 |
 |
 December 26, 2004
Hooray! But why did it take 30 years for this to happen? Was this a market failure, a market research failure, a regulatory failure, or a technological failure? Somebody needs to investigate this for me. UPDATE: Over at LiveJournal, iocaste posts a Wall Street Journal article that sort of answers my question. Apparently labels really have become scratchier in recent years, and the reason is that less scratchy labels cost four cents instead of two cents. Government regulation also plays a role. However, still no word on why it's taken so long for imprinting to catch on. —Kevin Drum 6:15 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (0)Comments
July 2008
June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
PROGRESS!....I have spent the last 30 years of my life cutting tags out of shirts because I find shirt tags to be annoyingly itchy. This year, however, I received several shirts for Christmas, and all of them came sans tags. Like the Gap shirt on the right, the size and care information was imprinted directly on the shirt. |
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
------ ADVERTISEMENTS ------
|
||||||||
