Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ajpathecreature OP t1_j8a6cl7 wrote

Reply to comment by wierd_husky in Patagonia products - safe bet or stay clear? by ajpathecreature

Well you see now I don’t get something, how do they grow as a brand if they donate 100% revenue? Don’t get me wrong that is pretty amazing, they must be one in a handful, but how does that work

−6

wierd_husky t1_j8a8btb wrote

100% of profit is different than 100% revenue. The owner donated the company to a trust and so all that profit that the company makes goes to the trust, and the trust is set up so that it’ll automatically pay out climate charities and stuff like that.

Edit: here’s the explanation in their words https://www.patagonia.com/ownership/

49

jloganr t1_j8afdey wrote

hmm.. i did not know this. I was all in on Arcteryx before. I'll keep this in mind for my next purchase.

12

phowntabir t1_j8e7s3d wrote

Hasn’t Arcteryx been sold off to Chinese investors? They’re not usually paragons of sustainability.

2

jloganr t1_j8epcp4 wrote

True, but all the stuff that I do have was from before. And they're still maintaining their repair obligations.

I am talking about any new stuff that I have to buy.

1

ajpathecreature OP t1_j8ab3j7 wrote

Thanks! This helps me even more to make up my mind! Thanks again for your time replying my post.

8

complywood t1_j8blgxr wrote

I hate to be the downer about the whole trust thing, but… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cu6EbELZ6I

−4

_2Silencio2_ t1_j8bzykn wrote

He will avoid taxes, but he also could’ve IPO’d Patagonia or sold the company to the highest bidder if he cared about money and nothing else. What other for-profit companies are set up like this? Still pretty cool that it’s guaranteed left over money not used to run the company and R&D goes towards helping the environment. Adam Ruins Everything is a great show, but I don’t get the critique this time. The reality is 99% of companies would be much worse to give your money to compared to Patagonia.

24

wierd_husky t1_j8borol wrote

Yeah, I heard he evaded a ton of taxes by doing this, that’s why I specifically mention the company being good and little about him other than the donation itself. Kind of sucks that he did the good thing for the wrong reasons but it was still probably a good thing, and will probably end up doing quite a bit of good, definitely still better than all those other companies that evade taxes and then continue to pillage the environment.

4

thegroundhurts t1_j8fo51n wrote

He did avoid taxes by restructuring the company like that, but there's many ways he could have avoided taxes, including putting it all in a profit-making trust to his kids. There were also ways to make so much money that even after taxes, he'd still be way wealthier than he is now, like by bringing it public on the stock exchange.

Even if he was doing it only to avoid taxes (which I think he wasn't), this was the absolute best way to make sure Patagonia continues to be used for good. Tax-free status is given to most non-profit organizations and to most money that's donated to non-profits, and for a good reason. It encourages people to do good things for society, rather than to hoard profits.

Pretending that this is some evil tax avoidance scheme is just propaganda from corporations that don't want to be called out on their continued greed, and their own tax avoidance. They're afraid that if enough people realize what a good thing Chouinard did, then society will draw attention to the bad things they do.

And, since OP asked, their warranty really is that great, too. They'll replace or repair anything, no matter how long you've had it, and for virtually any reason, if you think there's something wrong with it. That said, their stuff is really high quality, so I know of almost no one that's ever had to legitimately use the warranty.

2