| Author |
 Topic  |
|
platys
Seriously Hooked
USA
719 Posts |
 Posted - 10/18/2006 : 11:56:51 AM
|
quote:
They are selling her "Cashmerino Aran" for $7.75, almost two full dollars more. If a customer purchases that cashmerino aran and there's no cashmere in it, at best they're getting a yarn that's 67% merino wool and 33% microfiber. At worst, they're getting 55% merino wool and 45% microfiber. For almost two dollars MORE per skein.
That's a really good point. I'd pay 7.75 for the fiber mix in Cashmerino aran, and have. I wouldn't pay 7.75 for a merino/microfibre mix, no matter how great it felt. Especially given its low yardage. For example, you can get a wool/microfibre mix here for 4.49 a ball:
http://yarnforward.com/donna.html
(The weight is DK, not Aran, so you get more yardage.)
Plus, there are a lot of yarns out there that are wool/microfibre/cashmere around that same price point. I'd rather buy one of them and actually get cashmere.
Gail
http://www.knittergail.com
http://www.islandofmisfitpatterns.com |
 |
|
|
carol940
Chatty Knitter
USA
142 Posts |
|
|
Leslie41
Chatty Knitter
223 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 2:17:33 PM
|
But the DB Merino is NOT the same yarn as the Cashmerino. My LYS has both and I chose to buy the Cashmerino (for $2 a skein more) NOT because it was labeled as having Cashmere in it, but because I liked it better. In my opinion, it was worth the extra $2 a skein.
But wouldn't you have rather paid less? And in the end, it doesn't matter whether any one knitter was willing to pay extra. What matters is that every knitter who bought that yarn was denied the chance to make an informed decision. Millions of knitters buy that yarn, and many of them might have bought it at that price. But many would also NOT have made that choice. Me, for one. I personally would have thought a wool/microfiber blend yarn costing almost $8 a skein outrageously overpriced.
And from the additional links posted by theKnitwith, It seems that my original estimation of the "worst case scenario" is in fact in effect. According to the fiber analysis, the cashmerino aran tested is approximately 57% wool and 43% acrylic. So they substituted the cashmere not with more wool, but with more cheap acrylic. And all three types of cashmerino tested from three different skeins failed utterly. It seems the Noro yarns are also mislabeled. Some cashmere there but nowhere near as much as indicated on the label.
I've looked about a bit concerning the testing of the yarn, and the person responsible for the analysis is Kenneth Langley, a Professor at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, and his specialties are (From the UMASS website) "Statistical Process Control, Design and Analysis of Experiments, Quality Engineering (Taguchi), Yarn Manufacturing, Light Microscopy, Animal Fibers, Natural Dyes, TQM".
Unless someone's forging his name and his stationery and his test results, KFI is absolutely, positively nailed on this. |
|
|
|
mokey
Permanent Resident
15302 Posts |
|
|
platys
Seriously Hooked
USA
719 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 2:34:07 PM
|
I just looked at the exhibits - it appeared that The Knit with actually paid for the analysis - its not coming from Cascade. That would seem to mean that there were two independant tests confirming no cashmere content. Did I get it right?
Gail
http://www.knittergail.com
http://www.islandofmisfitpatterns.com |
|
|
|
platys
Seriously Hooked
USA
719 Posts |
|
|
HilaryL
Gabber Extraordinaire
USA
360 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 2:53:36 PM
|
Leslie,
I agree with you. My point was only that if one liked the yarn, there was no point being upset about having USED it. How much one paid for it is another question.
I still might go pick up some of that sale cashmerino ... :)
Hilary
http://hilaryknitstoo.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
Slipped Stitch
Warming Up
USA
96 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2006 : 7:50:00 PM
|
I got this same letter today by e-mail from my LYS. I was HORRIFIED!
While I've had issues with the Debbie Bliss Cashmerinos (please, don't get me going there), I still bought quite a bit of it before I became wise to it.
I called the shop earlier tonite, Wednesdays they have late hours. I have a couple of sales receipts and a couple of garments as well as balls of yarn still not worked up. They were very gracious, and apologetic about this problem but are very serious about the recall. They said bring it all in so they can make it right.
I asked them whether this recall was not an over reaction of some kind. They told me the entire commercial sector of the yarn market has known about this problem since at least July and in some instances since late May or early June. The shop has been, their word, "consumed" by this issue since right after July 4th whem they heard about it for the first time because of what is at stake for them.
