We don't control how vendors price things." "The Army doesn't get its uniforms from Crye yet it is complaining to us that the uniforms cost more. "They attributed the cost difference to us incorrectly," said a clearly frustrated Crye official during a March 19 phone interview with. He lays out pretty clearly that the "printing fees" he receives account for about one percent of the 20 percent price hike uniform companies want to charge the Army for MultiCam. According to Caleb, those numbers are highly inflated. There has been a lot of talk about the "royalties" that Crye Precision receives from MultiCam sales. Is it that much of a surprise that vendors are going to charge up to 20 percent more for uniforms and gear printed in MultiCam than they would for the same stuff in UCP? After at least five scientific studies - four by the Army and at least one by special operations forces - MultiCam has outperformed UCP and performed as well or better than many other patterns on the market today. What seems to be at the heart of this issue is Army uniform officials can't seem to accept that they have to pay more for MultiCam than they did for UCP. I talked to Caleb Crye yesterday for my story that ran this morning on. Crye Precision LLC - the creator of MultiCam - finally spoke out on the Army's attempts to adopt the pattern for service-use in the form of a chronological account of the Army's attempts to "negotiate" with Crye over the price of MultiCam.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |