Would like to buy a Desoto wetsuit, but... (Page 3)

I upgraded from my old 1-piece Neosport to a Black Pearl this year and here's what I can say:

1. I'm faster in the new suit, and now that I'm used to dealing with two pieces, faster in transition too.

2. If you email Desoto, you get a pretty thorough reply very quickly and in fact you may get multiple replies if the person who answers you thinks of something else to add.  If you have any issues, Emilio himself will likely contact you directly.

3. The quality of their goods is first-rate. They care a lot about their reputation.

Everything else for me was icing. It's hard not to like Emilio's story, Cuban immigrant turned successful triathlete, successful and conscientious businessman, and family man.

I am pretty sure the comments are made innocently, and my read is that it was an explanation of the materials available on the market and their role in it.  Since Emilio is a BT member, maybe he'll speak up.

I am also pretty sure he's out there wondering about the increased web site traffic and probably increased sales!

How dare you bring politics into wetsuit discussion!!

Who, me?

(stirthepot.gif)

I agree with all of the above based on feedback from this site(and ST), and knowing these things I was surprised at the steps beyond simple product description. Another thing I'm fully aware of is that triathlon and cycling are not necessarily a cross section of society relative to political perspective, and tend to be more "earthy" in general.  Perhaps waving the proverbial Patagonia green flag is a viable strategy in cycling/tri marketing. What do I know?... Proceed with the flogging...

^^ This.

You're searching for a problem that doesn't exist dude.  And you're going to miss out on one of the best wetsuits made and the great customer service that comes with it.

To each his own.  But it sounds pretty silly to me. 

So, what your saying is, you're now going to buy a suit made in China.

I don't think I was searching for something that didn't exist, quite the opposite. I think I found something I wasn't looking for and didn't care to see. The simple fact is that there's a definitively negative indictment of the oil industry, drilling process, and petroleum industry in general. It's only a few sentences, and seemily innocuous, but there nonetheless. It's a calculated step beyond simple product description that rubbed me the wrong way, right or wrong, it did. So be it. I know Emilio is well respected on here an ST, I respect that, as well as respecting other peoples stances on issues. I would imagine others would respect my simple frustration as well as my right to voice an opinion however unpopular it may be. If it's an innocent semantics issue I'm sure he'll be around here to clarify shortly. Otherwise, I'll take it for how I read it and make my decisions accordingly. I'm not knocking the products or company at all, simply the marketing choices. There are consequences to mixing political belief systems with business. I realize my stance isn't popular here and I understand, I'm sure i'm over sensitive in an election year, but it stood out to me as a very integral part of the product description. It's possible some don't see it as such due to their belief system?

Would you admit that the gulf oil spill was disastrous for the waters and of the gulf and the surrounding shorelines?  Do you have an issue with a manufacturing process that releases less heat into the environment and uses less or non-toxic substances in the process.  I'm still struggling with what your issue is.  Do you like being dependent on oil?  Do you like being wed to substance that pollutes our environment in the mining, production, refinement and use of that substance? 

I'm still struggling with how their product description could have upset you so bad that you choose to buy another product.

The reality is that more often than not "green technology" results in a consumer level product that costs a premium and offers worse performance, most of the time at no difference to the environment, only a difference in perception. I'm speaking in generalities, not necessarily about Desoto, but these products are sold under the guise of conservation, but in reality exist to either make a statement, appeal to a certain marketing demographic, or secure government funding handouts. Take ethanol as a great example. Here's a biofuel that takes the equivalent of 1.5 gallons of gas to produce one gallon of EtOH. And when the product reaches the consumer you have a fuel that is less efficient, costs more, has notably worse performance, and is harmful to engines. Keep in mind that you burned more fuel making it than you created. Yet, people feel good about it b/c they're putting renewable corn into their tanks. It's sold to the public as an alternative fuel, yet it INCREASES our oil usage.The reality is this example is a special interest subsidy and nothing more, sold to us as conservation, and funded by our tax dollars, as well as increased fuel and food prices.

That scenario aside, I'll focus more on Desoto. I'm 100% for conservation of resources, of course I want clean air and water and independence from foreign oil. I applaud Desoto for sticking up for what they believe in, and practicing what they preach, if that is what indeed they are doing. I commend them for putting their money where their mouth is so to speak. But, conversely, being the devil's advocate, what is being saved by not using a petroleum based compound? How much oil are we really talking about?  Does anybody think there's an appreciable difference in energy used either way, or does one just sound better? I don't know them personally, but I would assume that since they've made this commitment to the environment that the family carries it throughout their life, doing such things as not using petroleum laden things like sports cars, boats, large homes, SUVs, airplanes, heated swimming pools, BBQ grills, etc. The seemingly tiny amount of oil used in the creation of a wetsuit would certainly pale in comparison to other things used in day to day life. So either the Desotos are a.) totally into the conservation, or b.)their description is either  there to make a statement or appeal to a particular demographic.  If it's "a", then I applaud their sticking to their values, despite our differences of opinion on where energy should come from. If it's "b" then I could've done without the comments.  Sorry if I offended y'all, but I simply wasn't expecting to see a drilling is bad message while shopping for a wetsuit. I'm totally in favor of people voicing their opinion, be it at a stump speech, or on their product website. I'm voicing mine as well, plain and simple. My opinion is that if you put a political statement in your sales pitch you run the risk of alienating groups. Of course, the opposite can happen, as did in the ChikFilA case study, but it's a calculated risk that I'm unwilling to take in my business...

4 pages into a thread and no discussion of the actual product.

Oh yeah, it isn't political at all. Not a chance.

Dude - then buy the frickin' suit. 

I reread their description and I think Emilio agress with you about most folks "green" campaigns (I agree 100% with your comments on green alternatives using more natural resources than the un-green alternative).  He tells you upfront we call it GreenGoma buts its not entirely Green.  I think we all share the same goal to move away from petroleum dependence.  I'm just surprised by your visceral reaction to a company trying to make a product that's a bit better from an environmental perspective.