(07-27-2024, 11:37 PM)Tedolph Wrote:(07-27-2024, 11:31 PM)jesseix Wrote:(07-27-2024, 11:17 PM)Tedolph Wrote: Well, well, well........the plot thickens.
Gentlemen, as part of a capitalist system, we only have two choices when we have issues regarding ethical behavior of a manufacturer or retailer: reward them with a purchase or punish then with a boycott. It doesn't matter if it is razors (Gillette) or beer (Bud Lite). Here we have two diametrically opposed stories from two different parties. They can not both be right. The truth does not lie in the middle. One needs to be rewarded, and one needs to be punished. We (collectively) have the opportunity to judge via the samples. I hope we have the collective discipline to make a judgement, meet out a punishment and stick with it. One of these parties should no longer be in the shave related business.
As for me, I have never bought a Gillette product after the unforgivable incident, nor would I ever buy an InBev product. There are well supported vendors who's products show up in our own SOTD photo's who have very sketchy histories and, at least at one time, repulsive marketing tactics. I am baffled that anyone would reward those tactics by buying product from them even though they may be good products.
So, I hope that we as consumers can come to a verdict in this case and execute a fair and permanent justice.
So which side/story do you believe/support?
Considering the seriousness of the Claims and Counterclaims, I would like to see the rest of the evidence (reviews form everybody who got a sample) before rendering judgement. I specifically want to see if anyone can confirm or deny that this razor is made from old parts, whether the current parts are fungible with REX Ambassador or whatever the previous razor was, etc.
Having owned both a Rex and a Denali this razor does not appear to me to made from old parts at all. This is coming from someone that is returning the razor.
Clint