Brand/company Q's...Is Notch owned by Sherrill? What brands are worth/not-worth buying from?

Hosocat said:
Not to beat a dead horse, but one thing that bugs me about notch is their seeming lack of "contribution to the profession". There's probably a better word for it, but I mean what is it they contribute to the profession in which they sell their goods. The latest example I've noticed is with rope. If you go to Samson or Yale you will find tons of info on splicing their products. But go to notch website and there is no info on splicing. All those videos and research on splicing cost Samson and Yale lots of money, but it helps the people who buy their products. Yet there is nothing from notch. Notch, at least up to now, seems less willing to spend money supporting the people who buy their products.

I'm a realist and greedy. If notch products are say half the price of others, but of comparable quality, then the greed in me will likely buy notch. But notch often prices their products at or only slightly below their competitors. When the notch product is priced close to manufacturers who contribute more education and support to the industry, then I lean toward buying from the companies who seem to be in it for the long term.
Click to expand...
The bigshot, triple thimble and bigshot trigger are all notch (or it's predecessors) ideas/ products. I'm assuming the jet step was an original idea worked on in conjunction with harken, and id hazard a guess the rook/ hydra was done similarly

Id say that those were all meaningful contributions
 
theatertech87 said:
The bigshot, triple thimble and bigshot trigger are all notch (or it's predecessors) ideas/ products. I'm assuming the jet step was an original idea worked on in conjunction with harken, and id hazard a guess the rook/ hydra was done similarly

Id say that those were all meaningful contributions
Click to expand...
@Hosocat wasn't speaking in-terms of whether "they" have brought things to market, rather he was illustrating that real companies like Yale put out info like in my signature, or Samson's splicing tutorials library. Sherrill isn't doing that because that's not the point of their operation the point is to maximize profit EVEN IF it means selling less units (which is worse for the industry -- for instance if they'd make 5% less by selling 3X as many Safeblocks by reducing it to a fair price, but were only getting 2.95X the total profit by doing so, I've zero doubt they'd keep it at the inflated price even though it means a great tool will see far less use (ie an objective disservice to the industry)

Actually @Hosocat I'd take it a step further, not only do they not contribute but with examples as-above they actively stifle things- they "took over" the whole "ring-based rigging" revolution from dave driver and in the better part of a decade they've done jack-shit to advance it and have kept prices at gouging-levels and will until they no longer can (IE once enough people are getting wise to it and instead paying $75 for a pair of superior, fatter Elevation Canada rings and just making their own, have a feeling most aren't aware just how easy it is to splice TEC, the up-charging they ask because they provided&spliced some TEC are just insane and essentially "added to" the hardware (IE my 5' x-sling has an xl ring(70), two lrg (30X2=60, running total 130), but retails for $45 more....that's the cordage&splicing fee, just totally trying to maximize everything they can which has always confused me because by just doing some 'community good' and incurring some small fee for doing so should create a bigger return in sales, people *want* to shop places/brands they like hell I'd choose Samson over Yale on a comparable-product solely because Samson put out such an incredible splicing-library and I splice a lot, I dunno I mean even reading their magazine the way they phrase things it lacks any feelings of seriousness, I guess "that's retail" in a way but it is a spectrum and "the walmart model" is 1 extreme of the spectrum and sherrill seems to be taking a lot from their model (moreso in product-grabbing&re-posturing than in "everyday low pricing" and a high-volume/low per-item ROI, wouldn't mind them doing the walmart thing where they position Notch in-between Petzl & DMM like it's a private entity (so misleading!) IF it was accompanied by them providing value but the rigging-rings case makes so obvious that is not their mindset, it's not "price competitive & get market share" which, ironically, would likely be more profitable long-term, but just 'maximize immediate profit" If they were the walmart model, when they took-over the x-branded Antal rings from Dave, and then immediately introduced comparable Notch rings right beside it but for $10 less, that's the type of move where they could've easily done $20 less and still made bank but chose not to. I know not everybody "shops their conscience" but I can tell you I wouldn't give them a cent unless&until I'm ready for another Safebloc, IF I have to go through them I would because I'd have no choice and that unit is just great but I wouldn't buy anything from them if there were comparable alternatives available which there usually is.
 
Dude, you need to call them and have a chat about your concerns/beefs. You might learn a few things about how gear production and distribution works.
 
