My comments are based on the report referenced in post #1 plus a familiarity with the sort of stuff businesses in difficulties (eg Frazers, Debenhams, Arcadia) usually say and also my following up of Pure Fishing's background (eg Pflueger, the supposed reel manufacturer, now exists only as a marketing name).Please do tell me more
.....That's why 'conglomerates' exist. The parent company, 'three times removed' from Hardy/Greys/Advanced Composites, has worldwide interests in all sorts of things, of which both fishing and composite are only a small part. so if one part fails it's tough but doesn't greatly impact the whole.….. Nowadays these commercial advantages do not guarantee more success, certainly not in an oversaturated marketsegment with a diminishing clientèle. I'm not surprised, but what they lose here they will make up for in other (still) growing markets. The diversity of their catalogue is their biggest asset, when a specialised brand becomes unprofitable they just throw it overboard and buy another one. I can only see one reason for them to hold on to Hardy any longer and it's not Greys, but their exclusive rights on the carbon nanotechnology. I bet they nearly went bankrupt buying that.
"Nanotech" or nano-technology is an often misused word used for all sorts of things. The common definition is anything that has at least one dimension below 100 nanometres but that certainly isn't a 'standard'.As did Loomis and Loop, but no-one can claim the nanotech marketing without paying the patentholder.
To be fair, you're lucky you got a spare section at all - G.Loomis in the USA is a whole different entity to Loomis in the EU (as far as I know they're under Shimano ownership). I once sent a rod off for a replacement tip section for a customer and it took 8 months for them to come back and say 'sorry we don't have the parts.'Most warranties are a con .... I broke the tip of my Loomis Distance caster and it cost me £135 to have it replaced "under the warranty" ?
I don't need to know anything about the tackle trade. I just needed to look up who owns what and through who. You can do that for any field of business. I don't actually care, I don't give a toss what happens to Hardy or who paid so much for what. 3M is far from being the only one who supplies filled epoxy resins and Hardy don't have to pay for and own the patent, they just buy the cans of material from 3M and use it just like other businesses in all sort of trades do.Spare me the technicalities, left those behind with the job. Thought you knew something about the tackle trade and who owns what. Come back when you know how much Hardy paid 3M for the patent.
It was actually Liphook that asked you to tell him more, but that's just me being a pedantI don't need to know anything about the tackle trade. I just needed to look up who owns what and through who. You can do that for any field of business. I don't actually care, I don't givr a toss what happens to Hardy.
In your postt you askrd to tell you ore. Which I did. I don't gice a s**t what you thinki about it6.
You're a weird guy.Gobshite is the word
Funny that you should mention Loomis. A few years ago they were considered the bees knees. I rarely if ever see them mentioned these days on the forum. Possibly the replacement costs that you mention have somthing to do with it. Ditto Thomas & Thomas.Long and short is - if you want a Loomis rod, buy it from the US and deal with them for any broken sections.