Well sorry Fozzy - check some of my posts because I have spoken honestly about quality. We sell numerous brands which i feel have either bland designs or poor quality but do so because the market demands it. Any customer who has spoken to me will know I tell them EXACTLY my view on a product if they ask me. I have had many opportunities to sell a product which I knew wasn't right for a customer and advised them to purchase it elsewhere because of price (often with US customers) and availability. You can't say I won't say that when my site does exactly that!
Yesterday I was approached by a gi manufacturer asking us to become exclusive dealers for their products in the UK, Ireland and Italy (where our outlets are).
Not sure how you make out that we are selling BGG goods. We haven't touched BGG since probably February when we sold the last of our stock. Truth be told, we could sell a ton of BGG and make a decent profit but choose not to because of our belief in Ed Clay and Gameness. Other dealers in the UK have happily sold BGG knowing the situation. Maybe I am naive in putting some eithics into the business but I would rather feel good about the products I stock and promote.
MY single point about this thread is that (as supported by GSoares, Terrier and Soid) when people mention NoGi, they are pounced on as being illegitimate, fake, poor quality, etc. As has been said, NoGi don't post on forums (obviously they are wiser than me there!) so no-one has stood their side. I have simply stood up and said that the quality is good, the designs, excellent.
Just look at the situation in the USA with BadBoy. Some company in the US holds the rights to the name in the USA and threatens Badboy if they sell in the USA.
Basically until the owner says 'Yes, I deliberately took the name' or I see proof to that, I will keep an open mind. My problem is that others seem not to keep an open mind and base viewpoints on what they hear. The negativity that seems to be being projected is one sided. Look at the recent problems with this kind of situation Gameness vs BGG; Machado Bros vs Machado Kimono; BadBoy Brazil vs BadBoy USA. In the first example, the Clays have spent thousands of dollars defending their right to the name but BGG still exist; in the second, customers in the USA find it almost impossible to get hold of BadBoy fightwear, in the third example, Mkimono/Machado couldn't use their own FAMILY name to sell a kimono that is recognised as being one of the best out there plus faced the threat of legal action! Who were the losers? The consumer ultimately and thereby the companies. Did Badboy USA gain anything? No. Did Gameness profit from all the legal action - no. Did the Machado's benefit from Luciana Machado not being able to call her kimono Machado? NO.
Would Chris Brennan benefit from NoGi Brazil not being NoGi Brazil? I don't really see how.