I think eyeheart has a good point about the price notch charges for their rings. Considering that they didn't develop the ring concept and they are probably subbing the manufacturing to some sweat shop in china, the cost to manufacture should be much lower to notch than it is for other companies. On the surface it would seem notch is taking advantage of the customer and charging a price that provides them much more than what most would consider a fair profit. Same thing could be said for their other equipment, like biners, saddles, etc. If they are going to use factories who pay their workers pennies on the dollar compared to companies who manufacture in the US, France, Wales, or other countries, then they should pass more of those savings on to the consumer. I have some notch products and have no complaints, but the prices were just a little lower than other established companies. Notch should pass along more of the savings to the consumer if they want to win the loyalty of consumers.
 
Hosocat said:
I think eyeheart has a good point about the price notch charges for their rings. Considering that they didn't develop the ring concept and they are probably subbing the manufacturing to some sweat shop in china, the cost to manufacture should be much lower to notch than it is for other companies. On the surface it would seem notch is taking advantage of the customer and charging a price that provides them much more than what most would consider a fair profit. Same thing could be said for their other equipment, like biners, saddles, etc. If they are going to use factories who pay their workers pennies on the dollar compared to companies who manufacture in the US, France, Wales, or other countries, then they should pass more of those savings on to the consumer. I have some notch products and have no complaints, but the prices were just a little lower than other established companies. Notch should pass along more of the savings to the consumer if they want to win the loyalty of consumers.
Click to expand...
I'd be willing to bet there is a substantial licensing fee to antal or whoever owns the patent on those rings... Just because we use it differently in the arb world doesn't mean it isn't already someone else's intellectual property... Sherrill could patent the slings and their arb use I suppose, but not the rings themselves
 
Hosocat said:
I think eyeheart has a good point about the price notch charges for their rings. Considering that they didn't develop the ring concept and they are probably subbing the manufacturing to some sweat shop in china, the cost to manufacture should be much lower to notch than it is for other companies. On the surface it would seem notch is taking advantage of the customer and charging a price that provides them much more than what most would consider a fair profit. Same thing could be said for their other equipment, like biners, saddles, etc. If they are going to use factories who pay their workers pennies on the dollar compared to companies who manufacture in the US, France, Wales, or other countries, then they should pass more of those savings on to the consumer. I have some notch products and have no complaints, but the prices were just a little lower than other established companies. Notch should pass along more of the savings to the consumer if they want to win the loyalty of consumers.
Click to expand...
I can't vouch for any of their other gear but I can definitely say that the Notch chainsaw and climbing trousers are NOT made using sweatshop labour. We (Clogger) produce them in New Zealand for Notch (to their specifications and design I will add). All our staff are paid a minimum of $18/hour (most are on more), get 4 weeks paid vacation a year along with 15 days paid sick leave per year. Our facility is climate controlled for comfortable working conditions year round.
We are in lockdown from Covid19 at the moment and the factory has been temporarily shut down. The owners (amazing people by the way) are making sure that we all still get paid, even though all 50+ staff are sitting at home with literally nothing productive that we can do.
If that is your definition of a sweatshop then please tell me what a good workplace looks like...
 
Last edited:
Hosocat said:
Thanks, peetle I was not aware of that. It would be interesting to see where all the notch products are manufactured. I assumed it was china.
Click to expand...

It is a pretty common misconception! White label manufacturing (producing goods for other brands) is something that nearly all manufacturers would do to some extent. A lot of the time it provides enough volume going through the factory that you are able to get better machinery and therefore produce your own product range more effectively and with better quality.
All major brands will have a section of their range they produce themselves and the rest they will outsource to people who are experts in the fields required and who have the tooling and equipment required to make the stuff - Stihl for instance makes power equipment. I very much doubt they make any of their own accessory range and they would be mad to do so. Their expertise is in making engines and other hardware, not designing helmets, clothing, axes and other stuff.

The issue of copying products and designs - i dont know too much about that other than what we have to contend with in our own sphere. Ain't nobody is going to be copying us as we custom design a lot of our own fabrics including our chainsaw protective fabric and they are made for us and nobody else. Also we are always tweaking the design and the makeup of the fabrics. By the time someone went to the hassle of copying our stuff and getting it made cheaply somewhere we would likely have already improved the design and they would be stuck with an outdated product (it has happened before!!!)

Innovate or die!
 
I was under the impression that notch sources out all of their branded equipment. They are in the retail business, not manufacturing. I have heard edelrid mentioned in association as well as Harken for thier rigging rings and safebloc. Happy to hear another quality name in the industry in Clogger.

Cheers
 
RyTheTreeGuy said:
I was under the impression that notch sources out all of their branded equipment. They are in the retail business, not manufacturing. I have heard edelrid mentioned in association as well as Harken for thier rigging rings and safebloc. Happy to hear another quality name in the industry in Clogger.