This is how the recall works. Any proof of purchase from the shop is good enough. For any sales receipt and labels to match, they issue a full credit plus 10%. Doesn't matter how long ago the yarns were purchased. (It won't be recent because they took the yarns away from sale back in the Summer; I know, I saw them doing it at the time). For purchases where I don't have the sales receipt, I only need to submit the labels and receive a credit for the lowest selling price plus 10% if my name appears on their mailing list (for me, not a problem there!). For knitting alone, I just bring in the knitting, finished or not, and they estimate the number of balls bought and issue a credit as if I had labels (though I have to sign some sort of an affidavit where I swear I bought the estimated number of balls from them). No need at all to turn in any finished knitting. Not that I think I would, after all it's my knitting, no matter how much I disliked how the yarns worked up.
I asked them how this recall came about and they told me it all started with a rumor some months ago. How I hate rumors! (Please, don't get me going there!!!!). They spent three months and slightly more than $10K trying to protect their inventory which they estimate to be worth about $20K and their business which they have been working at for more than 35 years.
Anyway, the shop says they are squarely in the middle. They know customers overpaid for these yarns. From their studies, the shop says they overpaid between 20 and 50% on the wholesale cost of similar yarns based upon approximately the same wool and acrylic content. Yet the distributor won't make good on it either to the shop or to the consumers. They said they asked the distributor to give them a certain document guaranteeing the yarns but the distributor flatout refused.
I asked about Debbie Bliss herself (I really like Debbie's patterns). The shop said Debbie is probably in the middle too because the shop understands, but might be wrong, that Debbie does not own the line of yarns marketed under her name. It seems Debbie merely gets some kind of a percentage royalty because she sold her name to some company in England. The company in England has some kind of ownership interest in KFI (so the manufacturer and the distributor are really all the same folks). The shop says they have proof of the corporate ties between KFI and the English company. The shop also said, like KL posted, that a couple weeks ago, KFI put out a letter under Debbie's name insisting the yarns have cashmere.
The shop told me they believe -- the words they used were "they believe and still want to believe" -- that Debbie is being used by KFI and that Debbie will be, unfairly, hurt by this too, just like the shops and the knitters. They have not had any direct contact with Debbie.
The shop said they have a RECALL BIBLE in the store that I was welcome to read and review when I come in. This bible has copies of all the test reports ( theirs and KFI's) as well as other documentation about this mess. Only some of these documents have been posted to the shop website. The back up for this recall also includes documentation on why the KFI test reports are not valid.
The picture I get is that an elaborate hoax has been pulled on the shops, AND KNITTERS, by KFI. And KFI is in a position where knitters canonly go after the shops and not KFI.
This is really a pity. I've been shopping at this store for quite some time. It's a small, family business which is really good at knitting (their class schedule is just awesome) and with unbelievable knitting services ( if you ever want a really good buttonhole in a cardigan, check out what this shop can do). They have an inventory that is incredible -- whatever yarn I want to use (whatever natural fibre or whatever gauge, they seem to have the very thing or a substitute and, if not they move mountains to get it); they say they have more than 600 yarns in stock and since I've seen the store many times, their color range really can't be beat.
What I want to know is why this small shop can do what is the right thing when the facts are known but KFI, which is a much bigger company, can't.
I too am very interested in just how this is going to play out over the long run.
I don't want my favorite LYS, or for that matter, any yarn shop, to go under because of a shenanigan like the wone KFI has been pulling off.
|
|
|
|
dreamin darlene
New Pal
USA
35 Posts |
|
|
platys
Seriously Hooked
USA
719 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 09:38:13 AM
|
That's a really interesting link - The Knit With did do their own testing, after all, and it matched the other results. And that when KFI did their testing, they did it with new yarn which had been produced after this came to light - plenty of time to add cashmere back in.
I certainly don't plan to trust a KFI label in the future.
Gail
http://www.knittergail.com
http://www.islandofmisfitpatterns.com |
|
|
|
Momma78239
Permanent Resident
USA
4858 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 10:27:53 AM
|
wow.
I think I'm happy that I learned to spin my own.
-WendyM[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v632/Momma78239/smallspindlepic.gif[/IMG]
And all the women that were wise hearted did spin with their hands, and brought that which they had spun, both of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine linen. Exodus 35:25 |
|
|
|
gulf knitter
Seriously Hooked
USA
737 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 1:25:26 PM
|
| Although I realize that there are bigger issues for the retailers, for me personally, it would be worse to find that a yarn I thought to be all wool contained ACRYLIC, rather than that it was missing some trace element of cashmere. For me, 12% is not enough cashmere to motivate a cashmere purchase. I did ignore the hideous microfibre content of the DB yarn to buy a few balls for punkin hats because I liked the color. It was nice to knit with and the hats wore well -- one of them has just been handed down to a third sibling. Sarah. |
|
|
|
JeffreyDeneckeJr
New Pal
3 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 2:15:49 PM
|
RECALL WITHOUT RECOLLECTION
Before applauding Knit Withs seemingly altruistic, magnanimous recall, please take a moment to consider the following facts, which Mr. James Casale conveniently seems to have forgotten:
Over the past five years, KFI sold The Knit With a grand total of 94 bags of products containing cashmere, as follows:
2002 -- 4 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran;
2003 -- 24 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran
20 bags of Debbie Bliss Baby Cashmerino
15 bags of Noro Lotus
2004 -- 26 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran
2005 -- 10 bags of Debbie Bliss Baby Cashmerino
2006 -- No products.
On average, thats less than 19 bags per year! Or, just 12 sweaters per year! Or, merely $800 in sales per year! Not per season, but per year! Any way you look at it, were not talking about a massive recall by any means.
And there was never any reason for The Knit With to recall these products in the first place. The tests that independent labs performed for KFI on samples of these products, including DNA tests and tests performed by European labs that have been approved by the Cashmere Institute, continue to confirm what KFI has been saying all along the products contain cashmere. So KFI continues to stand behind the products, even issuing its customers continuing guarantees in the form prescribed by the FTC.
So then, you may be asking, why in the world is James Casale doing this? Well, for one thing, of course, hes sure getting a lot of free publicity. But he has another motive as well.
You see, for years, KFIs sales representatives dealt with The Knit Withs founder (James Casales mother) Marge. Marge was a sweet, pleasant, and lovely lady who always treated our reps with respect. As a result, KFI and the Knit With enjoyed a mutually advantageous business relationship.
After Marges unfortunate death, however, things changed dramatically. James took over the store. By the end of 2005, KFIs sales representatives refused to continue to call on the Knit With because of James nasty and abusive behavior toward them. So, despite James direct appeal to KFIs owner, KFI decided to stop doing business with The Knit With altogether. Thats why the list above shows no KFI sales to the Knit With in 2006.
James reacted to KFIs business decision like a jilted lover looking for revenge. His plan? A smear campaign targeting KFIs products. Culminating at least so far in The Knit Withs highly publicized recall.
Who knows what hell do next. But if we were you, wed take whatever it might be with a grain of salt. Because, at least in James Casales case, Hell hath no fury like a Yarn Shop scorned.
Jeffrey J. Denecke Jr.
Manager of Operations
Knitting Fever INC.
“He has filled them with skill to do all kinds of work as craftsmen, designers, embroiderers in blue, purple and scarlet yarn and fine linen, and weavers - all of them master craftsmen and designers.” |
|
|
|
Leslie41
Chatty Knitter
223 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 3:12:38 PM
|
Before applauding Knit Withs seemingly altruistic, magnanimous recall, please take a moment to consider the following facts, which Mr. James Casale conveniently seems to have forgotten:
Over the past five years, KFI sold The Knit With a grand total of 94 bags of products containing cashmere, as follows:
2002 -- 4 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran;
2003 -- 24 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran
20 bags of Debbie Bliss Baby Cashmerino
15 bags of Noro Lotus
2004 -- 26 bags of Debbie Bliss Cashmerino Aran
2005 -- 10 bags of Debbie Bliss Baby Cashmerino
2006 -- No products.
On average, thats less than 19 bags per year! Or, just 12 sweaters per year! Or, merely $800 in sales per year! Not per season, but per year! Any way you look at it, were not talking about a massive recall by any means.
