In my past dealings (official) with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, storage, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR. What/how this is being \"sliced & diced\" with current legislation is something that one should take the time do some real research to confirm before bashing. I\'d expect that Mr. Buff has already done so ... much more than any of us.
I suppose a complaint could be filed with the FTC to initiate an investigation if someone has sufficient legal cause / evidence against Mr. Buff.
BTW ... I\'m Jonesin\' for the VBM with two batteries on order just like everyone else.
In my past dealings (official) with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, storage, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR. What/how this is being \"sliced & diced\" with current legislation is something that one should take the time do some real research to confirm before bashing. I\'d expect that Mr. Buff has already done so much more than any of us.
I suppose a complaint could be filed with the FTC to initiate an investigation if someone has sufficient legal cause / evidence against Mr. Buff.
BTW ... I\'m Jonesin\' for the VBM with two batteries on order just like everyone else.
In my past dealings (official) with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, storage, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR. What/how this is being \"sliced & diced\" with current legislation is something that one should take the time do some real research to confirm before bashing. I\'d expect that Mr. Buff has already done so much more than any of us.
I suppose a complaint could be filed with the FTC to initiate an investigation if someone has sufficient legal cause / evidence against Mr. Buff.
In my past dealings (official) with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, storage, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR. What/how this is being \"sliced & diced\" with current legislation is something that one should take the time do some real research to confirm before bashing. I\'d expect that Mr. Buff has already done so much more than any of us.
I suppose a complaint could be filed with the FTC to initiate an investigation if someone has sufficient tangible evidence against Mr. Buff.
In my past dealings (official) with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, storage, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR. What/how this is being \"sliced & diced\" with current legislation is something that one should take the time do some real research to confirm before bashing. I\'d expect that Mr. Buff has already done so much more than any of us.
In past dealings with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR.
In past dealings with the federal gov\'t purchasing, the requirement to escape the penalty for import in contract bid consideration was that at least $1 more was spent on assembly/mfr, etc. stateside than was spent elsewhere, i.e $50 import/$51 stateside meant qualification as a U.S. based product for bid consideration purposes. This is a very loose explanation and I\'m not current on the FAR rules, but it probably is pretty close to the situation.
After all, do you really think \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise has no fat in it? The FTC simply set rules that each serving had to be less than .5 grams of fat (or something like that). Make the serving size small enough ... VOILA ... \"Fat Free\" Mayonnaise gets put on the label, even though it still has plenty of fat in it.
Made In USA ... I\'m guessing very similar concepts in today\'s realm.
If Mr. Buff\'s U.S. based company (Tennessee) is compliant with USA rules about \"Made In USA\" (or following the premise of the FAR in the case of non-specific guidance elsewhere), then he shouldn\'t be bashed for it. Rather yell at the congressmen that pass the laws for the FTC, FAR, etc. He didn\'t make the rules ... only playing by them. I\'m guessing he\'s not the only USA mfr playing by the same rules ... ... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did.
By the time you put the cost in for engineering design, R&D, assembly personnel, benefits, facility overhead, insurance and a whole lot more ... the cost of the components easily becomes less than 50% of the cost to MFR.
Time do do some real research to confirm.
Dec 29, 2010 at 02:16 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #9169227 « Vagabond Mini Lithium: Made in USA? »
... and I\'ll bet he didn\'t even lobby congress to make the rules that way, but I\'m sure other USA \"BIG BOYS\" likely did. It\'s always ironic how investers and consumers love it when \"Wall Street\" does well, but then cry foul when they learn how it\'s being done.