Yeah their criteria for what’s good or bad seems to be very subjective. Some brands are bad because the product is diminished while others are bad not because of the product but because of a corporate structure or supply chain decisions.
For example Pyrex is avoid because in the US it’s no loner borosilicate just tempered soda glass—this is understandable, the product is objectively worse.
Hoka is also avoid not because the product is bad but because they don’t own their factories and don’t have long term manufacturing agreements.
This site seems more of a purity test for their vision of how companies should operate as opposed to an actual products are worse list. I think we all agree that private equity is generally bad but this site is basically just bashing any company they disagree with how they’re ran. Let the quality of the products dictate the rankings not subjective shifting criteria based on corporate structures.
Yeah their criteria for what’s good or bad seems to be very subjective. Some brands are bad because the product is diminished while others are bad not because of the product but because of a corporate structure or supply chain decisions.
For example Pyrex is avoid because in the US it’s no loner borosilicate just tempered soda glass—this is understandable, the product is objectively worse.
Hoka is also avoid not because the product is bad but because they don’t own their factories and don’t have long term manufacturing agreements.
This site seems more of a purity test for their vision of how companies should operate as opposed to an actual products are worse list. I think we all agree that private equity is generally bad but this site is basically just bashing any company they disagree with how they’re ran. Let the quality of the products dictate the rankings not subjective shifting criteria based on corporate structures.