This is fallacious reasoning, Mr. Denecke. You present here what teachers of critical thinking refer to as a "red herring", in that you pursue a completely irrelevant topic in order to divert attention away from the key issue: that a professor of UMASS Dartmouth tested several balls of your cashmerino yarn of different weights and found no cashmere in any of them. The motivations of the yarn store in question are not at issue here. The veracity (or lack thereof) of the tests on your yarn performed by Profesor Langley is. And you do not offer a substantive refutation of his conclusions.
To further muddy the waters you add yet another logical fallacy: you attack the people making the charge rather than the charge itself, dragging out some personal squabble between KFI representatives and the knit with, just as previously you attempted to claim Cascade's motivation was jealousy that Ella Rae yarn was taking market share from Cascade 220. Jealousy? Who cares? Answer the FACTS of the report from the UMASS professor: that your "cashmerino" yarn contains no cashmere. It should be called "acrylerino". In addition, your Noro yarns were found to contain considerably less cashmere than advertised.
The tests that independent labs performed for KFI on samples of these products, including DNA tests and tests performed by European labs that have been approved by the Cashmere Institute, continue to confirm what KFI has been saying all along the products contain cashmere. So KFI continues to stand behind the products, even issuing its customers continuing guarantees in the form prescribed by the FTC.
Another logical fallacy. Biased sample. Any sample that KFI provided to its testing facilities cannot be trusted at this point, because KFI was in control of the sample given. This is equivalent to a restaurant critic announcing ahead of time that he is going to be eating at the reviewed establishment. No review that results can be completely trusted, because the restaurant will then put its best foot forward, knowing that a review will result. What happens when the restaurant critic arrives incognito? That's the real question.
The cashmerino samples Prof. Langley tested were RANDOM. You say yours were random but you have everything to gain by seeing to it that they are not, and KFI's obfuscation, mudslinging, and misdirection up to this point does nothing to reassure me of its motives and honesty.
My guess is that you are a very rich man. I would suggest, from the evidence provided, that some of that wealth is ill-gotten.
Shame on you.
|
|
|
|
mokey
Permanent Resident
15302 Posts |
|
|
megknits
Sustaining Member
USA
712 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 4:38:45 PM
|
You know, since KFI is headquartered in New York, perhaps this is a question for the NY Attorney General's office.
The AG, Elliot Spitzer, has been very aggressive in investigating consumer issues and he is incidentally running for governor at the moment. Any consumer or yarn store located in the state who believes they have bought a mislabeled product could ask them to investigate.
Meg
There's two sides to everything. One knitter's knit stitch is another knitter's purl. |
|
|
|
JF Casale Esq
New Pal
USA
1 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 5:40:12 PM
|
| Denecke message noted. |
|
|
|
glccafar
Seriously Hooked
825 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 8:14:05 PM
|
Interesting name up there^^^
Esq.=Esquire=Attorney.
|
|
|
|
dreamin darlene
New Pal
USA
35 Posts |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 8:39:19 PM
|
Seems to me that Knitting Fever just got nailed.
AGAIN!!!!!! Karma.
And by the hand of their own Manager of Operations. 
What interesting developments.
I wonder what could happen when a just little more of the bright glare of truth shines on this problem.
|
|
|
|
KL
Permanent Resident
6041 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2006 : 01:37:15 AM
|
Oh Boy, here we go again.
Mr. Deneke and other manufacturers, will certainly be reading this thread.
I applaud those in the the manufacturing industry, that are upfront in their identification, including Mr. Deneke in a public, cyber Forum.
Being a LYSO, and a consumer, I appreciate and understand both sides.
This is a difficult situation, at best, for both sides. I am not taking anyones side here, but I DO think we should allow the professionals [ whatever our personal opinions are of them], to handle this issue. I am speaking of the Attorneyys here-whatever your personal opinion of them may be.
On a personal note- you may want to purcase DB or not-that is a personal decision, as well it shoud be.
On a professional LYSO note,the issue becomes more personnal- do we keep it on the shelf, Do we do a disclaimer as to current stock?, Do we bow out and dump it on sale? This has far-reaching results all involved - albiet consumer, manufacturer or distributor.
We are in a state of flux, with no concrete answer.
If we have a customer interested in KFI cashmere-we will let them know there is a controversy.
Will we take it off the shelf- Not.
We are not the "End All" in this judgement, but we can explain what is going on and let the customer decide for the time being.
She is the one that rules. JMO, KL
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Knitter's Review Forums |
© 2001-2010 Knitter's Review |
|
|
|
|
Yarn Recall!
