistent that they would go for the conflict angle and ignore those areas which were not in dispute. That way they can present it as whinging sour grapes from the STA about the success of the Gold Bros type shops and the economic effects upon their members.

When my late father (an actor) advertised Heinz soups in UK TV ads, he and the lad playing his grandson were interviewed for an article by the Sunday People. By careful manipulation of the facts they managed to turn it into a story about my father stealing the lad's affections from his own grandfather.

Conflict again.

[Cawdorian]

Very well said Matt, In my opinion kilts should be plainly labeled with the type of material, the country of origin of the material and the place where it was manufactured.

Making the investment is a 13 oz or 16 oz Scottish wool kilt is just a matter of setting priorities and goals, a custom tailored wool kilt is a lifetime investment. I wear my kilts frequently to many events and want a kilt that looks good, holds the pleats and wears well. IMHO the Scottish Wool Kilt is the only way to go.

[RockyR]

I agree with everything Matt said as well.

If you'd like, draw a comparison to USAK. We offer $100 kilts (and $230 kilts) on our site. Are they Scottish? No. Are they Made in Scotland? No. Are they made of UK material? Yes. Are they mostly registered tartans? Yes (and the ones that aren't are noted). Do we claim that they're wool? No (we describe exactly what they are).

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THEM or the people who want them. They are getting a fair product for a fair price (imho). They are accurately described and we TRY not to be misleading about them on our site at all.

Notice that we don't try to say that they're "Designed in Scotland" or anything like that. We "know our place" in the kilted world and don't try to be something we're not. We have a "model comparison guide" to compare the different levels of kilts we offer. At no time do we say that a casual is an "authentic wool kilt designed in Scotland". We describe our kilts exactly as they're made.

All that being said... we're proud members of the STA and stand behind Brian's comments 100%. He knows who we are and what we offer. We've had several discussions about this topic (especially since the article came out) and he has not once insulted cheap kilts to me, as long as they are marketed as "entry level" or are otherwise labeled correctly.

When I go on vacation, I am spending my hard earned money to relax and enjoy myself and ALSO to support the economy of the place I'm visitng (yes, I actually think in those term since I'm a business owner in a small and growing business district). I want to know that I've helped support locals so that they can continue to bring joy to others down the road. If I go to a place the THE ROYAL MILE, steeped in history and culture, I want to support that culture with my money. I expect to see some "trinkets" along the way, but would like to buy "made in Scotland" products to help their economy.

If you stop looking at the "race" issue or the "cost of kilts" issue for 1 second... ask yourself this:

Why DO they label things that way? Why don't they just be honest and label things "made in pakistan"?

The answer is simple... they wouldn't sell NEARLY as many. So, is it ethical to try to trick people (b/c that's what they ARE DOING) into thinking their product is made in Scotland?

Again... there is no problem with cheap kilts... it's with the way people are mislead into thinking they are buying a product that is made in Scotland.

[Mike1]

I, for one, think this Scotsman article is ridiculous. For one thing, it completely misses the main point that was made in the article from the Scottish Tartans Authority.

Well, it's certainly not the first time The Scotsman has missed a point. They do have a certain "political slant" (for want of a more PC term) that doesn't necessarily match the name of the publication. Forum rules prevent referring to that publication by the name it's commonly known by in Scotland.

[Monkey@Arms]

From The Scotsman

Wed 14 Feb 2007

MSPs' sporran legion attacks cut-price kilts

MSPs have called for measures to protect Scottish kilts after traders in the Capital warned cheap imitations were ruining their businesses.

They were speaking at a "Question Time" style panel last night, when local members of the Federation of Small Businesses quizzed a cross-party panel of politicians. The call follows an accusation by the Tartan Authority that some Royal Mile shopkeepers were misleading tourists by selling cut-price acrylic kilts for as little as £19.99.

Pentlands MSP David McLetchie said: "There has to be fair competition. Goods are being sold on a fraudulent basis."

City councillor Donald Anderson, who will be standing for Holyrood in May, said Scottish whisky producers had successfully fought to safeguard their product. He added: "We need the same quality with regard to the Highland-wear industry."

Graeme Muir, who runs the Tartan Gift Shop on the Royal Mile, has claimed cut-price acrylic kilts are ruining his business.

But other traders said the cheap kilts were only filling a gap in the market.

http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=241142007

Best regards,

Jake

[Chef]

There is a couple of things to look at here. First on the kilts, there is definitely a market for the cheap kilts but they definitley should not be sold as the genuine article. The Tartan Authority should create a trademarked moniker that identifies the genuine article and then properly advertise it so locals a tourist alike know what to look for. The parliment should also create a labeling law to protect Scottish goods by requiring origin etc to be properly labeled and then enforce that law. Who knows they may already have one and it just isn't enforced.

Ok, but second (and back to to what I got out of the story) The Royal Mile is a dreadful mess. Certainly there are still the traditional shops selling genuine goods but most of the stores are selling tourist trash of low quality.(I am not refering to kilts at all) Unfortunately most of the traditional shops have had to bring in some of this garbage to compete. It used to be wonderful to walk along High Street and it was also a fine place to find genuine Scottish articles for yourself or for gifts but it has turned into a tourist trap. It has gotten very difficult to even see the history of the Royal Mile through all the tartan garbage for sale.

Granted I grew up in Edinburgh and like most people I liked my town the way it was, but even if you push that aside it has still gone too far.

[McClef]

There is a couple of things to look at here. First on the kilts, there is definitely a market for the cheap kilts but they definitley should not be sold as the genuine article. The Tartan Authority should create a trademarked moniker that identifies the genuine article and then properly advertise it so locals a tourist alike know what to look for. The parliment should also create a labeling law to protect Scottish goods by requiring origin etc to be properly labeled and then enforce that law. Who knows they may already have one and it just isn't enforced.

Ok, but second (and back to to what I got out of the story) The Royal Mile is a dreadful mess. Certainly there are still the traditional shops selling genuine goods but most of the stores are selling tourist trash of low quality.(I am not refering to kilts at all) Unfortunately most of the traditional shops have had to bring in some of this garbage to compete. It used to be wonderful to walk along High Street and it was also a fine place to find genuine Scottish articles for yourself or for gifts but it has turned into a tourist trap. It has gotten very difficult to even see the history of the Royal Mile through all the tartan garbage for sale.

Granted I grew up in Edinburgh and like most people I liked my town the way it was, but even if you push that aside it has still gone too far.

I think the trademarked monicker (logo) idea is a good one especially reinforced with a labelling law - this has not yet been enacted though I gather from discussions I had with retailers that the STA is interested in this. Those selling genuine Scottish articles already make sure that the labels say so VERY clearly. Even the tat shops sell some genuine articles which could possibly add to the confusion about the rest.

But it's not just the Royal Mile, there are also shops on Princes St and some of the streets that run off it. There are some articles that you can find in just about every shop (genuine kilts or no) and the prices are remarkably exactly the same!

But not ONE of them sold an "Up Yer Kilt" badge! (Only stickers, patches or fridge magnets).

I can't even see what economic benefits that an overkill of shops brings even the biggest "culprit" in that respect. Surely there should be a limit on their numbers but nobody has a high opinion of the City Council's interest in or ability to do so.

Some gems of genuine shops aren't actually on the Mile but rather in closes and wynds off it which could possibly put them at a disadvantage to begin with.