Cheers
Click to expand...

You would be correct.
When it is a critical/rated piece of PPE/equipment like the rings you mention, chainsaw trousers or harnesses or whatever, the amount of hoops you have to jump through to get certification are crazy.

Not saying they are perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but Notch have a brand to build which they appear to be basing around lower to mid range equipment that reliably gets the job done without all the bells and whistles of higher end products. If they got a dud batch of gear from a disreputable supplier and a customer was badly hurt or killed, their brand is potentially gone over night. They literally can't afford to get stuff made for them that doesn't do what it says on the outside of the box.
 
Back on form maybe(?), what I'd like to see going forward is any US/ Canadian/ etc. makers of tree climbing gear, PPE, etc. get their approvals before selling said gear - and the approvals I'm thinking of are the European ones - these guys have their poop together way more that US/ Canada/ Australia/ etc., just 'cuz the EEC made them do it, standard like. If you go to Honey Brothers or Freeworker sites, they have the regulatory part of the product descriptions as standard parts of their webpages. Ropes, harnesses or whatever. Wesspur is pretty good at this too. Personally I don't care if say CSA has a standard, but if it's got a EEC standard approval it's good enough for me (some local HSE regulations will allow other standards/ approvals). But there are some jurisdictions (in Canada, BC comes to mind), that have their own faller PPE standards believing they are the center of some universe or something - if you meet an EEC standard you should be good to go. Sigh. But I know this is a pipe dream.
(An example is Clogger who must have had to stand on their heads getting all the testing, approvals and stickers and tags and labels for each petty safety jurisdiction they want to sell into. Silly to have to have this in this day and age.)
This would in my opinion make safety better and make it esaier for manufacturers of gear too. My 2 centz for this afternoon.
Cheers
 
ghostice said:
Back on form maybe(?), what I'd like to see going forward is any US/ Canadian/ etc. makers of tree climbing gear, PPE, etc. get their approvals before selling said gear - and the approvals I'm thinking of are the European ones - these guys have their poop together way more that US/ Canada/ Australia/ etc., just 'cuz the EEC made them do it, standard like. If you go to Honey Brothers or Freeworker sites, they have the regulatory part of the product descriptions as standard parts of their webpages. Ropes, harnesses or whatever. Wesspur is pretty good at this too. Personally I don't care if say CSA has a standard, but if it's got a EEC standard approval it's good enough for me (some local HSE regulations will allow other standards/ approvals). But there are some jurisdictions (in Canada, BC comes to mind), that have their own faller PPE standards believing they are the center of some universe or something - if you meet an EEC standard you should be good to go. Sigh. But I know this is a pipe dream.
(An example is Clogger who must have had to stand on their heads getting all the testing, approvals and stickers and tags and labels for each petty safety jurisdiction they want to sell into. Silly to have to have this in this day and age.)
This would in my opinion make safety better and make it esaier for manufacturers of gear too. My 2 centz for this afternoon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
This would make sense, except for the fact that most of the standards are piecemeal at best... Look how long it took Europe to even allow using a rope wrench, or the issues with the Akimbo/runner/unicender that I doubt are ever going to be resolved because there is no relevant standard to test them to... Even the zigzag which has ce stamps falls partly into that category of needing multiple ce numbers that only sort of cover it's function
 
ghostice said:
Back on form maybe(?), what I'd like to see going forward is any US/ Canadian/ etc. makers of tree climbing gear, PPE, etc. get their approvals before selling said gear - and the approvals I'm thinking of are the European ones - these guys have their poop together way more that US/ Canada/ Australia/ etc., just 'cuz the EEC made them do it, standard like. If you go to Honey Brothers or Freeworker sites, they have the regulatory part of the product descriptions as standard parts of their webpages. Ropes, harnesses or whatever. Wesspur is pretty good at this too. Personally I don't care if say CSA has a standard, but if it's got a EEC standard approval it's good enough for me (some local HSE regulations will allow other standards/ approvals). But there are some jurisdictions (in Canada, BC comes to mind), that have their own faller PPE standards believing they are the center of some universe or something - if you meet an EEC standard you should be good to go. Sigh. But I know this is a pipe dream.
(An example is Clogger who must have had to stand on their heads getting all the testing, approvals and stickers and tags and labels for each petty safety jurisdiction they want to sell into. Silly to have to have this in this day and age.)
This would in my opinion make safety better and make it esaier for manufacturers of gear too. My 2 centz for this afternoon.
Cheers
Click to expand...
And clogger ist still not CE certified...
Also, I agree with @theatertech87 our regulations are pretty messy at times, the rope wrench being the prime example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom