Thursday 10 May 2012

An open letter to hosiery companies

Dear Sir

Clearly you are a 'sir' and not a 'madame' or else I would have no need to pen this letter. Women, as hopefully the primary wearers of your products would likely have identified and rectified the anomaly of which I am about to speak.

No I am not writing to complain that in a time of technological advances that you still have not invented a pair of pantyhose that can be worn more than twice. I do understand this would not be in your best financial interests and in this time of economic uncertainty you rely heavily on the repeat custom of people like myself that appreciate the look of a nice pair of stockings.

I am, however, writing to ask you to reconsider your approach to the packaging and displaying of your products.

The current practice of inserting a piece of card inside a portion of each pair of pantyhose/tights is deeply flawed. I am sure you are aware that that you manufacture items of a certain delicacy. I am certain your quality standards have been rigorously tested to ensure said cardboard is gently inserted and accurately aligned.

After all, that's why they pay you the big bucks.

However the issue I would like to draw your attention to is not the insertion, but the removal of the card. My fingers, being neither practiced nor quality tested, seem completely unable to retrieve said card without laddering an unfortunate and highly visible portion of the stocking, thus rendering them useless.

And at a price of generally more than $10 a pop, this is not ok.

I am resigned to the fact that my decision to cover my legs in hosiery must come at a price. Its usually one I will begrudgingly pay. However to fork out my cash for a product that lands in the bin before it touches my legs makes me feel like, well, a bit of an asshat.

The solution is really very simple. Remove the cardboard. I will then go back to contentedly pretending that it's perfectly acceptable to spend large sums of cash for items that can only be worn 2-3 times.

Thank you for your consideration of my feedback.

Kind regards

Bec

No comments: