Dupont Teflon Products - How come they are contradicting themselves? - Page 2

Scottwax · 03-22-05, 09:39

Quote:

Originally posted by wannafbody
-i wouldn't dismiss a product simply because it has Teflon in it

I will, because I don't want to reward a company for perpetuating the Teflon® myth.

87maxxima · 04-02-05, 09:16

every one is bashing this stuff but has anyone ever even used it?

termigator · 04-02-05, 10:09

Quote:

Originally posted by 87maxxima
every one is bashing this stuff but has anyone ever even used it?

Why reward a company for using deceptive marketing to advertise their product? It probably has a money back guarantee, but they're counting on most people not wanting to bother.

SilverLexus · 04-03-05, 07:47

I agree with Scott. It's very deceptive marketing.

jfelbab · 04-03-05, 08:01

All you are seeing is who is running the Dupont company. Clearly, the marketing types are running the show. The scientist who made the factual Teflon statement is probably now sweeping the floors. That's how many (most?) big business work. They tell the sap (er, consumer) whatever will help sell the product.

Teflon, to Dupont is a brand. They have spent a lot of money on brand recognition to generate brand value and they are using it. Good thing they don't make propolactics.

TOGWT · 04-03-05, 08:12

Quote: Good thing they don't make propolactics.

They could call the new brand "Slick Willy"

SilverLexus · 04-03-05, 08:15

TOGWT, that's hilarious.

"That's how many (most?) big business work. They tell the sap (er, consumer) whatever will help sell the product."

Not all big business operates this way. In the long run, lying to the customer destroys relationships and that eventually destroys profits.

Setec Astronomy · 04-03-05, 08:36

I'm trying to resist jumping into this again...but you guys are talking like DuPont is really involved in this wax. Look at the bottle, it's made by Tenneco, DuPont has just lent their name to it. In this day and age, many hallowed companies have done the same, if you think that AT&T phones are made by AT&T, that small Honeywell or GE appliances are made by those companies, look a little closer. They have licensed their good names to unknown companies who have the products made in China. (well, last time I looked, the AT&T phones were made by Philips in Mexico, but that was 5+ years ago). Or how about this off a recently purchased "Honeywell" humidifier box: "Kaz Home Environment, Southborough, MA, USA. Made in China. The Honeywell trademark is used by Kaz, Inc. under license from Honeywell Intellectual Properties, Inc."

gb387 · 04-03-05, 09:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Setec Astronomy
I'm trying to resist jumping into this again...but you guys are talking like DuPont is really involved in this wax. Look at the bottle, it's made by Tenneco, DuPont has just lent their name to it. In this day and age, many hallowed companies have done the same, if you think that AT&T phones are made by AT&T, that small Honeywell or GE appliances are made by those companies, look a little closer. They have licensed their good names to unknown companies who have the products made in China. (well, last time I looked, the AT&T phones were made by Philips in Mexico, but that was 5+ years ago). Or how about this off a recently purchased "Honeywell" humidifier box: "Kaz Home Environment, Southborough, MA, USA. Made in China. The Honeywell trademark is used by Kaz, Inc. under license from Honeywell Intellectual Properties, Inc."

Yes that is true but... There are TONS of restrictions in who/what/where/when you can use the name and all must be approved by the company that you are licensing the name from, its a ton of email/faxing/letters to get the use of the name the way they want it not to mention a ton of $$$$.

Anyway... I guess I am not using the products so I don't have to really worry about it.

foxtrapper · 04-04-05, 04:19

Quote:

Originally posted by gb387
Yes that is true but... There are TONS of restrictions in who/what/where/when you can use the name and all must be approved by the company that you are licensing the name from, its a ton of email/faxing/letters to get the use of the name the way they want it not to mention a ton of $$$$.

Not even close to true. Slick-50 is a prime example, as they used the word teflon from the very begining. DuPont sued them over it, and lost. The courts ruled that a company using an *ingredient* like teflon can say what ever they want to say about it. DuPont was prohibited from complaining about the misleading advertising, and prohibited from not selling teflon to the company making Slick-50.

If you've got a product with X ingredient, you can brag about it as loudly as you like, and to your hearts content.

Setec Astronomy · 04-04-05, 07:40

This is a little different. Tenneco has licensed the DuPont brand name (look at the bottle). If you look at it, it appears that it is made by DuPont, unless you read the small print on the lower back of the bottle. When this product was first mentioned on here, I searched it and found a press release which talked about DuPont licensing their name to Tenneco for this line of products. Maybe this was a "if you can't beat them, join them" thing.

AndyA6 · 04-04-05, 08:20

Why not try it?? Got a coupon (nope-mail in offer) from the latest Road @ Track, buy one of the products and get your $ back...