Cross-Eyed Labor or Odd-Footed Customers?

No, I think Manufacturing is the right forum. But no, I don't think it's a question of "cross-eyed labor" or "odd-foot customers". It's more like "produce and pack". No design review, no inspections, no customer complaints investigations, no employee motivations, no nothing. Just in business to make money.

In a sense, it's like the recent poisoned milk scare. Manufacturers just want to make money without bearing any responsibility for their product (and think they can get away with it). I've seen this again and again.

We don't have WalMart in the Philippines. Don't they inspect their supplier's products before accepting them? Can't you return the items to them? The big stores here in the Philippines make inspections before acceptance and charge the suppliers a hefty fine if a product if found to be defective. It seems WalMart should be doing the same.

regards,

Vulcan

In the UK, as the consumer is protected by legislation, the products can be returned to the retailer for a refund as "not fit for purpose". It then becomes the retailer's problem to deal with the supplier.

Forgive my stupidity, but what is the problem here?

i cannot see it either does that mean i am Cross-eyed?

Me too. I've never seen a pair of socks where one sock was designed for the right foot and the other for the left (I think the OP is complaining that he's got either two right foot or two left foot socks, but, how he thinks he can tell: I've no idea).

The left sock has a considerably larger ankle cuff. For me this works. I was ran over by a truck while riding a motorcycle back in 1998. Due to the expertise of Dr. Harold Klienart at the Jewish hospital in Louisville, KY. I still have everything from the shin down. But I am definitely odd footed. Makes for a nice conversation piece at the local swimming pool.

I saw that, but I did not want to read too much into it, knowing the nature of sock fabric (easily distortable).

True.

I guess if they are 100% cotton he could dry the larger of the two on high heat and air dry the other.

I think there's a bit of an optical illusion going on here. Needless to say this "ruler" is not to scale, but, it is the same in both images (of it).

I certainly wouldn't have called the difference between 1.6 and 1.45 considerable: not for a stretchy sock; especially when the person taking the picture probably tried to stretch one and scrunch up the other .

Typically socks are one-size-fits-all. Perhaps in the OP's country these are yet to be invented?

Ha Ha, I thought the problem was that they looked pre worn and were suppose to be new out of the package!

:-)

Josh.

I have several pairs (I call them pairs as they came packaged as five pair)... they all looked alike to me, I didn't measure. However, after one washing none of them match up any more and of course there is the lone missing sock that is lost somewhere between the laundry basket, washer, dryer, and folding pile... never to be seen from again. I have white socks too, same thing! I think there might be a sock conspiracy.

I beginning to think I'm the only one who sees this.

The heels are at the side of the sock instead of under where it's supposed to be. The sock's twisted!

What's more is that they're twisted in the same direction. Odd-foot indeed.

regards,

Vulcan

I guess you're right. This appears to be the only visible fault with the socks. But I would not complain about wrong-footedness. I would simply return those.

I wonder what this says about a country/outlet that imports such poorly-designed clothing?

Yes indeed, Vulcan. It's as if they're made for some bipedal. marine hominid with strange anatomy including flipper feet; perhaps a diabetic flounder man for wearing after metamorphosis.

Either that or... I was just thinking that the seamstress and or inspector (yea right!) in some country (which shall remain unnamed) who made and passed these...socks(??)... may have had a preconceived, perhaps contemptuous, opinion of certain foreign (or even fellow countrymen) WalMart customers.

Hard to see how the multiple errors could be made by a single sighted person...much less two.

TexEx

Two possibilities:

One, they don't know how socks look like and took a guess. Probably some pheasant who's never used a sock in his or her life. Taught how to operate the machine and left unsupervised.

Two, they decided that making a proper sock is too complicated or uses more material or time (or whatever) so, to save some, decided that they'd do it this way and hope that nobody complains or notices.

Money makes the world go 'round. Unfortunately, it also makes people take too many shortcuts.

Like I said, I don't know if Walmart has a no-return-no-exchange policy (isn't that against the law?). You should return the defective merchandise and either get your money back or at least exchange it for something else of the same value. Just make sure that the new item isn't designed for extraterrestials.

regards,

Vulcan

Please confirm that you're joking here Vulcan:-

http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&q=socks&sa=N&start=0&ndsp=18

Vulcans don't joke.

That's a lot of socks. Fortunately, none of them seem to be twisted.

^{P.S. Living with humans have given me a twisted sense of humor}

regards,

Vulcan