The question here is badge engineering without informing the customer fraud?
Take for example, if one were to buy a Mercedes Benz Car (badged by Benz) , pay a premium price and later discover that it was a Mercedes Benz rebadged Chinese car worth half the amount. This is why, IMO, the Brand owner has a responsibility of telling the customer before the sale that the vehicle is made by another and only Badged by the vendor/vendor's agent in Aus.
The deal here is that the Brand Badge, by custom, promises quality to justify a high price but then does not deliver that. In a sense, its a reverse case of piracy.
Manufacturers are not allowed to "pirate" a Brand and sell the" knock out" product at an increased price, so why should the Brand Owner be allowed to sell another product by rebranding ?
I know that many will claim that such practice will, over time, devalue the Brand but, IMO, the customer should not be disadvantaged in that process over time.
For example, the New Mitsubishi Express van is made by Renault and it is virtually identical to the equivalent Renault product but the buyer is not informed before the sale that he/she is buying a Renault product. The question is: is this customer deception?
According to the Comm Dept of Transport, the importer is deemed to be the manufacturer by placing the compliance plate on the vehicle. This, IMO, is different to customers' expectations based on Brand which is an ACL issue.
