Re: Leupold bashing: is it trendy?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Terry Cross</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Most certainly it is a legal issue. Also a marketing and reputation issue.
How do you define "made". Assembly or actual manufacture?</div></div>
Happily, the FTC has specified the legal definition applicable here. Two criteria apply:
Assembly and us based components comprise at least 75% of the cost of the good and second that the final transformation of the product is done in the united states.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
If a majority of components and/or sub-assemblies originate out of country (too much foreign content)then at what point do you cross the line to state that they are made in Oregon.
</div></div>
See above. If its made in the USA, logic would dictate it would have to have then been assembled in the United States somewhere.
Given that Leupold has a factory in Beaverton Oregon which has been the primary assembly location for 3 decades, I think its a pretty good bet if the product is from Leupold and qualifies under the FTC two-part test as Made in USA, it would also be deemed to have been made in Oregon.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Your glass statement is out of bounds as Leupold has never been able to acquire domestic glass in the volume and quality needed to sustain their operations. At one point they did qualify to place "made in USA" on their products and packaging even with imported glass.
</div></div>
It is ironic that someone arguing in a forum thread is telling someone else, also arguing in a forum thread, that thier forum comment was out of bounds. I could see someone making that claim if one were to insult your mother. Or bring in some religious insult to this discussion. There are some bounds which we tend to implement through peer pressure on the basis of community acceptance.
I don't think talking about the sourcing of glass in a scope falls out of what would be reasonable in a discussion of optic manufacturer quality.
Interestingly I think BMT held your same point on this aspect of the products, when he noted "but glass is special ordered from all over the world". The key then is the value of the glass and foreign components relative to the cost of manufacture. When the glass from Japan or elsewhere combined with various cams and housings and so forth reaches a point where it no longer costs less than 1/3 of the cost of assembly in the US, the overall final product no longer qualifies under the FTC program to use that sticker.
I don't think BMT was insulting Leupold, I think he was simply explaining that there is a lot that is sourced elsewhere which is why many of the later scopes no longer qualify for that program as the cost of manufacture in china and japan has gone up relative to the pretty static assembly costs in the US.
My own two cents is that I dont think the problem really is where the glass and housing and what not are coming from. Many manufacturers are sourcing components from elsewhere. Do you know what country is the number 1 buyer of high grade CNC tooling from Germany and Japan? Its China.
They aren't using 5 millionths capable multi-axis CNCs for your kid's cabbage patch dolls.
Most manufacturers out there are in a position where they <span style="font-style: italic">have</span> to globalize the supply chain to remain reasonably competitive. Some still assemble here for greatest control and skilled labor pool, some have leveraged the MUCH lower cost labor forces of the Philippines or elsewhere. The trade off, of course, being additional introduced risk to your intellectual property and continuity of supply, volatility in your cost of goods sold, as well as a risk of increased service and QC expense.
I think Leupold's drop in quality has more to do with a determination to limit R&D spending, maximize production on existing proven designs, as well as a failure to invigorate the quality control process. When you combine that with awful warranties for their LE and military channel products, you end up with the frustration you see in this thread.
Does that mean that Leupold sucks as a whole? I don't think so. As with any spending. Know your options. Know why you are selecting a certain product or other. Know what you are willing to spend. And make your choice.
I know my choice is going elsewhere for the next little while.
